Russian Intifada
By Israel Shamir
The decision by the Estonian nationalist
Prime Minister, Andrus Ansip, to uproot the Tomb of the
Unknown Soldier in Tallinn brought this small Baltic state
to the verge of civil war and severely disturbed peace in
the region. The usually tranquil and delightful, Hansa-built
Old Tallinn, surrounded by its long city wall with “Long
Hermann” and “Fat Margaret,” two 15th century
towers, is now full of heavily armed police, hundreds of
detainees locked up and beaten up in Terminal D of the
harbour, burned-down shops, torture and mistreatment, open
ethnic conflict, vocal support of neocons – not what one
expects to find in this pleasant country with its peaceful
folks. The Eestlanes, the aborigines of the land -- tall,
quiet and blue-eyed peasant folk -- were supposed to be so
calm that “a red-hot Estonian lad” is a synonym for slow-wit
among their neighbours. On the other hand, these good
craftsmen and fishermen, fond of taking their coffee with
the sweet liqueur Vana Tallinn, volunteered en masse for
Nazi SS divisions and were prominent in ethnic cleansing
campaigns.
For an Israeli, these Tallinn events had
a strong touch of déjà vu. Uprooting of the Unknown Soldier
Tomb was done by the nationalist government in a pointedly
insulting and arrogant way. This triggered the Russian
Intifada, the spontaneous uprising of the unprivileged. In a
like manner, the provocative and arrogant visit of Ariel
Sharon to the al-Aksa Mosque in the fateful September of
2000 had jumpstarted the Palestinian Intifada. In both cases
a provocation was initiated by extreme nationalists of the
ruling ethnic group keen on spoiling fragile inter-communal
relations, for they feed on strife. In both cases, they
claimed their unlimited right to do whatever they wish. In
both cases, the media attention was concentrated on the
response to provocation, rather than on its causes. For
sure, the violent response of Palestinians in 2000 and
Russians in 2007 -- their rioting, stone-throwing and
shop-burning -- was obvious, visible and unpleasant. What is
less visible is that each was a result of provocation, and
of a long sequence of injustices leading to the outbreak of
violence.
Estonia is notorious for coming as close
to apartheid as any country in Europe since 1945. The
Columbia Encyclopaedia tells us that “Estonians (Eestlanes)
make up about 65% of the population; Russians constitute
almost 30%, and there are Ukrainian, Belarusian, and Finnish
minorities. Since independence (1991), citizenship has
generally been limited to ethnic Estonians, a practice
widely criticized because it denies political and civil
rights to the many Russian-speaking inhabitants. In 1993
ethnic Russians were officially declared foreigners, raising
even stronger objections.” The “Russians” of Estonia are of
various origins – ethnic Ukrainian, Georgian, German,
Armenian, Jewish, Russian – all non-aborigines are called
“Russians”. The Russians were stripped of their citizenship,
their ID cards are now stamped “Alien”, while in private,
they are called ‘Negroes’ – an abbreviation of Ne-Gr,
non-citizen.
This is not your ordinary
immigrants-versus-natives conflict. The non-Eestlanes are no
more “immigrants” in Estonia than Parisians are immigrants
in Corsica, or Londoners in Wales. Estonia became Russian in
1721, before Corsica became French (in 1768), and remained
in union with Russia until 1991, except for a short break
(1921-1940). Non-aboriginal Estonians would be considered
equal and ordinary citizens in every European country but
new Estonia. Even “recent immigrants” moved to what became
Estonia over fifty years ago in a perfectly legal way.
Estonia had all the preconditions for
peaceful co-existence between its communities. The Russians
had a positive attitude towards the native Eestlanes, their
culture and their language in keeping with their tradition:
indeed, the Eesti language survived and flourished, while
the tongues of peoples with comparable territory and
population, such as Breton, Cornish or Sorb (residing in the
UK, France and Germany respectively) have all but vanished.
Russian writers and poets were attracted by Tallinn’s Baltic
charm, and made it a setting for many novels. While
neighbouring Swedes considered Eestlanes uncouth and clumsy
(“Estonian ballet” is a Swedish synonym for heavy and clumsy
gait), the Russians nourished a flattering image of an
Estonian as a silent, pipe-smoking he-man.
There is no clear racial divide, either:
ethnic Russians are a fusion of Slav and Finnish tribes
(like the French are a fusion of Celtic and Germanic ones),
and they can’t be distinguished from the ethnic Estonians by
their facial features. In the present conflict over the
monument, Jurgen Ligi, Estonian ex-minister of defence,
called for the removal of “the idol with monstrous Russian
face”. The ignorant racist did not know that the “monstrous
Russian face of the idol” was an Estonian face, sculpted
after a known Estonian sportsman by Estonian artist Enn
Roos.
The local Russians were extremely
pro-Estonian: they liked the Estonians, they supported
Estonian independence in 1991 and expected to remain
citizens with full rights in new Estonia. “When the
Eestlanes demanded independence, the Russian Estonian
intelligentsia [the educated classes] not only supported
them, but were in the forefront of the struggle” – writes
Lara Larson, a Russian Estonian, whose blog
http://laralarsen.livejournal.com/ is extremely popular
these days. “Now we understand that the reasons were
different: Eestlanes fought for their separate isolated
life, while the Russians fought for democracy. The newly
independent Estonia fitted the Eestlanes’ vision, while the
democracy we looked for did not materialise. Non-Eestlanes
were stripped of their civil rights. That was the first
blow. There were many insults, we were habitually slighted.
At first, we hoped it was a temporary development; and that
soon, equality and fraternity would blossom. Indeed, there
were improvements, but two years ago, an extreme nationalist
government made things worse.”
“The Russian-speaking community is
discriminated against. Officially, they just have no right
to vote for the Parliament. But unofficial discrimination is
much worse. The Russians suffer from heavy unemployment,
they earn less; there are practically no Russians at the
top. There are no Russians in the beefed-up state
organisations. The Eestlanes practice full segregation in
the working places. Does it mean that the Russians are less
able, can’t be taught, are doomed to sweep streets? Probably
not. The Language Laws provided the perfect machinery for
discrimination, for they made it almost impossible for the
Russians to become citizens: one has to show such a
proficiency in the Eestlane language that an ordinary
Eestlane can’t pass it. For instance, one has to pen a long
essay extolling the advantages of investments in Estonia.”
“You could not get any job, even a
verbally-non-demanding one, unless you pass the exam. The
exams became more demanding every year; one has to be an
extraordinary well-read and well-educated person to pass the
test. Now they introduced a new measure: the language
commission can check you anytime and void your exams if they
would decide your knowledge of Eesti is not up to scratch.
But even Estonian citizens of Russian origin were kept out
of jobs and were discriminated against in many subtle and
not-so-subtle ways.”
“The Tomb’s demolition was a trigger,
rather. The discriminated part of population did not agree
to take it laying down. Such sustained pressure and
mistreatment could not last forever. Masses of people went
out to the streets in protests, they had no leaders, no
organisers, but they were fed up with discrimination. This
is not a political conflict; this is a movement for civil
rights, for equality.”
The strange idea of stripping natives of
their citizenship because their fathers were born just
across the present border seems out of place in Europe. In
neighbouring Sweden every immigrant obtains Swedish
citizenship, and becomes as much a Swede as the king (who is
a descendent of immigrants himself, from France on his
father’s side and from Germany on his mother’s). It is not
necessary to master Swedish, though one may learn it at the
state’s expense – as opposed to Estonia. An immigrant may
take exams, get his driver’s license and fill out
applications in his native tongue. In Finland, a small
Swedish minority has full rights, and can freely use their
language everywhere. There are no problems between the
native majority and ethnic minorities in these countries.
The outbreak of the Russian Intifada
should sound an alarm for Estonians. Instead of bewailing
the burnt shops and writing offensive letters to their
newspapers, they should give thought to what caused the
riots, and change the situation to fit Swedish and Finnish
model. They should void their language laws, give
citizenship to their Russian-speaking minority and forbid
discrimination. They should strive for equality, and elect a
Russian for president, as the Indians elected a Muslim.
Follow the Human Rights declaration. In short, they should
get off the tree and enter 21st century.
The problem is, Estonians are the least
believing, most godless folk in Europe, tells the
Answers.com: according to the most recent Eurostat
"Eurobarometer" poll, in 2005
[4], only 16% of Estonian citizens responded that
"they believe there is a God". This, according to the
survey, would have made
Estonians the
least religious people in Europe”, while the Russians of
Estonia believe in Christ. So, though there are twice as
many Eestlanes than Russians, Lutherans are 39% while the
Orthodox are 28%. Godless population is easily trapped by
nationalist myths. That is why they erect monuments to their
SS fighters, foam about Russian occupation and Stalin’s
repressions and publish racist attacks on “Slavic
degenerates”. Forget Haider, forget Le Pen – these guys are
liberals and democrats in comparison with the present
Estonian leaders.
While Germany was severely punished and
fully denazified, Estonia was considered a Nazi victim,
rather than a willing collaborator with the Nazis. The
Jerusalem Post noted “the active
participation of numerous Estonians in WWII era crimes and
the support of much of the local population for the Nazi
occupation. There was no anti-Nazi underground or resistance
movement of any kind in Estonia.” “Stalin’s
repressions” were a form of de-Nazification less severe than
that carried out by the Americans in occupied Germany. While
Anglo-Americans caused the death of
millions of Germans, while the French killed probably
some 50,000 of their collaborators, Stalin’s denazification
was not thorough enough. After 1991, the Nazi elements in
Estonia made their come-back.
Ephraim Zurov of the
Jerusalem Post writes: “The Estonian judicial
authorities have invested much effort in prosecuting
Communist criminals, mostly Russians, at least 10 of whom
have already been convicted in Estonia. The same cannot be
said, however, of the investigations carried out regarding
Estonians who collaborated with the Nazis in the crimes of
the Holocaust.
Not a single Estonian citizen who participated in the
persecution and/or murder of Jews during WWII has been
brought to trial by the Estonians, despite the existence of
abundant incriminatory evidence”.
I have now spent a few days in Estonian
Internet and it has been a shocking experience. Their
writing oozes with hate and racism, much of it aimed at
Russia. An official guide to Tallinn says that a Russian
Tsar had built the beautiful Alexander Nevsky Cathedral “to
obliterate the grave of Kalev, the Estonian hero”. It refers
to destruction caused by the Red Army while taking Tallinn
in 1944 in a most dramatic manner: not even the neo-Nazis in
Germany speak in such terms.
This is one of the reasons for the
trouble between the Eestlanes and the local Russians: the
latter celebrate the V-day, while for the former this is a
day of mourning. Surely there were native Estonians in the
Red Army, but now their sons and daughters apologise that
“they were forced to join”.
The pro-Nazi apartheid regime of Estonia
is tolerated and supported by the West because the US and
NATO needs an anti-Russian Estonia. The neocon flagship, the
Wall Street Journal (30 April 2007,
Estonia and the Bear), encouraged the Eestlanes to
escalate their conflict with their Eastern neighbour. Once
this newspaper pushed the Iraqi WMD threat, now, it decries
“Russian involvement”: “Some of the 1,000 rioters arrested
arrived only in recent days from Russia”, “The real
inspiration was Moscow”.
This is far from true. Russia is doing
good business with Estonia. Independent Estonia is rather
useful for Russia, as a nearby banking centre, a good place
for transhipping, for small import-export operations, for
popular tourism. Russian businessmen send their oil via
Estonian harbours and develop its infrastructure, use
Estonian airline connections and build tourist projects.
Russia does not want trouble in Estonia.
The Wall Street Journal and its
neocons have no moral considerations; they preach human
rights when it suits them, and ignore their breach when it
fits their plans. They write: “[Estonians] insist, not
unreasonably, that Russians learn a few words of their
language to gain citizenship.” This is a lie. All
inhabitants of Estonia know enough of the native language,
but they can’t pass the test as its purpose is to deny
equality to non-purebred Eestlanes. “And the majority of
Latvian and Estonian Russians have gotten their
citizenship”, says the WSJ, and this is another lie.
Estonian apartheid is real, and it is obvious, but the
neocons ignore it.
The Estonian PM Ansip explained his
actions by the urgent need to rid central Tallinn of the
graves of “marauders, drunkards and occupants”. His actions
were applauded by the Wall Street Journal: “The
Estonian government transferred the bronze statue of a Red
Army soldier and exhumed remains of Soviet troops to a
military cemetery near the capital. Estonians are generous
to keep them at all: France doesn't have a memorial to the
Nazi occupation.”
Who was buried there? The Unknown
Soldier’s Tomb was a common grave of 12 Soviet soldiers who
perished while taking Tallinn from the Germans. One of the
twelve was a twenty-year-old Jewish girl soldier, Nurse
Elena Warshawsky, born in Ukraine. Her revolutionary father
Moses called her Lenina, but she preferred her less exotic
name. She was killed in action on September 23, 1944. She
was not an occupant; she was a young woman who died fighting
the Nazis. Now her remains and the remains of her eleven
comrades-in-arms have been removed by a tender Estonian
bulldozer, while she is compared to the Nazis by the neocon
WSJ.
The neocons are notorious for their lack
of scruples, but this case takes the cake. A comparison of
Israeli Jewish soldiers with Nazis is usually met with an
outcry of condemnation by Israel and by its American friends
including the WSJ. But no one objected when the WSJ compared
Elena Warshawsky to the Nazis. Israel kept mum. Jewish
organisations were silent as fish. The Jewish-owned and
edited WSJ usually is quite vocal, and rightly so, when a
Jewish grave is vandalised. But in this case, they applauded
vandals.
Indeed why should they care about the
dead Jewish girl, when they have bigger fish to fry: they
try to cause confrontation between Estonia and Russia, they
try to convince the Eestlanes that they may pull the bear’s
whiskers under protection of the NATO shield: “the Kremlin
can still stir the Baltic pot. Fortunately, as a NATO
member, little Estonia doesn't fear for its life, circa
1940.”
Wrong again. In the 1930s, the
predecessors of NATO, England and France, enticed Poland and
Czechoslovakia in similar way to confront Russia and
Germany. The Poles and the Czechs fell for the trick, they
did all they could to provoke Russia and Germany believing
that the West would help them. But in their time of need,
the West dropped them like a hot brick. Tomorrow the West
will repeat this manoeuvre with Estonia.
Estonians may learn much from their
neighbour, Finland. In the 1930s, the Finns embraced an
ambitious anti-Russian policy, to the great pleasure of the
neocons’ spiritual fathers. They paid for it with two lost
wars and a chunk of lost territory. After this painful
lesson, Finland swapped its Mannerheim’s Line of
confrontation with Russia for the Paasikivi Line of
friendship with Russia. Finland has never had reason to
regret it. The country flourished, prospered on its transit
trade with the USSR, and afterwards with the new Russia.
Finland stayed out of NATO, out of anti-Russian blocs, and
remained perfectly independent, free and prosperous.
The external anti-Russian course of the
present Estonian leadership is inherently connected with
their internal apartheid. Unless Estonians change both, the
days of their independence are numbered. One fine day, when
the US tanks move in to establish “democracy” in Teheran, a
Russian airborne division may provide an asymmetric answer
by removing the apartheid regime in Tallinn. Great countries
have their ways, and Russia may learn from the US treatment
of independent and hostile Panama. The passage to the Gulf
of Finland is no less important for the Russian fleet than
the passage through the Panama Canal is for the American
Navy. Unless the Estonian leadership wants to share the fate
of President Manuel Noriega they should give thought to
whether the US will fight for them. The Eestlanes will
always have the Russians for their neighbours, unless they
plan a great trek to Manitoba. The elimination of apartheid
and the establishment of a Paasikivi Line of friendship with
their great Eastern neighbour will guarantee Estonian
independence better than NATO and the WSJ neocons.