[ad_1]
“This is the reality of the world today and it must be constantly explained to people,” Landsberg said in an interview with Elta.
Professor, we commemorate the thirtieth anniversary of the tragic events of January 13. Do you think that the events of three decades ago are properly rooted in the collective memory of society?me?
Let society respond. It seems to me that these things are very deep in our consciousness … Perhaps young people have less experience or have listened less. However, it is the responsibility of parents and the educational system to take care of how young people should be informed and familiar with the history of their country. And I don’t have to think for all the people if they are serious enough about what happened, where we were, we fought, and we won.
I think the majority of the public is serious and solid in this regard.
There are rumors that perhaps the events of January 13 should be commemorated more with the head raised than on Victory Day.
I think this is a long-standing problem. And that is often talked about. There is a draft resolution in the Seimas (the conversation took place before the adoption of the resolution by the Seimas – ELTA), which emphasizes victory. I think it’s really a mature track to watch. It is a tragic victory, but a victory.
However, the resolution you mention focuses on the issue, not on how to mention January 13, but on a prominent point in the text due to the last name you entered. Therefore, the opposition and some politicians are unhappy with the fact that the resolution notes that Lithuania, led by you as chairman of the Supreme Restorative Council of the Seimas at that time, has won a historic victory. It is said that this is how the question of their status arises.
If they pretend, let them be with you and explain. I have no comments. I see the constitutional texts, I know where I was, what I did. I have nothing to argue with: illiterate or arrogant who deny the facts? There is no need to argue.
But how do you see the same debate from the side?
You know, I’d wait for that to end. Now my comments can be interpreted in any way. I will see how my nation and my parliament behave.
30 years have passed since January 13. Undoubtedly, this period was accompanied by changes in society, changes in the generation of politicians. What do you think remains to be done, what is still very important on January 13?
In some respects, looking at the international content and the context of that drama and shock, the Lithuanian state could perhaps behave in a more statelike way … Please evaluate accordingly. That night, in the Supreme Council, we assessed that it was an undeclared war against Lithuania by the Soviet Union and an attack on its independence. This understanding could be more robust. We resisted this war, but it was a real war, which is not over yet, the current Russian government is trying to continue, attacking the defenders of Lithuanian justice. This is the reality of the world today and must be constantly explained to people.
The resolution mentions these circumstances, perhaps something more needs to be done?
First is the unfinished case. People talk about it, debate publicly, publish a book on the case of January 13. There are questions as to why they have not been answered. Perhaps one day these questions will be answered.
You recalled on January 13, urging the Lithuanian people to stop and follow the quarantine rules during the spread of the pandemic. How do you feel, professor, about the current climate of society? A society facing a dangerous virus. Is the sense of concentration and perception that must be resisted very different now and 30 years ago? Are they even incomparable after all?
There may be some sense and comparison. Many people realize that the danger is great, that we must be united, united, a policy towards this new enemy. Well, while others try to dismantle a united attitude and a united front … But it is a question of conscience.
Information about queues has appeared in the public sphere. Here there has been talk of a non-Soviet legacy of thought. Do you agree, are there other things here?
There is enough Soviet heritage in our society that it is not surprising that someone wants to take advantage of their official position. Various cases are used.
And how do you see the work of the political elite in a pandemic? In your assessment, did the competition between politicians in the context of a pandemic go beyond normality or a tolerable framework of political competition?
Perhaps the time will come when the attitude of politicians and the actions they propose or do not take will be analyzed, taking into account the needs of the current moment. In fact, the greatest need was human health and life. If someone has seen that this is not the most important task, it is also a matter of conscience.
No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of ELTA.
[ad_2]
