an analysis of local population involvement in the lithuanian holocaust
TRANSCRIPT
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
An Analysis of Local Population Involvement in the Lithuanian Holocaust
ID: 1019469
Module: HI31Z -The Holocaust: An Integrative History
Word Count: 4,643
1
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
An Analysis of Local Population Involvement in the Lithuanian Holocaust
Out of the large and flourishing 240,000 Jews in Lithuania, ninety per cent were
murdered between the years 1941-19441; no other Jewish community was so
‘extensively and comprehensively affected.’2 The decisive majority, about eighty
per cent, were murdered within the first few months of Nazi Germany's invasion
in June 1941. They did not endure the initial stages that characterised German
policy against Jews nor did they experience the years of ghetto life that came
before the deportations to the death camps. Like the majority of the Jews in the
German-occupied areas in the Soviet Union ‘they were shot near pits and in
woods close to their former places of residence.’3 It is a well-accepted fact that
the Holocaust in Lithuania, like the rest of Europe, was ‘devised, planned and
executed by the German Nazis.’4 Nonetheless, what made an annihilation of
Lithuanian Jewry on such a grand scale possible was the help of the local
population – the Lithuanians.5 This in turn leads to the painful question of
responsibility and thus renders the Holocaust in Lithuania a highly charged and
1 Andrea Bartman, ‘Paneriai in History and Memory: The Mental and Physical Presence of the Holocaust in Lithuania, 1941-2010’, Master Thesis Holocaust and Genocide Studies, (University of Amsterdam, 2010) 152 Dina Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania: some unique aspects’, in David Cesarani, in The Final Solution, Origins and Implementation, (Routledge, 1994) 1603 Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania: some unique aspects’, 1614 Liudas Truska, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, Jews in Eastern Europe, Vol. 2, No. 45 (2001) 55 Paul Frysh, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania: One Man’s Crusade to bring Justice’, Martyrdom and Resistance, Vol.37 No.3 (2001) 5
2
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
controversial issue, concerning not only historians, but also writers, journalists,
and political figures.6
The implementation of the ‘Final Solution’ in Lithuania can be divided into
three periods, as established by Yitzhak Arad: the end of June-November 1941
(mass liquidation of the Jews), December 1941-July 1943 (German policy aimed
at maximum exploitation of the Jewish labour force), and August 1943-July 1944
(dissolution of the ghettos.)7 The aim of this essay is to examine the
circumstances which made the fate of Lithuanian Jewry unique with particular
focus on the participation of the local population. For this reason, I will
concentrate on the beginning of the first period only, June 22-July, since it is this
period that brings into question the involvement of the Lithuanians. A
comprehension of the extent of local participation compels consideration of two
main factors: German policy and implementation; and the behaviour of the
Lithuanians. I will briefly discuss both factors, examining the significance of local
participation followed by an investigation into the complex of Lithuanian
attitudes towards Jews to help determine the reasons for their actions. Finally,
this essay will examine the events in Lithuania that transpired under the Soviet
regime ‘upon which the rewriting of history and the present day concepts of
Brown/Red Holocaust are based.’8
6 Truska, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, 57 Yitzhak Arad, The Final Solution in Lithuania in the light of German Documentation, (Yad Vashem, 1976) 2388 Yitzhak Arad, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’, Defending History, Vol. 5 No. 1692 (2014)
3
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
Before I proceed with this analysis, it is useful to provide a brief overview
of the historiography for this period as it forms a basis for understanding many
facets of this argument. Little work had been done on this subject by Lithuania
prior its independence in 1991. The Communist treatment of Holocaust memory
underwent a reworking and manipulation serving the authorities' political and
ideological needs. Consequently, during the Soviet period, official historiography
‘disregarded the issue since it portrayed the victims of the Holocaust not as Jews
but as Soviet citizens.’9 Furthermore, the many Lithuanians who at the end of the
war fled Lithuania and settled elsewhere preferred to avoid the problem. Liudas
Truska affirmed that it was not until the 1970s that these Lithuanians began to
speak out, and although there was some evidence of a few approaching the
subject critically (Tomas Venclova being one such example) the majority
attempted to convey the impression that Lithuanians did not bear any guilt.10
Although the freedom that came with independence stimulated research
into previously taboo topics and suggested that Lithuania would take a more
critical approach in regard to its involvement in the Holocaust, it resulted
instead to calls for the Jews to ‘apologise for their crimes against the Lithuanian
nation during the Soviet occupation.’11 Lithuanian participants and historians
turned their attention to the documentation of their own national losses under
the Soviet regime, and viewing it in Manichean terms meant an almost complete
9 Truska, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, 1310 Truska, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, 1811 Anthony Polonsky, ‘Introduction’, in Rachel Margolis, A Partisan from Vilna’, (2010, Brighton) 47
4
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
lack of awareness of their participation in it. It is appropriate to note at this point
that this renders the treatment of the Soviet and Nazi period of occupation
problematic. Both work from participating Lithuanians and sources from the Cold
War period are remarkably tainted making it all the harder to ‘understand a
history that is still fraught with emotional force’ and subject to apologia and
political rhetoric.12 Nevertheless, there have been attempts to uncover
Lithuania’s participation in the Holocaust. In particular Lithuanian-American
historian, Saulius Suziedelis, along with German historian, Christophe
Dieckmann, have made significant efforts to ‘illuminate’ the Holocaust in
Lithuania. They took a new approach to the anti-Soviet uprising of 1941, which
was presented ‘exclusively in a positive vein’, by unmasking the murder of the
Jews and the dominant role played by the Lithuanians.13 Although this new trend,
represented by ‘liberally-oriented intellectuals, is gradually having an impact on
social consciousness, it has not yet become dominant in Lithuania.’14
Understanding the sequence of events following Germany’s invasion of
Lithuania is a precondition for evaluating the significance of Lithuanian
participation. Thus, I will begin by providing a brief overview of the period
June/July 1941. On June 22, Germany declared war on the Soviet Union and
entered Lithuania. On June 23, a member of the Lithuanian Activist Front (LAF),
the most prominent anti-Soviet resistance group, proclaimed the restoration of
12 Karen Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution 1941-1944’, University of Illinois, (1994) 1213 Truska, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, 1914 Truska, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, 20
5
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
Lithuania's independence and the formation of a Provisional Government. The
city of Kovno (Kaunas) was captured the same day and Vilna (Vilnius) fell on the
morning of June 24. All of Lithuania was conquered by the Nazis ‘within four to
five days.’15 Lithuania was not the only country which German forces invaded on
22 June 1941, but it was in Lithuania that the German Security Police began
organising a war of extermination.16 Only about 15,000 Jews managed to escape
upon Germany’s entry, most of which were Soviet officials.17 This meant that
around 220,000 Jews remained in Lithuania and it was during the wave of
pogroms that accompanied the anti-Soviet uprising following Germany’s invasion
that the mass murder of these remaining Jews was carried out (the most notable
being the anti-Jewish violence occurring on 25-26 June in Kovno.)18 On June 26
the Germans disbanded the ‘partisans’ involved in the anti-Soviet uprising and
began organising new police and army units, Lithuanian Police battalions, which
continued the brutal massacres in a more organised fashion.19 While this murder
was carried out ‘in accordance with a schedule of objectives by the German
Security Police (Einsatzgruppe A)’, many of the perpetrators continued to be
thousands of Lithuanians who ‘volunteered to serve the Germans.’20
The reconstruction of the period leads to two questions: how were the
pogroms initiated and who was responsible for them? The involvement of each
15 Arad, The Final Solution in Lithuania in the light of German Documentation, 23416 Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 15917 Arad, The Final Solution in Lithuania in the light of German Documentation, 23418 Polonsky, ‘Introduction’, 3019 Shner Neshamit, ‘Jewish Lithuanian relations during world war ll: history and rhetoric’, Crime and Punishment: The Association of Lithuanian Jews in Israel, No.6, (1999) 1620 Arad, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’
6
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
party needs to be assessed individually. German policy towards Lithuanian Jewry
was ‘dictated by the general goal of total extermination.’21 The first killing orders
were issued in Berlin by Heinrich Muller, the head of the Gestapo office within
the Reichssicherheitshauptat (SS Reich Main Security Office), and conveyed via
telex on June 23/24 1941 to the Stapo-Office in Tilsit.22 The Stapo Tilsit had been
‘commissioned with the task of preparing and carrying out Sauberungsaktionen –
cleansing operations – along the former Soviet-Lithuanian border’. Essentially, it
received permission to set up ‘its own mobile killing unit’, known as
Einsatzkommado Tilsit.23 Without specifically endorsing a programme of total
destruction, it was made clear that the unit was intended towards Jews and
Communists. This chronology supports the view expressed by Israeli historian,
Yehoshua Buchler, that an order to liquidate Lithuanian Jewry ‘was issued before
the invasion.’24
The collaboration of the Lithuanians can be traced back to before World
War II when the German Security Police forged close contacts with their
counterparts in Lithuania, both characterising themselves in anti-Polish
tendencies.25 Following the Soviet annexation of Lithuania, many Lithuanians
who previously held positions in the army, police and security service, took
21 Arad, The Final Solution in Lithuania in the light of German Documentation, 27122 Konrad Kwiet, ‘Rehearsing for Murder: The Beginning of the Final Solution in Lithuania in June 1941’, Holocaust and Genocide Studies 1(1998) 423 Konrad Kwiet, ‘The Onset of the Holocaust: The Massacre of the Jews in Lithuania in June 1941’, in Andrew Bonnell, Gregory Munro, Martin Travers, Power, Conscience and Opposition: Essays in German History in honour of John A. Moses, (New York, 1996) 10824 Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania: some unique aspects’, 16525 Kwiet, ‘Rehearsing for Murder’, 6
7
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
refuge in Germany. They were commissioned to the police battalions, the SS
Einsatzgruppen and the Einsatzkommando Tilsit and were easily recognisable by
their white arm bands.26 Thus, from the very beginning of their operations in
Lithuania, the Germans received the ‘full help and cooperation of the local
Lithuanian Order Police, the Lithuanian municipal authorities, and the Lithuanian
Security Police.’ 27 Dieckmann sums this up succinctly: the personnel ‘for carrying
out such a killing campaign’ was available thanks to the Lithuanian policemen
and the partisans who were prepared to collaborate.28
The complicity of the Lithuanians is not subject to question. Rather, what
remains unclear is the issue surrounding initiative. In an attempt to uncover the
implementers of the persecution of the Jews in Lithuania, an analysis into the
extent to which Lithuanians were willing to collaborate is necessary along with
the question of violence by Lithuanians against Jews before German annexation.
The Jaeger Report and Stahlecker’s documents are considered the most
important sources for the reconstruction of the events in Lithuania as they
demonstrate the extent to which the locals were involved. The Jaeger Report,
written by the SS commander of a Nazi killing unit that operated around Vilnius,
notes the ‘essential’ help of local Lithuanians and states that 4,000 Jews were
26 Kwiet, ‘Rehearsing for Murder’, 627 Yitzhak Arad, ‘The Murder of the Jews in German-Occupied Lithuania (1941-1944), in Alvydas Nikžentaitis, Stefan Schreiner, Darius Staliūnas, The Vanished World of Lithuanian Jews, (New York, 2004), 182 28 Chritophe Dieckmann, ‘The War and the Killing of the Lithuanian Jews’, in Ulrich Herbert, National Socialist Extermination Policies: Contemporary German Perspectives and controversies, (2000) 283
8
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
liquidated by pogroms and executions ‘by Lithuanian partisans.’ 29 Similarly,
Stahlecker reported that in Lithuania the proportion of ‘Germans to auxiliaries in
the firing squads was one to eight.’30 We can draw varying conclusions from this:
on the one hand it proves that the collaborators’ share in the killing of the Jews
was considerable,31 on the other it does not refute the argument that Lithuanians
were forced into collaboration. However, the reports of Einsatzgruppe A testify
not only to the degree of Lithuanian collaboration but also to the eagerness the
Lithuanians demonstrated which is vital in providing evidence of the extent to
which it was an active choice.32 The reports indicate that groups of ‘partisans’ in
fact themselves initiated contact with the Germans upon their entry into
Lithuania.33
While historian Dina Porat stated that Stahlecker’s reports should be
treated as a significant testimony because ‘the purpose of these reports was to
display German, not Lithuanian, determination,’34 they should also be
approached with caution as it was also in German interest to highlight Lithuanian
involvement; Dieckmann revealed that there were ‘serious intentions to involve
Lithuanian forces to the war of Germans.’35 In accordance to this, the Germans
29 Frysh, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 530 Ronald Headland, Messages of Murder: A Study of the Reports of the Einsatzgruppen of the Security Police and the Security Service, 1941-1943, (Fairleigh, 1992) 12431 Headland, Messages of Murder, 12432 Joshua Rubenstein, Ilya Altman , ‘III Lithuania’, in Joshua Rubenstein and Ilya Altman, The Unknown Black Book: The holocaust in the German-Occupied Soviet Territories, (Indiana, 2010) 27733 Dina Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 16234 Dina Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 16235 Christoph Dieckmann, Saulius Suziedelis, The persecution and Mass Murder of Lithuanian Jews during Summer and Fall of 1941, (Vilnius, 2006) 28
9
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
filmed the scenes of the executions, making an effort to avoid including in the
film a ‘single German among the leaders and accomplices in these killings’.
Rubenstein and Altman argued that, in this way, the Germans prepared ‘falsified
records for future historians’ which would show the Lithuanian people
responsible for the actions committed against Lithuanian Jewry.36 The
authenticity of such German reports should be therefore treated with caution.
Nevertheless, the readiness of Lithuanians to collaborate is also reported
elsewhere. British historian, Martin Gilbert, compiled eyewitness accounts that
demonstrated the zeal with which police forces along with individuals actively
cooperated with the Germans: on return from the killing, one Lithuanian boasted
‘that he had dragged small Jewish children by the hair […] throwing them half
alive into pits.’37 These detailed accounts demonstrate that not only did
participating locals not object to complying, but also that some acted with
delectation and extreme cruelty. Most shockingly, reports show that on June 30
1941, the Lithuanian Police Chief of Alytus ‘offered to kill all the Jews in the
region in a few days’ with the help of policemen and partisans, an offer which
was rejected by the Germans.38 This clearly illustrates the eagerness of some
Lithuanians to collaborate with the German army in the hope of liquidating
Lithuanian Jewry and suggests personal motivation.39 Furthermore, the
36 Rubenstein, Altman , ‘III Lithuania’, 28037 Martin Gilbert, The Holocaust The Jewish Tragedy, (Fontanna, 1987) 22438 Bartman, ‘Paneriai in History and Memory,’ 1739 Masha Greenbaum, The Jews of Lithuania: a history of a remarkable community, 1316-1945, (Jerusalem, 1995) 303
10
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
Lithuanian Provisional Government and the Roman Catholic Church could have
wielded their influence ‘but no such action was taken’.40 Instead, the German
army was welcomed as liberator by the Provisional Government, which
subsequently called for national cooperation and promoted collaboration.
Certainly, it did not take any steps to use its governmental power ‘to halt the
pogroms that were being carried out by elements that were subordinate to its
authority.’41 While this provides clear evidence of Lithuanian authorities
cooperating with the Germans, it does not simultaneously mean that all
Lithuanians agreed with their temporary leaders. It is important to highlight that
it was the ‘conservatives and radical nationalists’ who were at the head of the
Provisional Government and who made up the majority of those enacting the
pogroms.42 One must not draw the conclusion that all Lithuanians were active in
their complicity, the majority were bystanders and ‘one cannot depict all of them
as murderers.’43 Porat acknowledged that ‘at least one thousand Lithuanians
sheltered Jews, thereby risking their own and their family’s lives.’44 Conversely,
this does not change the moral question for Lithuanians. Despite those who took
active part in the murders representing the minority, it does not excuse the rest
who were ‘either apathetic or aggravated the misery of the Jews in lesser ways
than actual killing.’45
40 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution’, 19141 Arad, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’42 Dieckmann, Sužiedėlis, The Persecution and Mass Murder of Lithuanian Jews during Summer and Fall of 194143 Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 16644 Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 16645 Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 166
11
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
The question of who initiated the pogroms is perhaps harder to digest
and remains a subject fiercely debated in Lithuania today. Recently, David
Bankier published a unique collection of survivor testimonies which survivor Leyb
Kuniuchowsky had previously declined to publicise. These testimonies provide
vivid details, essentials ‘that are missing from the pertinent official German and
Lithuanian documentation.’ The witness testimonies demonstrate the extent to
which it was primarily Lithuanian volunteers who executed the pogroms; in
‘every single provincial Jewish community, local collaborators were at least the
majority, if not the only ones, doing the killing.’46 Furthermore, what emerges
from these testimonies is that the Lithuanians were in fact the initiators. This
notion is further promoted by several historians: Israeli historian and former
Soviet partisan, Yitzhak Arad, argued that in many cases ‘pogroms were
organised […] even before the entry of the Wehrmacht.’47 Dov Levin also
contended that Lithuanian nationalists ‘in at least forty localities did not even
wait for the German forces to arrive in order to start murdering Jews.’48 Zvi Kolitz
takes this argument one step further by maintaining that ‘by the time the
Germans arrived, many thousands of Jews were dead already.’49 While these
testimonies provide valuable insight, they should also be approached with
46 Efraim Zuroff, ‘Killed by their Neighbours’, Holocaust Studies: Haaretz, (2012) 647 Arad, ‘The Murder of the Jews in German-Occupied Lithuania’, 24048 Dov Levin, The Litvaks: A Short History of the Jews in Lithuania, (Israel, 2000) 21849 Zvi Kolitz , ‘The physical and Metaphysical Dimensions of the Extermination of the Jews in Lithuania’, in Lucjan Dobrszycki and Jeffrey Gurock (eds), The Holocaust in the Soviet Union: Studies and sources on the destruction of the Jews in the Nazi-occupied territories of the USSR, 1941-1945, (New York, 1993) 199
12
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
caution. Dieckmann made an essential contribution to this analysis50: he insisted
that the reports which argue that Lithuanians attacked the Jews by themselves
must be taken as wishful thinking. In his search through the archives he found no
evidence of Lithuanians attacking the Jews before German entry and concluded
that, as practiced Lithuanian initiative was not found, one must place the
initiative with the Germans. 51 The debate remains open but Dieckmann and
Sužiedėlis advise that until supported by reliable accounts ‘claims of large-scale
pogroms before the advent of the German forces must be treated with
caution.’52
The Shoah in Lithuania was one of the cruellest on record and the
commitment and enthusiasm displayed by Lithuanians in their swift campaign of
genocide ‘defies anything we know about the limits of human cruelty’.53 There
was no tradition of pogroms in Lithuania and unlike Nazi Germany which had six
years of persistent racist indoctrination promoting vehement anti-Semitism in
preparation for genocide, Lithuanians had no such indoctrination. How are we to
understand that Lithuania produced such monsters? The often heated
contention is that the first Soviet occupation of 1940-1941 accounts for and to
50 Christoph Dieckmann, ‘The War and the Killing of the Lithuanian Jews’, in David Cesarani, Sarah Kavanaugh (eds), Holocaust: From the persecution of the Jews to mass murder, 283 51 Dieckmann, ‘The War and the Killing of the Lithuanian Jews’52 Christoph Dieckmann, Saulius Sužiedėlis, The Persecution and Mass Murder of Lithuanian Jews during Summer and Fall of 1941, (Vilnius, 2006) 12653 Kolitz , ‘The physical and Metaphysical Dimensions of the Extermination of the Jews in Lithuania’, 200
13
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
some extent justifies the hostility displayed by segments of the society towards
the Jews. As previously mentioned, contemporary interpretations of the
Holocaust by members of the Lithuanian intelligentsia have devoted particular
attention to the period of sovietisation of the country.54 Some have even
contended that anti-Semitism in Lithuania was non-existent prior 1940 and that
it developed out of Jewish-Bolshevik collaboration. Conversely many Jewish
sources stress that, long before 1940, multifaceted anti-Semitism permeated
Lithuanian society and assert that one year of Soviet rule is insufficient in
explaining the intensity that anti-Semitism assumed following German invasion.55
Since the ‘short term motivation behind Lithuanian collaboration [is linked to]
the events surrounding the Soviet occupation’, it is imperative to provide an
analysis of this brief but highly significant period.56
How did one year of direct soviet rule affect the attitude and behaviour of
ordinary Lithuanians towards their Jewish neighbours? A reflection on the degree
of Jewish complicity in the Soviet Regime is one avenue that yields valuable
insight. Another is the way they were treated by the Regime. Thomas Remeikis
suggested that the ‘popular identification of Jew and communist’ resulted from
the ‘conspicuous numbers of Jewish members in upper leadership positions of
the Lithuanian communist party.’57 Jews had been linked to Bolshevism as early
as the Russian Revolution and the Lithuanian Communist Party comprised of
54 Truska, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, p55 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 8156 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 7657 J. A. Melamed, ‘Soviet Lithuania and the Jews’, Crime and Punishment: The Association of Lithuanian Jews in Israel, No.6, (1999) 10
14
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
many Jews: in 1939 approximately 52 per cent of the party members were
Jewish.58 It must be noted, however, that the party only had 1500 members thus
the overall percentage of Lithuanian Jews being part of the Communist Party was
relatively low. The necessary exploration of Jewish involvement in the Soviet
Regime is more problematic. Soviet documents do not name the ethnicities of
administrators and non-communist Lithuanian and Jewish sources rest highly on
‘subjective testimony and sometimes outright propaganda.’59 This renders the
seemingly simple and vital question of the percentage of Lithuanian Jews
assisting the Soviet Regime not definitively answerable. However, contrary to the
claim of many Lithuanian apologists that Jews occupied most of the leading
positions under the Soviet Regime, the Soviets in fact wanted to ‘give the new
order a Lithuanian face.’60 Leib Garfunkel asserted that this meant the Soviets did
all they could to appoint ethnic Lithuanians, even those with former fascist ties,
to high positions in the government.61 This displays the heavy reluctance of
Soviets to work with Jewish forces which subsequently undermines the claim of
substantial Jewish involvement. It is certain, nonetheless, that a number of Jews
served in the new administration. However, they were often either Lithuanian
communists or Soviet communists of Jewish decent and many of them were
dedicated idealists who completely renounced any Jewish identity.62 The
58 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 8959 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 8460 Polonsky, ‘Introduction’, 1961 Kolitz , ‘The physical and Metaphysical Dimensions of the Extermination of the Jews in Lithuania’, 20262 Melamed, ‘Soviet Lithuania and the Jews’, 8
15
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
Lithuanians, on the other hand, repeatedly insisted that they were ‘pursuing
specifically Jewish plans of cultural, economic, and political conquest.’63 The
impression was given that Soviet Russia was a Jewish power.64 What clouded the
issue was that many Jews welcomed the entry of Soviet troops, understandably
preferring the Soviets to the Nazis whose anti-Semitism was a ‘clear and
menacing danger to their safety.’65 Thus, ‘when the columns of Soviet tanks
entered Lithuanian towns […] many Jews, especially of the younger generation,
were among the crowds who cheered them on.’66 These actions were taken very
seriously as, in a moment of national disaster, to be even lukewarmly pro-Soviet
in Lithuania ‘was tantamount to treason.’67
Not only was Jewish involvement in the Soviet Regime limited, Jews were
also the largest group to suffer under Communist rule.68 Contrary to popular
belief, Jews suffered ‘disproportionately higher losses economically and
politically than the Lithuanian population’69. This was for a number of reasons:
the Soviet policies gave a degree of autonomy to all republics without any
consideration given to the minorities70; religious worship was restricted and thus
the Jews sustained the closure of synagogues while the Soviets did not yet
63 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 8464 Kolitz , ‘The physical and Metaphysical Dimensions of the Extermination of the Jews in Lithuania’, 20165 Polonsky, ‘Introduction’, 1966 Melamed, ‘Soviet Lithuania and the Jews’, 1067 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 8468 Levin, The Litvaks, 19269 Solomonas Atamukas, ‘The Hard Long Road toward the Truth: On The Sixtieth Anniversary Of The Holocaust In Lithuania’, Lituanus: Lithuanian Quarterly Journal of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 47, No. 4 (2001)70 Atamukas, ‘The Hard Long Road toward the Truth’
16
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
interfere with Catholic churches; and finally, as previously noted, Soviet Lithuania
was administered almost in its entirety by the Lithuanians71 and this was used to
optimum advantage, permeating anti-Semitism in their policies. This aspect is
often slighted by anti-Soviet Lithuanian historians who ignore the hardships
endured by Lithuanian Jewry during the period. Further evidence of Jewish
suffering under the regime can be found immediately following the takeover
when the Soviets deported both Jews and non-Jews to Siberia as ‘enemies of the
people’. This mass deportation included 7,000 Jews, about 3 percent of the
Jewish population, while ‘only 1 percent of the non-Jewish population was
deported’. That said, the Lithuanian encyclopaedia has no mention of the
deportation of Jews, yet the important role which Jews played in the deportation
of Lithuanians is clearly documented.72
As established by Yitzak Arad, the concept of ‘murder on a political basis’
could possibly be applied to those who ‘participated in the Soviet Regime and in
the subjugation of Lithuanians’73. However, the parallel occurrence and one
‘carried out on an immeasurably greater scale’ was the brutal murder of
thousands of Jews not because they had been identified as Communists, but
simply ‘because they were Jews.’74 Arad clarifies that this renders the concept of
murder on a political basis ‘inconsistent with reality.’75 Indeed, the level of
71 Melamed, ‘Soviet Lithuania and the Jews’, 872 Kolitz , ‘The physical and Metaphysical Dimensions of the Extermination of the Jews in Lithuania’, 20173 Arad, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’74 Arad, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’75 Headland, Messages of Murder,
17
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
violence that permeated Lithuania following German entry cannot be realistically
attributed to the immediate circumstances of the Soviet Regime not only
because the partisans did not care to make the distinction between pro-Soviet
and anti-Soviet Jews, but most importantly because ethnic Lithuanians who also
actively took part in the Soviet Regime were given a pardon if they could prove
that they killed at least one Jew (a proclamation issued March 16 1941.)76
Consequently, the atrocities committed by the Lithuanians need to be
viewed in the anti-Semitic means of a larger context. Thus, a historical
perspective analysing the evolving rapport between Jews and Lithuanians is
fundamental to an understanding of Lithuanian-German collaboration. A
consideration of pre-twentieth century Lithuanian history yields insight into the
deep-rooted prejudices of many Lithuanians at the onset of German invasion.
Firstly, the intelligentsia of nineteenth-century Lithuania ‘did not stem from the
vein of eighteenth-century enlightenment thought, but rather from ancient and
medieval scriptures and the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church.’77 The result
was a native intelligentsia deeply committed to the past, prioritising religion and
traditions, and therefore carrying anti-Semitic tendencies which became even
more profound as a result of Jewish economic gains.78 Secondly, the ferocity of
the anti-Semitism ‘stemmed from the frustration and rage that accompanies a
string sense of national impotence’ originating from Lithuania’s long standing
76 Kolitz , ‘The physical and Metaphysical Dimensions of the Extermination of the Jews in Lithuania’, 20277 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 1778 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 306
18
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
political, economic and cultural subjugation.79 An inquiry into Lithuania’s past
reveals a country that has been repeatedly fought over and dominated by
greater powers, namely Germany, Poland and Russia.80 With almost one fifth of
the population not Lithuanian - 7.2% Jewish, 4.1% German, 3% Polish and 2.4%
Russian - by the twentieth century Lithuania was experiencing an identity crisis;
xenophobic nationalism developed as a response to years of subjugation.81
Considering both the backward intelligentsia and the xenophobia deeply woven
into society, as happened so often in Jewish history, the Lithuanian Jewry
became a helpless target for a dangerous explosion of ‘revenge, ideology,
patriotism, power, and greed.’82
To highlight these influences is simultaneously to undermine that the
involvement of the local population in the annihilation of the Jews was merely
the result of ‘the alleged Jewish connection to Communism and the Soviet
occupation of Lithuania.’83 This frequently advanced defence of Lithuanian
conduct during the Holocaust brings with it a dangerous aspect as underlying
these claims is the concept of a ‘Red and Brown Holocaust’; a ‘symmetry in the
suffering among both peoples’84 (Brown referring to the Jewish suffering of which
the Germans were primarily responsible and Red referring to the Lithuanian
victims to which the allegedly Judeo-Bolshevik Communist regime is responsible).
79 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 1680 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’81 Centralinis statistikos Biuras, Lietuvos Statistikos Metrastis 1929-1930 (Kaunas, Vilnius), 1182 Atamukas, ‘The Hard Long Road toward the Truth’83 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 1184 Leonidas Donskis, Another Word for Uncertainty, Anti-Semitism in Modern Lithuania, NORDEUROPAforum (2006) 13
19
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
The purpose of this concept is to obfuscate the events of the Lithuanian
Holocaust during the period of German occupation by emphasising the suffering
of the Lithuanian nation under the Soviet Regime and simultaneously demanding
an apology for these actions from the surviving Jewish population. It is a position
that is not just the legacy of right-wing forces in Lithuania; rather, ‘the slogan of
two genocides is an official policy direction that has been cultivated and
maintained since around 2006.’85 This links back to historiography as Zuroff
argues that, in this way, Lithuania is trying to rewrite Holocaust history. He
proclaimed that nowhere in the world ‘has a government gone to such lengths to
obscure their role in the Holocaust […] to make themselves blameless.’ Leonidas
Donskis, philosopher and former Lithuanian MP in the European Parliament,
explains that ‘quite a large segment of Lithuanian society is still inclined to
consider Jews as collectively responsible ‘for the atrocities committed during the
Soviet occupation.’ 86
To conclude, the sources confirm that the initiative to kill Lithuanian
Jewry belonged to the Germans; the decision was made in Berlin, and
Einsatzgruppe A supervised its execution. The pogroms must be therefore
viewed in the context of German occupation. Nevertheless, in order to execute
such mass crimes, the enthusiasm of the Lithuanian collaborators was
indispensable; while the occupational authorities hold the initiative for the
85 Arad, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’86 Frysh, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania’, 5
20
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
annihilation of the Jews, it is doubtful that the order could have been executed
to such a lethal extent without the active and eager participation of the
Lithuanians.87 The intense involvement of the local population ‘entailed a fatal
combination of Lithuanian motivation and German organisation and
thoroughness’88 and created a climate that allowed the Germans to achieve
‘appalling success in ridding Lithuania of its Jews.’89 Lithuanians ‘were not mere
pawns of the Germans but […] enjoyed room to manoeuvre and negotiate’90. In
this way, Lithuanians were transformed from being bystanders into perpetrators
who by unleashing such savagery on their neighbours determined the fate of
Lithuanian Jewry. In terms of motive for their behaviour, the importance of the
Soviet annexation cannot be denied. Yet it is imperative to acknowledge the
growing anti-Semitism in pre-war Lithuanian society.91 It was a combination of a
complex of factors such as national traditions and values, religion, and historical
subjugation. Thus, the Soviet take-over ‘fed, intensified, and influenced already
existing anti-Semitism.’92 Nonetheless, this is not to suggest that one can excuse
the cruelty with which a number of Lithuanians attacked the Jewish community
during the Nazi occupation. Rather, as Friedman affirmed, one must recognise
that the willing involvement of the local population was not the result of ‘the
87 Yitzhak Arad, Ghetto in Flames: The Struggle and Destruction of the Jews in Vilna in the Holocaust, (Jerusalem, 1980), 46488 Porat, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania: some unique aspects’, 16289 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 1290 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 31291 Gerhard P. Bassler, ‘Collaboration and Resistance during the Holocaust: Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania by David Gaunt; Paul A. Levine; Laura Palosuo’, The Slavonic and East European Review, Vol. 84, No. 2 (2006), 365 364-36692 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 86
21
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
cold-blooded and bureaucratic policies of a Nazi Germany but of a complex and
deep rooted anti-Semitism.’ 93
In terms of the rewriting of the history of the Holocaust that is underway
in Lithuania, ‘there is an effort to cleanse the names of the members of the
Provisional Government of responsibility, even if partially, for the pogroms.’94
The government has systematically tried and continues to try ‘to minimize or
hide the extensive participation of local collaborators in the annihilation of the
country’s Jews.’95 It would be naïve to deny the fact that anti-Semitism remains
persistent and strong in contemporary Lithuania.96 February 16 2014, for the
seventh consecutive year, saw over 1,000 Lithuanians participating in neo-Nazi
marches which took place ‘during prime time along the major boulevards of
Kaunas and Vilnius.’9798 Yet at the same time it would be ‘inaccurate’ to insist that
modern Lithuanian politics has ‘completely failed to face up to the challenge of
anti-Semitism.’99 Donskis insists that, more recently, Lithuanian intellectuals are
beginning to show a genuine interest and sensitivity towards their fellow Jewish
citizens.100 To return to my introduction, this is a very contemporary subject, and
93 Friedman, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution,’ 1694 Arad, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’95 Zuroff, ‘Killed by their Neighbours’, 696 Leonidas Donskis, ‘Preface’, in Alvydas Nikžentaitis, Stefan Schreiner, Darius Staliūnas, The Vanished World of Lithuanian Jews, (New York, 2004), preface 97 The Algemeiner, ‘YIVO, Lithuania, and Lies about the Holocaust,’ February, 2013 [http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/02/13/yivo-lithuania-and-lies-about-the-holocaust/] (10/03/2014)98 Paulius Garkauskas, ‘Žydų atstovai apie eitynes Kaune: šių žmonių požiūris iškreiptas’, 2014, [http://www.delfi.lt/news/daily/lithuania/zydu-atstovai-apie-eitynes-kaune-siu-zmoniu-poziuris-iskreiptas.d?id=64034988] (17/04/2014)99 Donskis, ‘Preface’100 Donskis, ‘Preface’
22
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
collaboration plays an important role in the present-day debates about the
Holocaust in Lithuania. The wounds are still open and the issue of collaboration
will be one of the ‘heaviest and most difficult issues in Lithuanian history that still
lie ahead.’101 One thing that remains clear, however, is that having lost the
Litvaks, Lithuania ‘lost a significant part of its identity.’102
Bibliography
Algemeiner, The, ‘YIVO, Lithuania, and Lies about the Holocaust,’ February, 2013 [http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/02/13/yivo-lithuania-and-lies-about-the-holocaust/] (10/03/jf2014)
Atamukas, Solomonas, ‘The Hard Long Road toward the Truth: On The Sixtieth Anniversary Of The Holocaust In Lithuania’, Lituanus: Lithuanian Quarterly Journal of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 47, No. 4 (2001)
Arad, Yitzhak, Ghetto in Flames: The Struggle and Destruction of the Jews in Vilna in the Holocaust, (Jerusalem, 1980)
101 Atamukas, ‘The Hard Long Road toward the Truth’102 Donskis, ‘Preface’
23
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
Arad, Yitzhak, The Final Solution in Lithuania in the light of German Documentation, (Yad Vashem, 1976)
Arad, Yitzhak ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania and Its Obfuscation in Lithuanian Sources’, Defending History, Vol. 5 No. 1692 (2014)
Arad, Yitzhak, ‘The Murder of the Jews in German-Occupied Lithuania (1941-1944), in Alvydas Nikžentaitis, Stefan Schreiner, Darius Staliūnas (eds.), The Vanished World of Lithuanian Jews, (New York, 2004)
Bartman, Andrea, ‘Paneriai in History and Memory: The Mental and Physical Presence of the Holocaust in Lithuania, 1941-2010’, Master Thesis Holocaust and Genocide Studies, (University of Amsterdam, 2010)
Bassler, P. Gerhard, ‘Collaboration and Resistance during the Holocaust: Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania by David Gaunt; Paul A. Levine; Laura Palosuo’, The Slavonic and East European Review, Vol. 84, No. 2 (2006), 364-366
Centralinis Statistikos Biuras, Lietuvos Statistikos Metrastis 1929-1930 (Kaunas, Vilnius),
Dieckmann, Chritophe, ‘The War and the Killing of the Lithuanian Jews’, in Ulrich Herbert (ed.), National Socialist Extermination Policies: Contemporary German Perspectives and controversies, (2000)
Dieckmann, Christoph, Suziedelis, Saulius, The persecution and Mass Murder of Lithuanian Jews during Summer and Fall of 1941, (Vilnius, 2006)
Donskis, Leonidas, Another Word for Uncertainty, Anti-Semitism in Modern Lithuania, NORDEUROPAforum (2006)
Donskis, Leonidas, ‘Preface’, in Alvydas Nikžentaitis, Stefan Schreiner, Darius Staliūnas, The Vanished World of Lithuanian Jews, (New York, 2004)
Levin, Dov, The Litvaks: A Short History of the Jews in Lithuania, (Israel, 2000)
Friedman, Karen, ‘German/Lithuanian collaboration in the Final Solution 1941-1944’, University of Illinois, (1994)
Frysh, Paul, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania: One Man’s Crusade to bring Justice’, Martyrdom and Resistance, Vol.37 No.3 (2001)
24
ID : 1019469 HI31Z
Garkauskas, Paulius, ‘Žydų atstovai apie eitynes Kaune: šių žmonių požiūris iškreiptas’, 2014, [http://www.delfi.lt/news/daily/lithuania/zydu-atstovai-apie-eitynes-kaune-siu-zmoniu-poziuris-iskreiptas.d?id=64034988] (17/04/2014)
Gilbert, Martin, The Holocaust The Jewish Tragedy, (Fontanna, 1987)
Greenbaum, Masha, The Jews of Lithuania: a history of a remarkable community, 1316-1945, (Jerusalem, 1995)
Headland, Ronald, Messages of Murder: A Study of the Reports of the Einsatzgruppen of the Security Police and the Security Service, 1941-1943, (Fairleigh, 1992)
Kolitz, Zvi, ‘The physical and Metaphysical Dimensions of the Extermination of the Jews in Lithuania’, in Lucjan Dobrszycki and Jeffrey Gurock (eds), The Holocaust in the Soviet Union: Studies and sources on the destruction of the Jews in the Nazi-occupied territories of the USSR, 1941-1945, (New York, 1993)
Kwiet, Konrad, ‘Rehearsing for Murder: The Beginning of the Final Solution in Lithuania in June 1941’, Holocaust and Genocide Studies 1(1998)
Kwiet, Konrad, ‘The Onset of the Holocaust: The Massacre of the Jews in Lithuania in June 1941’, in Andrew Bonnell, Gregory Munro, Martin Travers (eds.), Power, Conscience and Opposition: Essays in German History in honour of John A. Moses, (New York, 1996)
Melamed, J. A, Crime and Punishment: The Association of Lithuanian Jews in Israel, No.6, (1999)
Polonsky, Anthony, ‘Introduction’, in Rachel Margolis (ed.), A Partisan from Vilna’, (2010, Brighton)
Porat, Dina, ‘The Holocaust in Lithuania: some unique aspects’, in David Cesarani (ed.), The Final Solution, Origins and Implementation, (Routledge, 1994)
Rubenstein, Joshua, Altman, Ilya ‘III Lithuania’, in Joshua Rubenstein and Ilya Altman (eds.), The Unknown Black Book: The holocaust in the German-Occupied Soviet Territories, (Indiana, 2010)
Truska, Liudas, ‘Contemporary Attitudes toward the Holocaust in Lithuania’, Jews in Eastern Europe, Vol. 2, No. 45 (2001)
Zuroff, Efraim, ‘Killed by their Neighbours’, Holocaust Studies: Haaretz, (2012)
25