LTStraipsnyje nagrinėjami painūs Latvijos ir Lietuvos santykiai tarpukariu, telkiant dėmesį j trečiojo dešimtmečio pabaigos ir ketvirtojo pradžios laikotarpį, kai suintensyvėjo ir tęsėsi sudėtingas Baltijos šalių suartėjimo procesas, pasibaigęs Estijos, Latvijos ir Lietuvos draugystės ir bendradarbiavimo sutarties sudarymu 1934 m. rugsėjo 12 d. Ženevoje. Kelias į vadinamąją Baltijos Antantę buvo labai lėtas ir komplikuotas, jį nulėmė, pirmiausia, sudėtinga Lietuvos užsienio politikos situacija ir Lietuvos santykiai su Lenkija, Sovietų Sąjunga ir Vokietija. Teigiamą reikšmę Latvijos ir Lietuvos santykių kaitai turėjo tai, kad 1929 m. rugsėjį arogantiško latvių atžvilgiu Augustino Voldemaro kabinetą pakeitė Rygoje studijavusio ir Latvijos atžvilgiu palankiau nusiteikusio Juozo Tūbelio vadovaujama ilgalaikė vyriausybė. Pozityvių rezultatų suartėjant Baltijos valstybėms pasiekta todėl, kad ketvirtojo dešimtmečio pradžioje pradėjo lėtai keistis pačios Lietuvos požiūris į įvykius regione. Mokslinis tyrimas atliktas remiantis daugiausia iki šiol istoriografijoje nenaudotais Latvijos diplomatiniais dokumentais, visų pirma, Latvijos pasiuntinybės Kaune pranešimais ir ataskaitomis. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Baltijos šalys (Baltic states); Baltijos Antantė; Latvija (Latvia); Latvijos ir Lietuvos santykiai; Lietuvos ir Lenkijos konfliktas; Vilniaus klausimas; Baltic States; Baltic Entente; Latvia; Relations between Latvia and Lithuania; Lithuanian-Polish conflict; Vilnius question.
ENThe article focuses on the complicated relations between Latvia and Lithuania in the interwar period. The period between the late 1920s and early 1930s was selected as a case study because it was marked by a complicated process of gradual rapprochement in the Baltic States, crowned by the signing of the Treaty of Understanding and Collaboration in 1934. The study is based on diplomatic documents from Latvia hitherto unexamined by researchers. The period in question, namely, prior to the establishment of the Bailie Entente, was very difficult for foreign policymakers of all states in the region. The relations between Latvia and Lithuania alone provide an insight into the causes that prevented the Baltic States, as well as the other regional states, from concluding an agreement earlier, or making it more effective. Mutual relations between the Baltic States, as well as those with Finland and Poland (they were important during the initial development of the plans to establish the Baltic Entente), were complicated throughout the interwar period, including the period of struggle for independence in 1918-1920. After World War I, relations between Lithuania and Poland or, to be more exact, their absence, played an important role in Central and Eastern Europe on the whole. Moreover, one of the main reasons for the confrontation between the two states was the issue of Vilnius. In 1925, plans to create a broader or narrower union of the Baltic States completely failed, one of the main reasons being the conflict between Lithuania and Poland. Latvia persistently tried to preserve good relations with both states, and even acted as a mediator on certain occasions, although it was unsuccessful as reconciliation between the two was not possible. Latvia’s relations with the two neighbours fluctuated: when they improved with Lithuania, those with Poland would deteriorate, and vice versa.In short, the main reason behind Latvia’s policy and attitude toward its two southern neighbours lay in the understanding that the existence of Lithuania as a neighbour state (maybe not as one strong enough to overshadow the reputed dominance of Latvia among the Baltic States, but independent nevertheless) was crucial to the interests of Latvia. However, of equal importance for Latvia was the existence of a strong Poland (needless to say, not strong enough to present a danger to the borders of Latvia itself) and the maintenance of good relations with it. On the whole, Latvia’s and Lithuania’s relations in the 1920s were based on cooperation, albeit affected by significant disagreements. These mainly concerned foreign policy, namely, relations with Poland, the Soviet Union, and Germany, and were caused by subjective differences of opinion. [From the publication]