[ad_1]
Despite the fact that Palanga has always been and always will be Lithuanian (and who could dispute, for example, Birutė’s Lithuania or Jonas Žemaitis – Vytautas, born in Palanga in 1909), the beach returned to Lithuania exactly one hundred years ago. To remember this amazing fact, let’s try to relive the events of that time in our minds.
From January 6 to 10, 1921, the arbitration commission headed by James Young Simpson (1873-1934) had just admired the windy Baltic Sea off the coast of Palanga and appreciated the Lithuanian character of this region. “Nonsense,” J. Simpson commented in a very Scottish tone about Lithuania’s arguments about another port in Sventoji, for American money. He didn’t understand, probably, that Lithuanians were already thinking about the airport then.
James Young Simpson (1873-1934)
“If Lithuania returns Klaipeda, the commission’s job would really be easier,” he wrote to the head of the Russian department of the British Foreign Office. Unfortunately, the commission received no help from the country, the final decision had to be made by Simpson alone. The arbitrator’s decision, which has been proven over a century, makes the following memorable arguments: “The totality of historical and ethnographic circumstances supported Lithuania’s claim in any assessment, and” cannot in itself hinder Latvia, as the economic interests of these sister states are not contradictory, but complementary. ” But let’s go back to the beginning.
I am writing this line in Edinburgh, looking out the window of the gray building at No. Queen Street. 52. JYSimpson was born and lived in this house until his death. A plaque on the wall of the house seems to confirm this. Only on closer inspection does it appear that the grandfather’s brother of the same name (1811-1870) was honored by applying colorform anesthesia during childbirth.
Science also attracted James Young Jr., studied zoology at Edinburgh and Cambridge, then became a member and vice president of the Royal Society of Geography of Scotland, advisor to the Royal Society of Zoology of Scotland, taught theology at the University of Edinburgh and published several scholarships. The knowledge of the Russian aristocrat Nikolai Golicyn inspired Simpson to travel by train to Siberia and to the book “Siberian Road Lights: Tales of the Siberian Railway, Prisons and the Exile System”.
Interest in Russia led the young Simpson to the intelligence department, which was later attached to the British Foreign Service. Simpson was soon entrusted with an archive of Finland, the Baltic countries, and the Caucasus. Having established contacts with the representatives of the newly formed republics, Simpson gradually but sincerely believed in the meaning of his independence. 1919 The Paris Peace Conference was the last period of Simpson’s diplomatic work, and his services were recognized by the Estonian and Finnish governments with state awards. However, fate once again united him with the Baltic states, when a friend suggested that the head of the Russian branch of the British Foreign Service become the chairman of an arbitration commission to establish the border between Lithuania and Latvia. Simpson couldn’t give up.
Having established contacts with the representatives of the newly formed republics, Simpson gradually but sincerely believed in the meaning of his independence.
The border issue was not easy. Lithuania demanded a Lithuanian-speaking coastline, which was assigned to the Latvian Curonian Spit, Latvia demanded the entire Liepaja-Riga and Mažeikiai railway line, Lithuania wanted Kalkuone and access to the Daugava, and there was no problem in other sections: Latvian newspapers were still flashing Steven Taler established the border between Estonia and Latvia, solemnly separating the kitchens from the bedrooms.
Photo by Rytis Satkauskas / Drawings by JYSimpson
The borders of the newly formed Baltic states were not established in the Treaty of Versailles (after Latvia rejected Lithuania’s rights to Palanga in negotiations), significantly hampering the path to statehood. The boundaries of the provinces provided legal certainty, at least temporarily, against external interference, but a clear delimitation of the territories by mutual agreement was necessary both to clearly define the limits of territorial jurisdiction – the basis of a modern state – and to put an end to territorial disagreements (Latvian forces fighting Bermontians considered Mazeikiai and Lithuania – Alūkštas), as well as fully implement the principle of national self-determination on which the Baltic states based their statehood. Both the Lithuanian and Latvian declaration of independence defined the territories of the states on an ethnic basis.
Britain has traditionally been one of the most loyal defenders of the independence of the Baltic states, in which it had both political and economic interests.
On the other hand, the arbitrator’s decision in the border dispute could have led to unnecessary accusations and staging, making the regional expert, who no longer had official duties, the most suitable for the position. Britain has repeatedly stressed that JYSimpson does not represent official London in any way, despite being paid a hundred dollars a month’s salary and a dollar a day a day.
Decisions were to be made by the chairman of the commission on the basis of the September 28 An arbitration agreement signed in Riga, which also establishes the fundamental principles of delimitation: ethnic composition and historical circumstances, political interests of countries (military, strategic, economic and communication) and the wishes of the border population.
In addition to the reputation of the British-appointed arbitrator, Lithuania and Latvia have used the emergent binding method of friendly settlement, establishing universally accepted delineation principles in the agreement and committing to impartially enforce the arbitrator’s decision. The decision, which took into account the existing administrative line (which, according to the Commission, “eventually became a line separating the two nations with a distinctive national worldview”), rejected the influence of the regions controlled by the military. balance, contributed to the formation of territorial dispute resolution practices.
Kaunas and Curonian provinces
Often overlooked is the fact that this decision nearly 30 thousand. has of territory transferred to Latvia and only 20.9 thousand. ha – for Lithuania. In fact, although special commissions were established to determine ethnic composition, the referee’s decision prevented plebiscites that could divide the locals.
Furthermore, Simpson seems to have made it clear that only a “correct” solution based on the principle of equality can be a good foundation for a good long-term relationship. It is important to note that Palanga was recognized as the territory of Lithuania based exclusively on the ethnic origin of the population, and only the territory beyond the Šventoji River, where there were no Lithuanians among the 662 inhabitants at that time, reached Lithuania according to their infrastructure development plans. It should come as no surprise that exactly less than 100 years later this vision is being implemented by the Būtingė oil terminal. Latvia received the Latvian territory of Aknysta and the Lithuanian territory of Alūkšta, on behalf of the brotherhood.
Often overlooked is the fact that this decision nearly 30 thousand. has of territory transferred to Latvia and only 20.9 thousand. ha – for Lithuania.
Interwar border signs on the border with Latvia not only mark the friendship of two fraternal nations. Of course, the border provided the necessary environment for bilateral cooperation and economic development. Territorial disputes have never overshadowed the neighborhood of Lithuania and Latvia.
But first of all, these border signs are a monument to our statehood. The nations that gained independence could not ignore the prevailing standards of international conduct. One hundred years ago, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia applied to become members of the newly formed Union of Nations and gradually gained international recognition. The ability to peacefully resolve disputes between them, to implement the decisions made, demonstrated the maturity of the newly appointed governments.
The work of the border commission was studied by prof. Zenonas Butkus claimed that the commission had done its job so well that no one remembered it anymore. It’s time to dust off this important page in history. Next time in Palanga or Edinburgh, or perhaps Alūksta, let us remember the common rules of conduct, the importance of our neighbors and our place in the international community, the consequences of a principled and reasonable human decision and responsibility for generations. future.
Rytis Satkauskas is an advisor to the Lithuanian Embassy in the United Kingdom.
[ad_2]
