184 Centralized Leadership, in Contrast to Lithuania, Was Not
184 Book Reviews centralized leadership, in contrast to Lithuania, was not established. There were regional organizations: the National Kurzeme Organiza tion of Latvian Partisans (1945), the National Vidzeme Movement of Latvian Partisans (1944-1948), the Latvian Union of Fatherland Guards (Partisans) (LTS(p)A) in Latgale (1945). The latter organization imi tated the structure of the Latvian army, its four divisions; it also made unsuccessful attempts to unify the partisan movement. Nevertheless, the leaders of these organizations (K.Rusovs, A. Cirulis (Varpa), pas tor A. Juhnevics, K. Blumbergs, V Mundure (Marta Skuja)) as well as the leaders of partisan detachments (such as P. Cevers) contributed greatly to the survival of the resistance movement. On February 1, 1954 there were still 105 partisans in Latvia. However, in 1956 they either surrendered or perished. On the basis of thoroughly collected and profoundly analyzed documentary material the author presents a comprehensive panorama of the partisan movement, the activities of separate organizations and the chronological stages of the struggle for freedom. To our knowl edge this is the only detailed history of the Latvian partisan warfare there is. In its turn, it will enable historians of Lithuanian 'resistance to draw generalized conclusions on the basis of more than their own country's experience, and, at the same time, develop new research as pects. Arvydas Anusauskas Lithuanian Institute of History Anatol Lieven. Pabaltijo revoliucija. Estija, Latvija, Lietuva - kelias i nepriklausomyb~. Vilnius: Baltos lankos, 1995, 475 pp. (Translated by Rasa AsminaviCiiite and Ausra Cizikiene from: Anatol Lieven. The Baltic Revolution. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Path to Independence.
[Show full text]