Guilt, Sympathy, and Cooperation: EU—Baltic Relations in the Early 1990s

Abstract

The period between March 1990 and June 1993 represents the critical window for European Union (EU)—Baltic relations. During this time Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania laid the foundation for future EU membership. For its part, the European community made a commitment to include the three republics in the process of enlargement. This paper traces the beginnings of EU—Baltic cooperation and examines factors that led to growing political and economic convergence. Nordic membership in the EU, ex-Soviet troop withdrawal, and Russian parliamentary elections were instrumental in bringing both sides together on the road to enlargement, but collective guilt provided the underlying rationale. In this paper, the author argues that it is impossible to understand fully this process of convergence without taking into account the connotations and consequences of the “black trinity”: the Munich pact, the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, and the Yalta agreement.

Comparative Politics and Government of the Baltic States

“…There is no single convincing theoretical paradigm that explains why the EU member states moved to a position of supporting the accession of three postSoviet states. As Ainius Lasas (2008) points out, it is likely the result of a combination of some states' economic self-interest (liberal institutionalism), the EU's founding commitment and established practice of continued enlargement (constructivism) and member states' continued rhetorical commitments to the region that eventually forced them to honour these pledges (sociological approaches) as well as Lasas's own argument that the West's 'collective guilt' for the Baltic occupation led the EU to dangle the prospect of membership to the three post-Soviet states. In any case, the road to membership began immediately after independence, when the Baltic foreign ministers, acting together, used a meeting in Brussels to request Europe Agreements as the first step towards eventual EU membership and proceeded in a more or less linear fashion.…”

Discursive Narration of the Collective Self in the International Speeches of the Baltic Presidents

“…Moreover, this narration of the self not only in state-internal discourse but also and perhaps more importantly in international discourse may often "serve as motivations for behaviour" thus aiding in sustaining and reaching to common political goals (14). Lasas (2008) has concluded that "the guilt factor" on the part of the Western states for the consequences of the World War II in the Baltic States has been both recognised and used by the Baltic leaders during the accession debates into the European Union and NATO (15). Moreover, it is also agreed that two almost radically different historical narratives exist and are shared among the ethnic population (minority and majority) of the Baltic States, and there is the need to "set the record straight" on the part of political actors to ensure the continuity of their states (4-8).…”

Lietuvos diplomatinė kultūra: herojiškos diplomatijos eskizas

“…Panaši, į vertybes apeliuojanti retorika buvo naudojama ne tik Lietuvos, bet ir kitų Vidurio Europos šalių diplomatų, siekiant narystės euroatlantinėse institucijose. Buvo teigiama, kad Vakarų Europa privalo neatstumti iš sovietinio bloko išsivadavusios ir demokratiją pasirinkusios Europos (Lašas 2008;Schimmelfennig 2001). Ši taktika vėl pasiteisino kaip sėkminga ir vertybinis diskursas dar buvo kurį laiką populiarus siekiant "suminkštinti" griežtas Vakarų diplomatų pozicijas įvairiais klausimais.…”