I did not get it . Do you mean, that Germany, a nation far more Western (in civilizational sense) than UK or US, was suffering from anti-Western feelinsg in the 1930s? Was it some form of self-hatred?

It is also revealing how your Russophobic self equates feelings of people, popular sentiments, with dictator appeasement.

Nominally. But why limit it to those who lived there before the Soviet Union? To exclude most Russians. Posted by: DoDo

It is not so, DoDo, it is much worse - Estonia and Latvia DID NOT exist before the Soviet Union, they were indirectly created by Soviet Bolsheviks and the Soviets were the first to recognize them. The discrimination is directed against certain arbitrarily set period - 1940. They cannot deny citizenship to those who was before 1940, because few of those people are left after ethnic cleansing in WWII.

You really that mean Spain or Portugal or, let’s say, Estonia has greater or much “deeper” democratic traditions than does Russia?

Edward — mplode demographically. Population is expected to decline from around 150 million at present to nearer a 100 million by 2050. Historically speaking Russia has missed the boat, the window of opportunity.

In fact Russia has the most dramatic historic population growth rate among Western countries. In the early 1700s Russia’s population was 9 million, I think’s Spain’s was 12 and France’s 20. 300 years later France’s population is around 60 (58.60), Spain’s 40 (39.30) and Russia’s 140 (145). Russia’s territory is SMALLER than in 1700s. In fact if count historic Russian lands which ended in Ukraine and other places, population is closer to 170 million. Over centuries Russia’s demographic performance has been one of the best in Europe, probably Iceland did better but I am not sure about that.

This is an interesting point that is very popular with Baltic ethnofascists but tells only half of the story, the less significant part of it.. First of Soviet Union is not Russia, as far as Russian State is concerned territories of what is today’s Estonia and Latvia have been in Russia’s for almost 300 years, not for 50 or between 1940 and 1991. These territories were not occupied but ceded by the Kingdom of Sweden by the terms of treaty of Nystad in 1700s. United States NEVER questioned Russia’s undisputed sovereignty over Baltics. In 1917 Bolsheviks overthrew Russian government in a coup. Faced with the perspective of a joint Entente and white Russian counteroffensive from the west and possibly collapse of the entire German front, they signed two treaties - one at Brest ceding huge territory to the Central Powers and second one, later, after those powers collapsed with newly formed Estonia and Latvia, which they of course indirectly helped to create. Recognition of Estonia and Latvia for Bolsheviks was tantamount to creating a buffer in the West. Of course, Bolsheviks, Trotsky and Lenin had NO right to sign that treaty. Neither United States nor any power in Europe or elsewhere recognized Bolshevik “treaty” of Dorpat (Iuriev). In fact Bolsheviks were in a legal limbo - United States NEVER recognized legality of 1917 putsch although de facto it extended diplomatic recognition to the USSR in 1933, I think. Stalin annexed Baltics to the Soviet Union. He did not annex them to Russia for they legally never became independent until Yeltsin’s dubious recognition. The Baltic ethnofascists claim that if Soviet occupation was illegal, then all acts of the Soviet Union on their territory, Soviet treaty and laws are illegal, and the so called “migrants” there or people “of wrong ethnicity” are also there illegaly. This is fine as long Russia does not do the same and does not say that yes indeed, ALL Soviet actions were illegal, beginning with 1917, AND not with 1940. Russian state has not done it yet for one reason I believe - it would throw whole state of balance and may cause immense restitution claims inside the country.

Let’s take a credible source that would show breakdown or relevant percentage of ethnic groups BEFORE Soviets. We know that the Soviets or Bolsheviks came to power in the course of the WWI, the so-called ethnic states, interwar ethnic dictatorships of Estonia and Latvia, are not representative of the history. They existed just for 20 years and were created de facto by Bolsheviks who were the first and in some cases the only ones to recognize the new ethic satrapies.

Let’s take Encyclopedia Britannica from the 1911, the one of the most comprehensive and authoritative editions, printed before World War I, and look up…. say Riga. I see disgusting David McDuff is upset that Latvian is a minority language in Riga. So how were things then, BEFORE Soviets.

So …. (http://30.1911encyclopedia.org/R/RI/RIGA.htm)

QUOTE RIGA (Esth. Ria-Lin), a seaport of Russia, 366 m. by rail S.W. of St Petersburg, the capital of the government of Livonia. The Gulf of Riga, 100 m. long and 60 m. in width, with shallow waters of inconsiderable salinity (greatest depth, 22 fathoms), freezes to some extent every year. The town is situated at the southern extremity of the gulf, 8 m. above the mouth of the Dvina, which brings Riga, by means of inland canals, into water communication with the basins of the Dnieper and the Volga. ./….Riga consists of four partsthe old town and the St Petersburg and Moscow suburbs on the right bank of
….
(Population) - The population, which was 102,590 in 1867, increased to 168,728 in I88I~and to 282,943 in 1897, so that Riga now ranks seventh in the empire in order of population;

….. 47% of the inhabitants are Germans, 25% Russians and 23% Letts, with a small admixture of Esthonians, Jews, &c.
UNQUOTE

Hence in the pre-Soviet era in urban areas the share of ethnic Latvian (Lettish, and Estonian in the Northern Russian Baltic province) population was not higher than 25% , if we just take Baltic Province’s largest city as example. Since de facto ethnic cleansing occurred in the cities between 1919 and 1945, what happened after 1945 was restoration of the ethnic balance in the cities. In fact under Soviet Union percentage of both Estonians and Latvians (ethnic Esthes and Letts) in the urban populations exceeded pre-Soviet era levels. David McDuff claims (same claim is put forth by Estonian ethnofasists) that no discrimantion occurred because those Russians or Russian speakers (mainly Jews) who are descendant of citizens of interwar republics (the phony states that existed from 1920 until 1940) got citizenship automatically. This is a technicality - territories of Estonia and Latvia underwent most thorough ethnic cleansing in between war period. Germans were repatriated, “sent home” in the 1930s (some tacing local ancestry to 1200s!) Russians were driven or exterminated while Russians speaking Jews - suffice it to say it was safer for a Jew to be in Nazi Germany than in Estonia and Latvia. The ethnic cleansing there was complete (and it was perpetrated by the Germans). Nazis used ethnic Estonian and Latvian extermination squds in Russia, Poland and elsewhere.

Modern Estonia and Latvia trace their descent not from interwar satrapies but geographically and symbolically (just compare Estonian court of arms to that of Estonia as province or gouvernment in the Russian Empire) from provinces of Estonia, Livonia and Courland. Under Russian Constitution of 1906 (The Fundamental Law of 1906), all subjects or citizens were declared equal regardless of their ethnicity. Since Bolshevik coup was illegal, then the subsequent creation and recognition of Estonia and Latvia by the Bolsheviks was illegal. The second recognition of Estonia and Latvia “independence” by Yeltsin’s (Eltsin) Russia is of dubious legality but what was totally illegal was stripping off hundreds of thousands of people of their civil rights including the right to use Russian language publicly.

I see Estonia-Latvia discrimination issue as the most serious obstacle to Russia’s integration in Europe. It is the litmus test of the future. I also think most Russians don’t realize it yet, don’t pay attention to it and don’t even imagine what a great future headache are those so-called Estonia and Latvia.

I believe Russia should democratize, become more normal, and expand ties - up to forming strategic alliance - with France and then with Germany, and not with EU in general because it is no longer possible.

Compare it to Qu?bec. If it hadn’t been for the various language laws which established French in a more prominent position in Montr?al and channelled immigrants to French-language schools, it’s quite possible that you would have had a very strong xenophobic backlash against immigration: if they’re going to become English Canadians and alter the linguistic balance . . . The language laws gave Qu?bec the chance to become a multicultural Francophone society.

I’d argue that the Estonian and Latvian laws did likewise. A situation where the language of an immigrant minority closely associated with an exceptionally unpopular period of foreign rule could have deteriorated badly.

you are asking for more information, but that needs more explanation, too much for this comment line. I will e-mail you an article from the
Estonian Institute about Ethnicity in Estonia.
There you can read about the different problems, social situation of Ukrainians and Russians in Estonia.

Well I would hope so, but what about the ones who migrated after 1940?

DoDo
All Baltic states restored granted citizenship to all Russians living there 1940 and ther descendants (!) too. What is a much bigger number.

And do not forget those Russian speaking people who are too proud and would never have chosen the other citizenship than the Soviet or Russian or they belong to.

I am optimistic, the signs for integration not assimilation are strong. There are serious attemps to bring the Russian speaking students out of the NorthEast corner, where they are majority, to the national university in Tartu. There are changes in the kindergarden education, there are changes in the Sport. I am playing streetball every sunday (in Germany) with some Russians and German Russians from Riga, and guess, they are wearing the Latvian soccer national trickot.

Actually I would like to note Jens-Olaf that I specifically didn’t mention Estonia in my original comment, since I had the impression that the situation there was somewhat different.

But can you say the same as this for Latvia and Lithuania?

I appreciate that the Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians etc also find themselves in a complicated situation, and I am sure the Russian government does it’s best to make your lives as difficult as possible. In all of these senses I am with you. But we now need to move beyond the old battles, to a new, multi ethnic, multi cultural and pluri-national Europe, where all Europeans, both new and old, can feel at home.

Ultimately it is natural that those Estonian citizens who don’t eventually speak Estonian will have more difficulty finding work, especially in white collar areas, but there needs to be a transition period.

Actually I would take another example from Spain here: Catalonia. In fact Spanish is now only taught as a second language in the vast majority of Catalan schools, with the majority of subjects being taught in Catalan. Despite all attempts from Madrid to stir things up by crying ‘discrimination’ there have been singularly few complaints from Spanish speaking parents. Why? Because they recognise in general that their children cannot use this language at home and that the school environment gives them this opportunity in order that they can later improve their employment potential.

So handled sensitively all this can be defused. But the first step in this defusing is the absolute guarantee of the rights of all citizens, and a sensitive handling of any transition period.