Vilnius University is cancelling its contract with Russian biblical professor Andrei Desnitsky because of his article “Soviet Baltic States: what was it?”. This is reported by LRT radio.
The article in question is an article by a religious scholar published on the Orthodox portal Pravmir in 2012. There Desnitsky argued that the term “annexation” rather than “occupation” is more appropriate in relation to the USSR’s annexation of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.
As an example of Desnicki’s denial of the occupation of the Baltic States, LRT radio quotes the following from the article:
“Absurd as it may sound, tanks entered Riga, Tallinn and the recently ceded Vilnius to Lithuania (it was the Polish city of Vilna until September 1939) with the full consent of the local governments. Neither the troops nor the population offered any appreciable resistance.”
“From a formal point of view, there was more freedom under the Red Army, because before its arrival no elections were envisaged at all.”
In addition, LRT notes that even before Russia’s annexation of Crimea, the professor was in favour of holding a referendum on secession from Ukraine on the peninsula, writes the BBC Russian Service.
It is noted that Desnitsky was hired as a senior researcher at Vilnius University last autumn, his residence permit in Lithuania depends on this work. The professor wrote in his Telegram channel that now, years later, he sees everything “completely differently”.
“Back then, in a peaceful and cloudless time, it seemed important to me to clarify whether it was annexation or occupation and what difference there was in the meaning and use of these terms. At that time it seemed possible to discuss: let’s look at the situation through the eyes of local communists who were quite sincerely rejoicing, let’s parse their arguments,” the scientist tried to justify himself.
If he were writing on this topic today, he would limit himself to one sentence: “There is not the slightest doubt that the accession was indeed violent and violated every conceivable norm of international law, and that repression did indeed follow,” Desnitsky stressed, adding that he regretted the article he wrote 11 years ago and apologised “to those who are ready to accept them”.
1,642 total views, 4 views today
