Citizenship, Collective Identity and the International Impact on Integration Policy in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

In Latvia in 1935 77% of the population belonged to the core nation; this figure decreased to 52% by 1989. In Estonia the shift in demographic composition was similarly dramatic: whereas in 1934 ethnic Estonians made up 88% of the population, by 1989 their proportion had decreased to 62%. Conversely, in Lithuania the indigenous proportion of the population remained stable: in 1923 it was 80% and by 1993 it had increased to 81% (Steen 2006, p. 192).

The divergent paths to independence resulted from the fact that most Western democracies including the USA did not recognise the Soviet annexation of the Baltic states in 1940 on the basis of the Ribbentrop–Molotov Pact, and maintained legal (de jure) recognition of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania throughout the whole Soviet time. All three Baltic states thus had an international legal status of ‘Soviet-occupied states'. Due to their ethnic heterogeneity, Estonia and Latvia used the argument of legal continuity to restore the interwar nation state (only Latvia) and ascribed the term of ‘illegal occupation-era settlers' to the Soviet-era immigrants (both Estonia and Latvia), whereas Lithuania decided to build state institutions from scratch. For a more detailed account see Pettai (1997, 2004).

Due to their restrictive citizenship policies, both Latvia and Estonia were frequently described as ethnic democracies, whose aim was to secure the values, power and resources in a given society for one ethnic group (Pettai 1997, p. 18); see also Linz and Stepan (1996).

Pettai and Hallik argue in the Estonian case that this policy was not part of a calculated bias in favour of Estonians. They simply represented a much larger percentage of the population in 1940, so it was inevitable that most of the restituted property would belong to them (Pettai & Hallik 2002, p. 518).

The findings have been confirmed by surveys by Vihalemm (2005, pp. 61–62), who found that the predominant identity among Estonians was the national identity, in which civic, ethnic and territorial dimensions are represented. Among the Estonian Russians the prevailing collective identity was territorial–ethnic: a total of 84% definitely felt that they were inhabitants of Estonia, 79% definitely felt that they were Russians, and 74% felt that they were speakers of Russian; the civic category of ‘citizen of the Republic of Estonia’ was firmly accepted by 48%, which was more than the proportion of Estonian Russians who actually had Estonian citizenship. The author concluded that civic identity was not a determinant of citizenship and the predominant reason for identifying oneself as an Estonian citizen was territorial (born and living in Estonia).

Gelazis draws attention to the fact that each member state is committed to its own ideological and constitutional tradition and the EU is not able to harmonise the standards of rights protection among member states and has had to oscillate between the positive assessment of the political and human rights criteria in general and making increasing demands towards the Baltic states (Gelazis 2003, p. 68).

Although the Constitutional Court of Latvia regards non-citizens as neither citizens, nor stateless persons (http://www.satv.tiesa.gov.lv/upload/2004-15-0106E.rtf, accessed 24 February 2011); the category of non-citizen has been equated to the problem of statelessness by the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (Edinburgh Declaration of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly on 9 July 2004, available at: http://new.oscepa.org/images/stories/documents/declarations/2004_-_edinburgh_declaration_-_english. 2314.pdf, accessed 24 February 2011).

More information on the Estonian Integration Programmes is available on the homepage of European Web Site of Integration, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/ewsi/en/info_sheet.cfm?ID_CSHEET=46, accessed 9 August 2010.

In Lithuania the conceptualisation of nation determined the main line of contestation. The nationalist camp within the Popular Front Sajudis in the late 1980s was divided into ‘modernisers’ opting for a ‘return to Europe’ and ‘conservatives’ propagating ‘return to the ethnic past’ (Jurgaitiene & Wæver 1996, pp. 196–97). In the same vein, Rindzeviciute presents two types of discourse in Lithuania: reproductive–nationalistic and constructionist–critical (Rindzeviciute 2003, pp. 87–88). The former is rooted in the interwar tradition, emphasising the role of language and culture and nowadays represented by Sajudis and its successor conservative party the Homeland Union–Christian Democrats (Tėvynės sąjunga—Lietuvos krikščionys demokratai, TS–LKD). The latter separates ethnic components of national identity from political ones and stresses that national identity is just one of several social identifications. This stance is represented today by the Social Democratic Party (Lietuvos socialdemokratų partija, LSDP), former Lithuanian Democratic Labour Party (Lietuvos demokratinė darbo partija, LDDP) and the successor of the Communist Party (Lietuvos komunistų partija).

In 1989 the Polish minority constituted around 7% of Lithuania's population and has been the biggest and most active ethnic minority in the country (Budryte 2005, pp. 147–48).

Edgar Savisaar opted for the ‘Zero Option’ in granting citizenship as well as for offering the status of a free-trade zone to the town Narva (Lieven 1993, pp. 279–81).

Electoral Programme of the LPEA accepted on 28 August 2008, available at: http://www.awpl.lt, accessed 17 November 2010.

Information about the party's activities is available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members/public/geoSearch/view.do?country=LT&partNumber=1&language=PL&id=96697, accessed 24 February 2011, and at the homepage of the Lithuanian Electoral Board, available at: http://www.vrk.lt, accessed 24 February 2011.

The Newsletter at the Centre for Eastern Studies, available at: http://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/eastweek/2009-12-09/another-partner-united-russia-baltic-states, accessed 24 February 2011.

‘A Row about Spelling Freezes Relation between Poland and Lithuania’, The Economist, 21 October 2010, available at: http://www.economist.com/node/17316729, accessed 15 April 2011.

Data available at the homepage of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia, available at: http://www.mfa.gov.lv/en/service/4727/, accessed 24 February 2011.

Data available at the homepage of the NGO Estonia.eu, available at: http://estonia.eu/about-estonia/society/citizenship.html, accessed 9 August 2010.

Press Statement of the OSCE Mission, 8 October 2006, available at: http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/latvia/21362, accessed 24 February 2011; PACE Resolution 1527 (2006) on Rights of National Minorities in Latvia—Section 11, available at: http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta06/ERES1527.htm, accessed 24 February 2011.

Estonian State Integration Strategy is available at the NGO Estonian Cooperation Assembly (Eesti Koostöö Kogu, EKK), see http://www.kogu.ee/indexphpid11145, accessed 9 August 2010.

The article is available on the website of ‘Providus’, available at: http://www.providus.lv/public/26598.html; see also Golubeva et al. (2007).

Integration and Minority Information Centre, available at: http://www.humanrights.org.lv, accessed 17 June 2010.

It must be noted however that none of the ‘Russian’ parties has explicitly admitted the Soviet rule to be an occupation.

Baltic Times, 16 June 2009, available at: http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/23064/; see also Kazoka and Akule (2009).

Integration and Minority Information Centre, available at: http://www.humanrights.org.lv, accessed 19 April 2010.

As a former Central Bank economist, Dombrovskis was regarded as an outsider and thus not entrenched in the discredited political spectrum.

Mullett 2009.

‘Estonia; It's the Institutions, Stupid!’, available at: http://www.lithuaniatribune.com/2010/04/27/estonia-it%E2%80%99s-the-institutions-stupid/, accessed 27 April 2010.

See footnote 27.

Interview with Andres Kasekamp, Estonian political scientist, published in Gazeta Wyborcza, 31 December 2010, available at: http://wyborcza.pl/1,76842,8888828,Rozmowa_z_Andresem_Kasekampem__estonskim_politologiem.html, accessed 24 February 2011.

See http://www.humanrights.org.lv/html/25501.html, accessed 23 October 2009.