Kazio Škirpos Lietuvos valstybingumo galimybių koncepcija ir jos palyginimas su Josifo Tiso valdyta Slovakija Antrojo pasaulinio karo metais – tarp realių ir nerealių alternatyvų

Direct Link:
Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Document Type:
Straipsnis / Article
Lietuvių kalba / Lithuanian
Kazio Škirpos Lietuvos valstybingumo galimybių koncepcija ir jos palyginimas su Josifo Tiso valdyta Slovakija Antrojo pasaulinio karo metais – tarp realių ir nerealių alternatyvų
Alternative Title:
Kazys Škirpa’s conception of statehood possibilities for Lithuania and its comparison with Slovakia under the rule of Jozef Tiso during the years of the Second World War: between real and unreal alternatives
In the Journal:
Istorija [History]. 2018, Nr. 112, p. 67-99
20 amžius. 1940-1990; K. Škirpa; Kazys Škirpa; Čekijos Respublika (Czech Republic); Slovakija (Slovakia); Vilnius. Vilniaus kraštas (Vilnius region); Vokietija (Germany); Lietuva (Lithuania).
Summary / Abstract:

LTStraipsnyje remiantis Lietuvių aktyvistų fronto (LAF) lyderio Kazio Škirpos dokumentais ir susirašinėjimu analizuojama jo pozicija dėl Lietuvos galimybės Antrojo pasaulinio karo metu užimti panašią padėtį, kokią tuo metu užėmė Slovakijos valstybė. LAF architektas K. Škirpa vylėsi, kad Slovakijos padėtis būtų mažesnė blogybė nei SSRS okupacija, ir galėjo padėti išlaikyti bent dalinę nepriklausomybę. Vis dėlto, jei Vokietija būtų pripažinusi Lietuvos valstybingumą 1941 m., ko taip atkakliai siekė K. Škirpa, Lietuvos padėtis būtų buvusi panaši į Slovakijos. Taigi Lietuva būtų kariavusi Trečiojo reicho pusėje ir laikoma jo sąjungininke. Vis dėlto „Naujosios Europos“ koncepcija, kurioje karo nebus, o visos tautos gyvens taikiai ir turtingai, kuria taip tikėjo K. Škirpa, buvo Vokietijos propagandinis išradimas – jei jis būtų realiai pritaikytas, būtų įteisintas Vokietijos dominavimas Europoje. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Antrasis pasaulinis karas, 1939-1945 (World War II); K. Škirpa; Kazys Škirpa; LAF; Lietuvių aktyvistų frontas; Slovakija (Slovakia); Valstybingumo koncepcija; K. Škirpa; Kazys Škirpa; LAF; Lithuania; Lithuanian Activist Front; Second World War; The concept of statehood; WW2.

ENThe Second World War, which broke out in 1939, essentially changed the face of the European continent. It was even before the outbreak of the war that National Socialist Germany had become the most powerful country in Europe. After taking advantage of the tensions in neighbouring Czechoslovakia, it divided this country. Though the Czech territory was incorporated into Germany, the situation created an opportunity for the national Slovak state, which was led by President Jozef Tiso, to emerge. Formally, the state maintained its statehood, though it had no other choice but to become Germany’s close ally. After the war against Poland began, Germany tried to draw Lithuania, wishing to take back its historical capital Vilnius from Poland, to its side in a similar way. Kazys Škirpa, Lithuania’s envoy in Berlin, was the greatest supporter of this close collaboration; however, the political elite chose the policy of neutrality. It did not prevent the Soviet occupation of 1940, which further strengthened Škirpa’s belief that the road proposed by him was better. After becoming the leader of organized anti-Soviet resistance, he hoped that if Lithuania staged a revolt against the USSR, Germany would allow Lithuania to become a part of “New Europe” and recognize its independence. Kazys Škirpa believed that Lithuania could take a similar position to that of the Slovak state. Hence, a broader approach as to how much real Slovak sovereignty was shows what hopes were fostered by Škirpa and how Lithuania should have looked like if it was recognized by Germany in the summer of 1941. A more thorough analysis showed that Tiso and Škirpa were ideologically close – they sought to strengthen Slovak and Lithuanian nations by all possible means, took a critical approach towards national minorities, followed social conservatism, and the leader cult.The Slovak state was a nominally independent country but it had to follow Germany’s will in its foreign and domestic policy; the Gestapo played an active role in this country; the Holocaust crimes were committed; it was planned to move a large population of ethnic Germans into the country. Hence, the Slovak state was part of Germany’s Lebensraum. Meanwhile, Lithuania was considered part of the USSR; therefore, despite Škirpa’s attempts to highlight Lithuania’s affinity to Germany in geopolitical and ideological terms in the Lithuanian Activist Front organization created by him, Germany did not recognize Lithuania and governed it at its discretion. Hence, by putting his trust in Germany Škirpa made a grave mistake, but at the same time he was also right believing that Anglo-Saxon countries were not capable of saving Lithuania from the threat of the repeated occupation of the USSR. It symbolized the geopolitical dead-end into which Lithuania was pushed back then, whereas hundreds of thousands of Lithuanians were about to face their tragic fate. [From the publication]

1392-0456; 2029-7181
Related Publications:
2020-07-09 21:14:15
Views: 61    Downloads: 18