Naturally, in addition to the exciting information from Ukraine, the media are also starting to report on domestic issues – political, party, economic, and cultural, not to mention the lives of more or less famous people, Mečys Laurinkus writes in lrytas.lt
Suddenly, the idea of recognising V.Landsbergis as Head of State has emerged from the trenches of the old political battles. We had already forgotten. I will not go into the details of the alleged problem, which I have so far been unable to see.
At the ‘biblical’ time of the restoration of Lithuania’s independence, V.Landsbergis was recognised as the leader vulgaris (from Latin ‘of the whole nation’) of the difficult journey towards victory. The Restoration Seimas and its leader were responsible for all political decisions.
It is true that there was also the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet (or rather the AA), of which I was a member, and I had to take part in the deliberations of listening to the problems and, to the best of my ability, advising what to do.
Of course, there was also the Government. It was headed by Mrs Prunskiene, whom many people admired and even predicted would become the first President of Lithuania.
As a Member of Parliament in the previous parliamentary term, I heard this with my own ears in rural areas. A.Brazauskas was also popular.
However, wherever he was, wherever he was not, Landsbergis became the most responsible.
I remember one episode of the search for the “most responsible for everything”. When the Lithuanian collective farms were about to be transformed into something temporary, hundreds of worried people gathered in Soviet farms of all kinds for large meetings, in which I myself, as a deputy, had to participate. I had to explain what to do.
It seems to me that it was then, without having prepared at least a logical course of action on what to do and what to expect, that the Sąjūdis laid the foundations for a crushing defeat in the elections in the near future. And although the Government prepared the reform of the collective farms, it was Landsbergis who was responsible.
In a marathon of emotional meetings with voters, I heard a prophetic suggestion: if nobody knows what to do, could we not invite V.Adamkus as President of Lithuania.
This is our history. Lithuania’s fate, at least so far, has been favourable.
It was also thanks to the efforts of Mr Landsberg that Lithuania did not enter the CIS vortex. With Mr Adamkus, we are in a safe space.
The route to this zone is clear, the people who have walked it are known, and the question of Landsberg’s status, which has suddenly resurfaced, is artificial. Not from today, by the way.
Landsbergis is a personality. Of course, this is not an argument for status. Nowadays, ‘personalities’ are manufactured by the media. For the sake of justice, without forgetting themselves.
Landsbergis actually beat the Lithuanian media of the time, except for a small part of it. He broke through. Not all politicians who are even remotely worthy of the name, even on a global scale, have achieved this.
How was Mahatma Gandhi even presented in the Western media? A crazy vegan. And the result? That is the most important thing. Landsberg’s political success is an insight.
All of us, loaded down with books, look. But knowledge is only a prelude to insight. When the empire was falling, it may have been easy to foresee what the famous philosopher Mamardashvili, shortly before his death, called ‘the ballet of independencies’. And what then?
One group of dancers joined together to form the Commonwealth of Independent States. With one orchestra conductor.
On the eve of the 11th of March, just before the Congress of People’s Deputies of the USSR, whose agenda already included how not to leave the Union, Lithuania played its own melody.
There may be more than one hero in the story, but Landsbergis’ role is not an incidental one. Not everyone who sought independence for their countries under the concrete block of the USSR by various paths, even very clever ones, had this insight.
On the 10th of May, the first President of the independent Republic of Ukraine, L. Kravchuk, died. A politician worth remembering and commemorating. On the 8th of December 1991, together with Yeltsin and Shushkevich, he signed an agreement replacing the disintegrated USSR with a Commonwealth of Independent States. It still exists today, uniting nine countries.
Georgia and Ukraine have withdrawn from the CIS. But there was no need to go there. Under Yeltsin’s Russia, they could easily have turned westwards.
But they did, they got confused, and they created many joint ventures with Russia, including the military industry.
There was a lack of foresight. Now we have to fight our way through the blood – and there is no telling how it will end.
Despite Ukraine’s impressive resistance, Russia is slowly gaining a foothold in the Donbas. This means that the war will drag on.
In fact, experts and well-informed politicians are unanimous in saying that a decisive breakthrough on the frontline is approaching, which will determine the future course of events.
Reports of possible surprises in the Kremlin are becoming more frequent. Even of a covert operation against Putin.
I do not quite understand how, on the second day after the operation, Mr Putin was able to hold three public meetings in one day and to speak quite animatedly alone at them. Nor is there any sign of mutiny on board. Does this mean that Putin is not afraid of anything?
I think he is afraid, and he is not the only one. He is afraid of what supported Lukashenko at the border two years ago – the new young generation.
It is, therefore, no coincidence that the Žinijos Society (you can guess from the three generations to whom it belongs) has organised a propaganda campaign in almost every school in Russia, with senior pupils, on the ‘correct’ Kremlin policy. Ministers and hundreds of officials and propagandists were expelled to broadcast forums. So the Kremlin is preparing for mobilisation.