The museum was launched by distinguished Lithuanian artist Antanas Zmudzinavicius who enjoyed number 13, the devil’s dozen, and always respected the characters that not always were human enemies.

Number 13 played a specific role in the life of Zmudzinavicius. His name-day was on the 13th, he met his future wife on the 13th, and his only daughter was born on the 13th. The artist said he made friends with the devils in childhood. He collected 260 exhibits (20 devil’s dozens) and decided to display the collection to the public. Zmudzinavicius said he promised to the first devil he met in Samogitija to shelter his brothers in his home and show them to people in exchange for good health and long life. The artist lived 90 years and presented his house with the museum to the city one year before passing away in 1966. But after his death devils continued to arrive and arrive from all over the world. In 1982 the house had to be expanded to accommodate all devils.

Today the museum collection numbers over three thousand exhibits of various forms and colors, with horns, tails, hooves, wooden, ceramic, metallic, and even woven on carpets. They are all gifts. Some are household items, e.g. walking-sticks, door handles, glasses, plates, and openers. Others pose for musicians, dandies or politicians. The third took on the image of donkeys, dogs or pigs. Like any evil spirit they can acquire any image. The collection is constantly growing due to new and often unexpected gifts. This year which is also the 13th the museum received a clock with a devil from South Korean musicians.

Devils occupy a major place in both Slavic and Lithuanian folklore. The latter has over five thousand fairy tales and stories related to the important character in folk conscience. Close to 400 places are named after him. Scientists say even the main Lithuanian natural site, the famous Puntukas stone, was pushed to its current place by the devil in the Ice Age. He wanted to crash with it a nearby church under construction but dropped the stone when he heard cockerel sing and thus the divine house remained intact.

In contrast to Slavic ethnography, the Lithuanian one does not always depict the devil (Velnias in Lithuanian) as a bad guy who wants to harm humans and seduce them out of the right way. He helped the spirit of ancestors (veles) maintain contact with those living. Sometimes he helped the poor and did it selflessly by showing treasures and hidden wealth to them. It is related to pagan perceptions about underground spirits that keep buried treasures and protect the poor and honest people and punish greedy and brutal. With the advent of Christianity the devils were moved to a team of evil servants of Satan. However popular conscience preserved a dual attitude to them.

In public conscience the devil was not always a bad guy who wants to harm humans and seduce them out of the right way.

Courageous girls even married them (suffice it to recall popular Lithuanian musical Devil’s Mill) and various deals were concluded with devils. They often appeared at various male parties and liked to visit village gatherings. Girls were even warned by strict mothers: if she liked a stranger dancer at a party she had to step on his foot to check whether it is a hoof. Lithuanian devils worked hard, got tired, and fell in love. Anyway, nothing human was alien to them.

Lithuania was the last in Europe to adopt Christianity and had no rich traditions of religious arts and medieval sculpture. Craftsmen expressed their religious feelings as they could. They cut saints and divine protectors from wood according to established canons. But they gave rein to their imagination in depicting devils and all types of evil force. Some characters were fearful, others were funny and the third resembled outstanding personalities. Zmudzinavicius himself experienced it as his friends-art artists liked to depict him as a good devil.

Gradually the devils acquired yet another trait in folk art. All human vice were attributed to them, mostly smoking and alcohol consumption (they invented hebon), lasciviousness, greed, and acquisitiveness. The dark forces personified by devils in modern popular conscience are thus accentuating the bright sides of life. The more devils the brighter the light.

Unfortunately, as demonology experts claim, the number of devils decreased by early XXI century, their power vanished, and Satan ousted them. Their place was occupied by people who better cope with the duties of a devil . May be it is the reason why the world of non-fearful devils who lost their power and settled down in Kaunas is visited both by adults and children of different age. The museum offers various educational programs for them which tell the history of each exhibit and describe witch parties, teach dances, magic deeds and whistling in order to call a marshland or forest devil.

Lithuanian folklore has over five thousand fairy tales and stories related to devils and close to 400 places are named after them.

However they rarely come today. Therefore, it is important to visit the museum where devils found their last shelter and where nobody can offend them any longer .

Galina Afanasyeva,

for Amber Bridge

What is the villa and who owns it? There are other beautiful and pridefully-rich buildings close to it on the cape. However the villa distinguishes itself. It is the Waldermasunde Palace. It may be quite overstated to call it a palace as Russians have seen a lot of tsarist luxury that is superior to many royal buildings in the world. But in Sweden they call them palaces. Prince Eugen lived and worked in the palace. He was the fourth and the youngest son of King Oscar II and is known in Swedish history by his hobby which was untypical for royals. Do not imagine anything bad as he was simply an artist and one of the central landscape-painters of Swedish fine arts of the late XXI – early XX centuries. He was neither a genius nor an amateur but just a good artist.

There is nothing surprising in his artistic hobby as the education course of royal offsprings included at the time (and likely includes today) a set of esthetic disciplines, including music, dancing, handicraft and drawing. In most cases the training ended in nothing. They learned the course and would only sometimes remember it.

It was different with Prince Eugen who was a genuine artist. He was not the sharpest pencil in the box, by nevertheless. . . We can count only one or two professional artists of royal blood. Besides many paintings, the prince is also known as a patron of arts who did a lot to develop them. He used his money to buy paintings of other artists and had a big collection of them. He built a house on Cape Waldemarsudde and added a gallery to keep the paintings and one sculpture. But all in good time. . .

Between easel and crown

Prince Eugen Napoleon Nicolaus of Sweden and Norway was born on August 1, 1865 in Drottningholm Palace, the royal summer residence near Stockholm. Residents of the capital were informed about the event by a 42-gun salute. The parents were Crown Prince Oscar and Princess Sophia of Nassau.

Eugen was the youngest kid in the family to which only boys were born. In that sense the father and mother should have been happy as they produced more than enough resources for the family to continue and expand. In those times monarchs stuck to the old traditions when the crown was inherited exclusively by males. In 1980 the rule was abolished and current King Carl Gustaf XVI can be succeeded by any of his children – two daughters and a son. The senior one will be the heir .

As Prince Eugen had three elder brothers – Gustaf, Oscar, and Carl – and little chance to take the throne he was calm about it as his place among substitutes was the last. However it did not free him from the feeling of responsibility of a son of a monarch as anything may happen in life.

When Crown Prince Gustaf married Princess Victoria of Baden the second eldest son Oscar fell in love with her maid of honor Ebba Munk, a daughter of a military man. The law on royal succession said that if a prince of the blood marries a common woman he automatically loses the title to the throne. Oscar faced the choice and love took the upper hand. As for the duty to the crown there were two more brothers in the reserve and no major threat to the future of the royal family. As a result of Oscar’s left-handed marriage Carl and Eugen made one step up the succession ladder. Although the family reconciled with headstrong Oscar two other heirs swore not to marry a commoner in any case. And they stood up to the commitment. Carl married Princess Ingeborg of Denmark while Eugen remained single all his life.

As a prince of the blood Eugen had to participate in official life. He did it perfectly and attended numerous ceremonies, receptions, dinners, functions, and travelled abroad to represent the king and visited other monarchs. In 1894 he was in Petersburg as a representative of the Swedish Royal Court to attend the funeral of Alexander III. In the same quality he participated in festivities devoted to the 60th anniversary of the reign of Queen Victoria.

He was the fourth and the youngest son of King Oscar II and is known in Swedish history by his hobby which was untypical for a royals.

There was also military career. A prince is destined to be a military man. Eugen did everything necessary. He was a Hussar officer, wore the uniform when necessary, participated in exercises, but did not enjoy it all. He once wrote to his mother from maneuvers: “It is no pleasure to be a bad officer. To devote much time to military service means to abandon painting.” As a Royal Family member Prince Eugen could not sell his paintings like other artists. He was stripped of a major criteria of assessing works of art – public demand through market purchase- sale. The only thing he could do is to present his paintings to museums and various institutions.

His father Oscar II was also fond of creative activity. Hr wrote verses which were published under the pseudonym Oscar Fredrik. In 1857 at the age of 28 he was even awarded the second prize of the Swedish Academy (today it awards the Nobel Prize in literature) for the poem From Recollections about the Swedish fleet. The full collection of works by the king numbered seven volumes.

Paris universities of Eugen

Eugen early developed interest in drawing. Relatives played a major role in developing his artistic inclinations: uncle Prince Cark painted landscapes, Princess Eugenie wrote novels, composed music, and sculptured. She did a lot to make the prince love drawing and handiwork in the broad sense of the word. In 1886 after two years in the University of Uppsala the prince wrote to his mother that he had decided to study painting and the only place for it was Paris. It was a tumult for the conservative family to hear about Mont-martre which the prince would definitely visit despite his prudence. And how would they treat the prince? Can there be a scandal? It was no royal business for sure. . .

“Paris is dangerous and humiliating today for a prince in contacts with French artistic bohemia,” the king wrote to Kronoberg Governor Gunnar Wennerberg who supervised the prince during studies in Uppsala. Prudent Wennerberg tried to calm down the father-monarch saying idleness and entertainments do not know geographic boundaries. “Délice de Capoue is everywhere, and the prince is resolute to reject “everything vicious, ugly and rude”, he wrote adding there were many worthy teachers in Paris.

The monarch reconciled with his son’s wish in the final end. He confirmed it in a letter to Eugen when he was already in Paris: “My dear boy, much time has passed since you left from the Central railway station. Parents should not be egoists and should better think about their children rather than their own joy!” Sending his son to Paris the king asked his acquaintances, the Selsing couple to move there as well to “give shelter” to his offspring. Naturally the king was worried and wanted for somebody to look after the son. In France Prince Eugen lived under the name of Monsieur Oscarsson. It was a tradition for Royal Family members to change the name when departing from homeland. Travelling incognito also attracted attention. The new name was only logical – father Oscar, his son Eugen and all together it makes Oscarsson. It is noteworthy that the surname of a not distant relative of Eugen, the founder of the royal dynasty to which he belonged, was French. Jean-Baptiste Bernadotte was the name of Napoleonic mrshall who was adopted by childless Carl XIII in 1810 and took the throne under the name of Carl XIV John.

Eugen’s teachers in Paris were artists Leon Bonnat, Pierre Puvis de Chavannes, and Henri Jourdain. The prince studied art and led an active high life, visited museums, concerts, cafes and theaters. In 1888 Eugen was in Theatre Lyrique when a chandellier unexpectedly fell from the ceiling and crashed close to him. The prince was safe and sound.

In April 1988 revanchist General Boulanger revolted against the republic causing unrest in Paris. Eugen was not scared but curious about the developments. He wrote to his mother: “Naturally, I was in the streets and followed the unrest” although Selsing was not very happy about it. However it was a part of the basic education of the prince to experience public disorders himself.

In Paris Monsieur Oscarsson acquainted several Swedish artists – Gustaf Cederstrom, Anders Zorn, Carl Larsson, Rickard Berg, Per Ekstrom, and Dane Peder Severin Kroyer who comprised the zest of Scandinavian art. He naturally got acquainted with French impressionism which produced “a fresh and worthy impression” on him.

The prince was a decent student. During the first “Paris period” he mastered the basics of painting and achieved a certain level of skills. In 1889 two of his pastels were selected for the Swedish pavilion at the World exhibition in Paris which coincided with the centenary of the Great French Revolution. Sweden, as well as Germany, Turkey and Montenegro ignored the festivities.

Landscape – beloved genre of His Majesty

Eugen has been self-critical and soberly assed his abilities since young age. “Even if I do not become distinguished, and I am sufficiently critical of myself to understand that it is true, I will never regret the choice of my path and will be very pleased if I succeed to do honest work free of deception”, he wrote to the father in 1888. Professional career of Prince Eugen began at the time. In 1889 he was elected honorary member of the Swedish Art Academy and next year his pastel with a Stockholm view and The Summer Night in Norway painting were displayed in an art salon in Paris. The Academy included him with two other artists into the state commission in charge of acquiring works of art.

In 1893 Stockholm hosted an exhibition of artist Ernst Josephson, a talented, versatile (also a poet) and unbalanced man (he was sick with schizophrenia and died under the patronage of two noble ladies). It features his main painting Necken (nude young man as a spirit of water playing a harp at a waterfall). Despite all artistic merits the state commission refused to buy the painting. The decision of the National Museum w as also negative.

The prince was indignant at the decision as he could not understand how they failed to “comprehend” the outstanding masterpiece. He bought it himself and the painting was hanging in Waldemarsudde Palace. He ruled it can be removed only in one case – if the whole of the palace is evacuated.

Eugen’s teachers in Paris were artists Leon Bonnat, Pierre Puvis de Chavannes, and Henri Jourdain.

In the first half of the ’90s the prince painted his most distinguished pictures: Old Castle, Last Sun Ray, Both Poplars (1893), Cloud (1895). They all reflect his deep mood and a feeling of internal dignity. They make you think and touch your soul. Before the death the prince left detailed instructions about the burial which also ordered that besides the national flag over the coffin with ducal crown placed in the big hall of the palace gallery there should be also Good Pastor painting by Juakim Skovgaard in the center and the Cloud and the Old Castle on the sides.

The genre of landscape was consonant to the internal world of the prince. Otherwise he would have hardly achieved such results. However I would dare suggest that despite all initial affection to the genre it contained something subconscious related to his duties imposed by origin. In contrast to portraits and genre painting the landscape and still life are devoid of “scandal virus” capable in favorable environment of instigating public opinion, scandalizing the author, and attracting attention of the public which enjoys gossip. Due to seeming neutrality and absence of conflict the genre mostly suited the artist of royal blood who in his creative activity had always to remember what he was, weigh all words and deeds to avoid unintentionally casting an imputation on crowned relatives.

Prince’s friend and genius of Swedish painting Anders Zorn also admired Swedish nature. Forest, water, and cliffs are its main symbols that were excitingly depicted on his canvases. On the background of the beauty the artist liked to place nude bathing peasant women – local beautiful, healthy, naturally tempting females with genuine femininity. The way he painted them produced a hymn to life which could be copied by a royal family member in the same free and reckless manner. Maybe today, but it was unlikely at the time. Noblesse oblige.

They often say that Prince Eugen painted in a manner close to impressionism. I am no art expert and cannot be sure about his style. However training in Paris and acquaintance with impressionists and their works could not but tell on his style and technique. The prince studied the basics of painting like all others – by classical canons. Later he began to search for his personal style and means of expression. It happened in the early ’90s. It is interesting to note that the brush of the prince produced an original painting – The Temple of Happiness in pointillism technique. Designed by the first neo-impressionist Georges Seurat the technique is also called divisionism. In contrast to its native France where it was used by numerous artists including Pissarro father and son the technique was rarely used in Scandinavia. Among the Sweden Anders Zorn seems to have come close to divisionism with his characteristic brushstrokes and love to instantaneous impression.

Color as felling of life

Like all major artists Prince Eugen studied the theory of color, including great Goethe who worked not only in literature and is known as the author of Faust and the Sorrows of Young Werther. The ideas of the prince were based on a symbolic postulate that each color correlates with the human soul and reflects certain feelings or their tints. Feeling, perception, mood. The notions were specifically important for the prince. It can be seen at first glance in his paintings. When you thumb a catalogue the absence of people strikes your eye. There are no people at all in most works. Only the artist and nature, sometimes also buildings and sculptures. Still landscape or landscaped still life. An object for attentive observation.

The prince was interested not only in easel painting. He was also distinguished as artist of monuments. When the construction of a new royal opera house was underway he expressed readiness to participate in painting its interior. His lot was the foyer. Eugen painted the Haga Moods triptych depicting a park with a royal palace in Stockholm. The town hall has his City at Water fresco. Two Stockholm high schools have the Bright Night, Summer, and Sun Over City panel pictures. In Kiruna Church he painted the altar. The concert hall in Goteborg has his wall painting Country of Recollections, while the antechamber of the Caroline hospital – the Copper Serpent alcove fresco. The foyer of the Royal Drama Theater (which staged plays by Ingmar Berger for a long time) welcomes spectators with his refined Frost-dew fresco.

In many cases, specifically when the talk was about decorating educational establishments, the prince participated in the project as an artist and patron of arts. He paid the work of his colleagues without remunerating himself. A son of the Swedish monarch, Eugen was no traditionalist although his origin demanded him to be. He was a self-made man. He lived by his own mind, acted according to his own perceptions of honor and decency, was not afraid of different opinions, including majority opinion and possible gossip, open criticism, and rumors. He was ready to struggle against the stream if it was necessary for his convictions.

I already said what he ordered to do with the painting of Ernest Josephson. The same happened with the Granddad sculpture by Per Hasselberg which depicts a nude boy on the knees of his grandfather. For many people it was insulting and newspapers demanded to move out “indecent rubbish”. However despite negative public attitude the prince defended the bronze sculpture of Hasselberg which currently stands in Humlegarden P ark close to the Roy al Library.

When August Strindberg (whom the prince liked and who was disliked by his royal parents for liberties in relation to crowned highnesses) and his partner August Falck decided to open the Strindberg Intimate Theater they lacked money for that. Eugen provided financial assistance to them and when the writer died came to bid him farewell. However no representative of the Swedish Academy or the Royal Court came to the funeral.

In contrast to many representatives of the right-wing circles in Sweden who advocated the ideas of Pan-Germanism, Prince Eugen rejected Nazism although Germany was perceived as a country of culture at the time. In 1933 he wrote to his friend Garry Fett that he did not want “to look for excuses and explanations of violence and breach of law.” The strict position of a representative of the royal court embarrassed many people.

Distinguished Swedish traveler, ethnographer, writer and public figure Sven Hedin who was a staunch supporter of Pan-Germanism and Hitler publicly asked whether the prince was “engaged in salon Bolshevism out of spite to the king and the foreign ministry.” The prince in the meantime signed an appeal to protect “German refugees” who included numerous Jews and then participated in the creation of the committee to assist refugees. The right-wing circles called the document “a scandalous appeal”. But the prince was not confused by it. He was a genuine free artist!

The prince lived over a half of his life in Waldemarsudde. Initially he came to the place to paint his landscapes and admired its picturesque views and loneliness. He later leased a part of a small yellow house on the cape which was called Old House after the construction of the villa. The house is still there. In 1899 the prince bought it together with the land plot and in 1905 there was a newly-built palace several meters away from it which offered an inexhaustible source of inspiration for Eugen.

It was there that he painted many of his works, big and small, completed and uncompleted, sketches and drawings. It seemed to him that Waldemarsudde was constantly turning a new facet to him and offering new light nuances.

In 1913 the prince added a gallery to the palace which he united with the main building by an underground passage. He displayed his big collection there which included both his own paintings and works by other artists: Anders Zorn, Carl Larsson, Ernest Josephson, Niels Kruger, Eugen Jansson, Bruno Lillieforce. . .

The genre of landscape was consonant to the internal world of the prince. Otherwise he would have hardly achieved such results.

Rodin’s Thinker sits with his back to the water on a steep bank in the park in front of the house. Nike of S a m o t h r a c e spreads the wings at the entrance to the southern facade. Hercules by Antoine Burdelle braces a bow in front of the northern entrance which cannot be seen from water and completely differs from the southern one. Carl Milles is represented best of all. The prince left it all to the people.

Today Waldemarsudde is one of the most beautiful museums in Stockholm. Prince-artist Eugen like they call him in Sweden was buried close to the Old House. His grave is inconspicuous – a small grey regular-shaped stone with a laconic inscription: Prince Eugen. 1865-1947.

Mikhail Busnyuk,

for Amber Bridge

What is Aurora Borealis festival , how did it emerge and how is it related to Aurora Karamzina?

The festival began in 2012 as a continuation of Christmas Candle Meetings project which the Litera studio has been organizing for five years jointly with ITAR-TASS bureau and bringing poets from Russia, Baltic countries and Northern Europe together. All the five years it was only enthusiasm but the project succeeded. In 2012 it was decided to change the format of Christmas Meetings into a festival and unite under its banner not only poets, but also playwrights, scientists, translators, and journalists. The project is implemented with the support of the Fund of Social-Economic Programs and personal support of S. A. Filatov. The organizers of the Aurora Borealis festival comprise the Russian Cultural-Democratic Union, the Russian Center of Science and Culture in Helsinki, the Litera Society, and the Runo bar-studio.

The idea enjoyed support in creative circles of Russia and Finland and has been successfully implemented for two years. In January 2012 our festival was attended by famous poets and writers from Ukraine, Russia, Finland, and Sweden. In 2013, besides winter events, the festival Aurora Borealis with participation of poet and translator E. Ioffe, bilingual writer A. Perttu, poet and translator K. Korto, Editor-in-Chief of Other Shores magazine O. Pussinen, as well as scientist and poet N. Perevezentseva from St. Petersburg held poetic evenings, literary seminars and master classes. Participants included V. Mesyats (Moscow), A. Korovin (Moscow) A. Gritsman (New York), N. Reznik (Colorado), A. Ostudin (Kazan), M. Garber (Luxembourg), A. Melnik (Liege), A. Radashkevich and G. Pogozheva (Paris) and other distinguished writers, translators and scientists form the whole world.

We decided to devote the festival to Aurora Karamzina and called it Aurora Borealis as Polar lights are also called. The name presupposes northern realities and simultaneously associates with Aurora Karamzina, an outstanding beauty of the XIX century to who Pushkin, Baratynsky, and other poets devoted verses. For organizers the role of Aurora Karamzina as public figure is also important. She was a maid of honor at the empress and advocated Finnish interests in the Royal Court and helped Finland join the Russian Empire as a Grand Duchy. She was a woman who did a lot for the country politically and as a charity provider.

We emphasize historic moments related to the history of Sweden, Russia, and Finland in order to deeply study historic processes and better comprehend modern facts.

Does the festival signify the beginning of major and long work?

Yes, we have big plans. On May 24-25 Helsinki will host a seminar of translators, publishers, historians from Russia, Finland, and Sweden. We want to create a network of translators, writers, publishers and historians. We want to promote cultural aspects which will help overcome intercultural stereotypes. It is not only belles letters, but also essays, research, etc.

We need a network of contacts which will help people better understand each other. We plan to plug organizations into the network which are experienced in the sphere, such as the Finnish literature fund (FiLi), Russian publishing houses interested in translations of Russian literature into the Finnish language and vice versa. We would like not only to unite all people engaged in the process but also to act as intermediaries between them and carry out both cultural and educational projects. The Russian side represented by Moscow project coordinator Yevgenya Dobrovoi helps us a lot as it is already launching its own educational programs in Russia and Poland. Our task is to raise the awareness of the Finnish public about modern Russian literature and introduce interesting modern Finnish poetry to Russians. Our days are the time of flourishing poetry in Finland and its golden age.

Still frame: Aurora Charlotta Karamzina (1808-1902, full name — Eva Aurora Charlotta Stjernvall, a daughter of Swedish nobleman Lord Carl Johan Stjernvall and Baroness Eva Gustava von Willebrand, came down in history as public figure and founder and supporter of various charities. She was a granddaughter of the last governor of Finland. From 1836 she had the surname of Demidova and from 1846 – Karamzina. In 1836 Aurora Charlotta became a maid of honor of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna. Together with sister Emily and Countess Musina-Pushkina she was considered the first beauty in the Royal Court in Petersburg. As a maid of honor Aurora was very influential and was among those who convinced Alexander III not to make Finland a province of the Russian Empire but preserve autonomy rights with it. Alexander, who as the crown prince stayed in the Finnish mansion of Aurora Charlotta, in the final end adhered to her advice and other supporters of Finnish autonomy and decided to create a commission for the convocation of Finnish Sejm and grant the duchy a wide autonomy and laws to ensure its financial independence.

A warship fighting in the Crimean War was named after her. It was sunk by the English and the name went over to the legendary Aurora cruiser. She had a reputation of femme fatale as her three lovers and the only son Pavel Demidov died. Aurora was the muse of many poets and artists. Pushkin and Baratynsky devoted poems to her and portraits were painted by Brullov and Gau. She was twice married. In 1836 she married one of the richest Russian men – Pavel Demidov, the co-owner of Ural enterprises, actual state counselor, and Royal master of the hunt. Legends claim wedding gifts to Aurora included not only the famous Sancy diamond but also a scarf which belonged to Napoleon’s wife Josephina Bogarne. Demidov died a sudden death in 1840 and left Aurora with a child. She got married again in 1846. The husband was Andrei, the son of distinguished historian Nikolai Karamzin. He was an outstanding officer who was considered a prototype of Mikhail Lermontov’s hero Pechorin. After eight years of a happy life Aurora again became a widow as Colonel Karamzin was killed in the Crimean campaign in 1854. After that she fully devoted herself to charities.

She went down in Finland’s history as a public and charity figure who created nursing homes, orphanages, and hospices. She donated practically all her income from Demidov’s mining enterprises to the poor. In Gelsingforce Aurora Charlotta Karamzina created a permanent nursing service. The Evangelic society of nurses which she founded yet in 1867 still exists. Aurora also opened hospices and hospitals. Children’s Home Street has been preserved in modern Helsinki.

By developing the ties we want to operate not on amateur but professional basis and produce high quality anthologies, as p r o o f – r e a d e r s say – very copy-read anthologies. We include into them only the names which are legends of the poetry of the XX-XXI centuries. We assess the authors by the text and everybody knows we shall reject bad texts.

Our festival is expanding. We now have partners in St. Petersburg and Stockholm. The Swedish friends we got thanks to Yevgenya Dobrovoi asked us to address the Swedish-language cultural center in March. St. Petersburg proposed to join the festival Petersburg Bridges in late May this year. Natalya Perevezentseva, the second Russian coordinator of the project, helps us maintain contacts with colleagues in Petersburg.

The main idea of the festival is to create international cultural space to develop projects related to translation and publishing. It also promotes preservation of the Russian language and literature abroad.

Interviewed by Yulia Andreeva,

for Amber Bridge

Although so far elections in Latvia were based exclusively on ethnic principle – Latvians voted for Latvian parties and Russians – for Russian, the Harmony Center does not consider itself an ethnic party. It offers its own political formula as it believes multilingualism and multiculturalism are Latvia’s advantages rather than drawbacks. It is difficult to advocate the formula in conditions of dominating national ideology and nationally-minded voters, however the number of supporters is on the rise.

At self-government election on June 1 the Harmony Center won a landslide victory in Riga – nearly two thirds of residents entrusted Ushakov and his team to govern the city for another four years. For the first time in Latvia’s modern history a political party won an absolute majority. It was also for the first time that the vote in the capital of Latvia was not based on the ethnic principle. At least a third of Harmony Center supporters are Latvians. It was a genuine victory which was preceded by strong campaigning. Now all of us and mostly Harmony Center leader Nils Ushakov have to prove that the choice was correct and make those who did not vote for us change their mind, said Urbanovičs. It is typical of Janis. Even such a major victory he perceives only as an opportunity to improve and grow.

History as weapon

Mr. Urbanovičs, you have been in politics for 20 years. How do you assess what has been done in the years?

On the official level the main achievements of Latvia is the joining of the EU and NATO or the return to the European family, so to say. But these are successes for the outside “market” while inside the country there is little to boast of because we failed to achieve the main thing – create the foundation for national development. No country like no building can be erected without a reliable foundation. The foundation comprises citizens of the country while we deliberately split society into citizens and non-citizens after regaining independence in 1991. Hundreds of thousands of people and there are 300 thousand non-citizens in Latvia were bluntly told: we reject you, you have no rights here, and in order to vote or become a lawyer you have to naturalize, i.e. take citizenship exams to confirm loyalty. It was an insult for people who were born in Latvia and lived here for many years. Legal deliberations saying the Latvian Republic and commonness of its citizens were restored in 1991 were no consolation to anyone.

Over 20 years have passed but the split is still there. We keep living in society which is split into citizens and non-citizens, Latvians and Russians. The split is the root of all problems. We do not have normal political competition as Latvian and Russian parties are competing instead of conservative, liberal, and social political forces. Most heated political debate focuses not on economic, but historic and national issues. We discuss where people were born, which language they speak, and on which side of World War Two front they fought.

Why are Latvian politicians so obsessed with history?

It is a paradox but many parties in Latvia build their political programs on the dream about the past. Unity, National Alliance, Union of Greens and Farmers are cultivating the dream of restoring the First Latvian Republic which existed in 1918-1940. But you cannot turn the time back. And there is no paradise which they promised after accession to the European Union. Moreover, the recent crisis considerably complicated the life of ordinary Latvians. According to official data, over 300 thousand people emigrated to earn their living abroad. It is an astronomical figure for Latvia. What do the ruling parties have to do in such a situation? It is politically risky to speak about the real situation and they switch to the past as history can offer various arguments if you look thoroughly .

But sober-minded people have to understand it is impossible to go back to the past no matter how wonderful it was . . .

Yes, it is true for sober-minded politicians. But one of the main problems is biased and provincial mentality. It helps plough the historic and national field. We are constantly trying to convince ourselves that we suffer because nobody understands how unique we are and that no common recipes for treating public and state diseases are good for us. It is gross provincialism! But it definitely helps maintain a conflicting atmosphere in society. For example, the Saeima has recently divided citizens of the country into “correct” and “incorrect”.

What is the “correctness” criteria?

It is the country where a Latvian resident wants to get a second citizenship. Earlier the possession of two passports was strictly banned and even punished by stripping the Latvian citizenship. Now the law is liberal but with a limit as dual citizenship is allowed only with members of the European Union, European Free Trade Association, NATO countries, as well as Australia, New Zealand, Brazil and countries with which Latvia concluded agreements on dual citizenship. The Russian Federation and other CIS member-countries, as well as Israel are not on the list.

The Harmony Center believes the approach is discriminatory. It turns out that a citizen of Latvia residing in the United States or Brazil enjoys more rights than Latvian citizens living in Russia or Israel. The amendments to the law do not allow thousands of Latvian citizens and their descendants to maintain ties with the native land. They are actually pushed out of the country for good. We requested Latvian President Andris Bērziņš not to sign the amendments into law, but he did not adhere to our call.

Trapped by myths

Harmony Center is the winner of the latest parliamentary election and the biggest faction in Saeima. But it is still in opposition. One of the conditions advanced to Harmony Center for joining the ruling coalition is the recognition of Soviet occupation. Isn’t it strange?

It is strange, of course! Latvia calls itself a democratic country but has only one official interpretation of history. It is banned not only to deny but also doubt it. The answer to the question “Do you recognize occupation?” is a kind of a password in Latvia. If you agree with what the asking person means by occupation then you get a foot in the door. If you reject occupation or at least doubt it (because you know more about the period than the asking person) you immediately become an alien and further communication with you is impossible. . .

It is a genuine totalitarian approach when they proclaim the only truth which needs no proof. Truth cannot be afraid of facts and evidence because it is truth that always passes the test for truthfulness.

The Harmony Center was offended by the demand to recognize occupation as a precondition for joining the government. Why should a politician elected by a big number of Russian voters in Latvia take a history exam with another politician elected by Latvian voters? Voters of the Harmony Center are no worse than voters of currently ruling national parties of Latvia! Deputies from Harmony Center are not going to take exams. We have to report only to our voters.

The problem in Latvia is that nobody is ready to seriously discuss recent history and 1940 developments. The country is trapped by myths which are reproduced e very year.

What is your opinion? What happened in Latvia in 1940 — occupation, annexation or incorporation?

For me the issue of incorporation, annexation or occupation is secondary. It is a dispute over definitions rooted exclusively in history mythologize. International law does not use “occupation” definition regarding Latvia. It is used only by Latvian experts to preserve and expand the myth they created.

You suggested to impose a moratorium on discussion of historic issues.

The Harmony Center is ready to discuss historic issues at any level but the problem is that no discussion is possible. Politicians who rule Latvia for the past twenty years are used to the language of ultimatums rather than dialogue. If the ruling parties are not ready to change the record it might be better to put it aside. Let us first provide decent pensions to the elderly and allowances to children and give medicines to hospitals and patients and jobs to able-bodied people. Then we can argue about half a century old developments.

They will object by saying it is possible to build up the present only on correct historic foundation…

The foundation is necessary but, unfortunately, in Latvia reference to history does not mean the construction of a correct foundation for the country. By constantly raising the occupation theme the Latvian political elite gives a signal that there are aliens, good and bad guys. Occupation thus stops to be historic fact as it is raised to the level of religion.

I am very much concerned by the ongoing calls to revise World War Two results and hold the second Nuremberg trial this time of Communism and that Russia has to compensate Latvia for “occupation” damage. They even created a special commission to calculate the damage and it regularly meets to count something. A Latvian Internet site offered to vote for pulling down the monument to Liberators in Riga close to which hundreds of thousands of residents mark the Victory Day every year.

This year on the eve of May 9 the ruling coalition decided to make a special “present” to Latvian war veterans – it banned the use at festive events of Nazi and Soviet symbols. It was the initiative of Unity, National Alliance, and Reform Party to equate swastika with the red flag, star, hammer and sickle. There is the second meaning behind it – to equate Nazi Germany and the USSR. This year the ban was not approved but the ruling parties will definitely push it through by next Ma y 9.

It is all very frustrating and serious when they judge the past and plan to demolish monuments. It is no fight with the past but shooting at future. Neo-Nazism is raising head in Europe and the revision of World War Two results is becoming a modern political trend.

I believe Europe and Russia need a new peace conference similar to the one held in Helsinki to discuss a lot of accumulated vital issues. Russian President Vladimir Putin and European Parliament President Martin Schultz can initiate it as both men have Passionist mentality and figuratively speaking can build an amber bridge between Russia and Europe. Latvia would only benefit from Its construction.

Accounting harms

They call the performance of current Prime Minister Valdis Dombrovskis a success story as budget deficit was reduced to the necessary level and the country is ready to introduce euro. How do you assess his work?

First of all I would dare say that I am convinced the country should better have a budget deficit than a deficit of the population. Three hundred thousand Latvians who left the country are the true assessment of the performance of Dombrovskis’ government rather than polite words he hears from Brussels offices. I am sure the government has to report not only to the International Monetary Fund but to all residents of the country. You will agree that not all residents of Latvia are planning to emigrate to London or Dubai. The government has mostly to think about them and their interests rather than about praise from the IMF .

Does the prime minister think about Latvians?

Domsbrovskis is a very good accountant who skillfully deals with figures. However accounting is no economy. Economy means development. The Harmony Center calls to stop constantly cutting all budget expenditure but to develop the country instead. The prime minister has recently said the Harmony Center headed by Riga Mayor Nils Ushakov is dragging Riga into a financial abyss. In reality it is vice versa. The Harmony Center controls the economic and social situation in the Latvian capital and prevents Riga and the whole of Latvia from falling into a pit. Riga today is the float of future development in the country. The new victory of Nils Ushakov at elections in Riga I shows city residents are well aware of that. Gradual development of the capital city in the past four years gave a guarantee that not everything in Latvia is consolidated, stolen and reduced.

Positively thinking we should admit that current economic crisis helped Latvia get rid of a very bad illusion and belief that someone would come to rescue it. Neither the EU nor the United States will come. Egoists work in every country and we also have to learn to be egoists. We have to argue rather than obediently fulfill instructions from above. We have to think how we should develop ourselves in order to secure Latvian prosperity.

Russian syndrome

Common sense prompts that Latvia should develop good economic relations not only with EU countries but also with Russia and CIS members. Nobody denies it at the official level but western vector clearly dominates real politics. What do you believe is the reason?

Let’s look at the map for the beginning. It is clear that Russia and CIS countries are our closest neighbors. They know Latvia and Latvian products well. Mounted activities on the avenue would give an impulse to economic development and create new jobs. But the problem is that the political elite constantly adds not a spoon but a whole bucket of tar into relations with Russia. Now we honor SS legion and then we speak about the danger of not only Russian investments but also of cultural organizations of compatriots as they comprise the “soft power” of Russia.

Now and then the issue of closing all Russian kindergartens is raised and calls are voiced to switch education in budget-financed schools only to Latvian language. In a word, the emotional background of Russian-Latvian relationship leaves much to be desired. It is a shame that Latvia turned its back on Russia for many years while neighboring countries – Lithuania, Estonia, Finland, and Poland successfully competed for Russian investments. We should have long admitted to ourselves that we want to operate on the eastern market. We have one major advantage for accessing Russian and CIS markets against Lithuanians, Estonians, Poles, Germans, Chinese – we have a much higher share of Russian-speaking population. But there is an obligatory condition: all people in Latvia – Latvians, Russians, Belarussians, Ukrainians, Jews, Poles and all other nationalities should agree a formula of joint existence and begin constructing a big common home. I always say the Latvian book of happiness can begin only with the following phrase: “and finally they agreed.” Only after that we shall be able to join global competition.

As long as Latvian leaders fight for the ballots of Latvian voters without paying attention to Russians and even declaring them enemies and as long as Russian politicians struggle for Russian voters there will be no breakthrough in the country. Remember the words of Professor Preobrazhensky in Mikhail Bulgakov’s Heart of a Dog: “Havoc is in heads”. I would add in the heads of politicians. Believe me, when the havoc is over the country will immediately improve.

Smile!

Dou you believe interethnic relations in Latvia are improving or deteriorating?

For the given moment they are mostly mothballed. Each community leads its own life. The Latvians keep repeating the mantra about occupation and hard destiny of the Latvian people, the Russians complain of being blamed for all historic deeds of the USSR and treated as second-tier people.

It is most dramatic that both are right in their own way as everyone believes only his own truth and does not even want to hear another truth. Any withdrawal from habitual and convenient perceptions and notions painfully hits at self-conscience. We like to live in the closed zone of personal psychological and political comfort and ignore everything happening around in the country and the world. It is the diagnosis of our disease and the first remedy is the understanding that we are ill. But we are stubborn patients and shall never agree that we are ill. It is a hard job for us to try and understand a neighbor of different nationality. We are all very lazy. Therefore, the ideas of reconciliation, harmony, forgiveness are unpopular. It is more important for us to hit the opponent as hard as possible.

At the same time huge money is spent to integrate society, but nothing is changing.

Integration is joint work. But we turned it into a process of converting unfaithful to genuine faith. Figuratively speaking, Latvian politicians are telling Russians in Latvia: “Dear Russians, you were unlucky to be born in wrong families but we shall correct it. We shall help you become Latvians!” The Saeima has recently adopted amendments to the citizenship law which list only Latvians and Livs as Latvian nation leaving all other nationalities aside.

But Russians in Latvia do not want to become Latvians. They want to remain Russians, speak Russian, read Russian newspapers, watch Russian TV, and they want their children study in Russian. The Russians also want to be treated as full-fledged citizens rather than schoolchildren who have to be taught how to grow up as genuine citizens. Instructions from above will not create a common life formula in Latvia. We already had such an experience not long ago.

During heated debate we often forget the main thing – you should not wish other people what you do not wish yourself. We forget that pronounced words often materialize: if you call someone a friend he will become a friend, if you call him enemy he will be an enemy . . .

There is an old animated cartoon about a small raccoon who was afraid of a big beast that lived in a pond. The raccoon made horrifying faces but the beast in the pond also grinned. And then the raccoon was advised to smile to the monster and the beast smiled in response… It is a cartoon for kids but with great philosophy – anger and negative emotions do not resolve but complicate problems which can be settled only through a positive approach. For genuine politicians it should be a commonplace truth in their profession.

Ina Оshkaya,

for Amber Bridge

The 1914–1918 war radically changed the map of the world. It triggered major social, psychological and cultural processes that drew a line between the past and the present. Without exaggeration the XX century and all modern history began in 1914.

The Amber Bridge launches a series of publications devoted to the Great War.

The summer of 1914 was extremely hot. The spring was marked by the opening of the Peace Palace in the Hague while autumn demonstrated that peaceful coexistence ideas did not go beyond the Lowlands. No trace of quiet and happy Europe remained. It was surrounded by thousands of kilometers of trenches with bristling bayonets of millions of soldiers.

Hundreds and hundreds of volumes were written about the causes of the developments. However the history of the war still contains episodes unknown even to educated reader. For example, the fate of Russian tourists who found themselves in early August on the territory of Germany which was a beloved place for elite rest.

On July 15-16 (28-29) when Austro-Germany declared a war to Serbia while Germany and Russia were still engaged in diplomatic gambling German border guards became very captious to IDs. The last train via Eidtkunen on then Russian-German border (now Russian settlement Chernyshevskoe) freely passed at 17:00 hours on July 19 (August 1), i.e. on the day of the declaration of war. It departed at 12 hours on July 18 from Berlin and arrived in Konigsberg. Further developments were troublesome for Russian tourists. Soldiers entered the train in the capital city of Eastern Prussia and said each passenger who looks out of the train will be shot. Contradicting orders followed: first passengers were told to curtain the windows and then to raise curtains. When the train arrived in Eidtkunen the travelers were ordered out to line up on the railway platform. It rained and a passport check began. The gendarme looked in passports holding them upside down. There was chaos. The Germans evidently did not know what they had to do. They first said passengers will have to walk to Verzhbolov (then Russian border post 10 kilometers away, now Lithunian Verbalis). However when the passengers got into a column to march they were ordered back into the train and told they would go back to Berlin. But the train proceeded to Verzhbolov. “One has to experience it himself to understand our feelings. We arrived in Verzhbolov completely exhausted, hungry and nervous. From there we reached Petersburg with delay,” a Russian eyewitness said.

By midnight Russian border guards let in the last group of compatriots who arrived in Eidtkunen from Berlin at 19:55 where they were again told to leave the train and line up on the platform. The Germans suggested they either go back to Berlin or Konigsberg or walk to Verzhbolov. “You can go there but I cannot guarantee that Russians will not shoot you. If they do not let you in you can come back and we shall send you to Berlin,” a German colonel said. Several hundred people went to Verzhbolov and were stopped by six border guards on the bridge between Eidtkunen and Verzhbolov. They called for an officer when they learned the people were Russian citizens. The officer called gendarmes to check passports. It all lasted for four hours.

Another 300 travelers, including distinguished State Duma members Vasily Maklakov and Count Ilarion Vasilchikov, as well as Princess Trubetskaya departed from Berlin at 12 hours on July 19 and arrived next day in Stalluponen (now Russian Nesterov). Trubetskaya and her son decided to go and get a pass from the local boss. Maklakov and Vasilchikov followed her. There were German soldiers around who shouted that they nabbed spies. It was surprising but the officer quickly issued the pass. Other train passengers also received them soon. However for clear reasons they had to walk to Verzhbolov.

Royal family members also found themselves in the misfortunate and dangerous situation. Empress Maria Feodorovna had to go to Petersburg via Denmark. Great Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich (distinguished poet who published his verses under K.R. pseudonym) together with his wife Grand Duchess Elizaveta Mavrikievna (born Princess Elisabeth Auguste Marie Agnes of Saxe-Altenburg), son Georgy and daughter Vera left for Eastern Prussia. On July 20 (August 2) their train passed through Gumbinnen (now Russian Gusev) where the grand duke got off for a walk on the platform. His adjunct Sipyagin and attendants were detained there. The Grand Duke was told they will be released with the luggage later. Princess Vera Konstantinovna recalled: “Germany was in war hysteria during the days. Everyone was looking for Russian spies and cars with Russian gold. They took our automobile for spying vehicle. While we waited for the train on the platform someone rudely said pointing at the brother that the boy could at least take off his Russian hat! (He had a sailor’s cap on with the “Funny” sign). The train stopped at the Russian border. We were ordered to keep windows and doors open. Windows were allowed to be curtained only in cabins with children. I was eight at the time and the brother was 11. I remember they gave us bread and milk. Lieutenant Muller was in command of our guards. He was very polite and gentle, but all of sudden turned rude and began calling my mother “Gnedige Frau” or “Lady” instead of her high title”. At 5 in the morning on August 3 all the detained were sent to Stalluponen. From there they were driven to the border and left there. Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich was ill and could not walk for long. A unit of mounted uhlans helped them. Count Gavriil Konstantinovich later wrote: “Head of the cavalry unit Captain Bychko recognized my father and helped us reach the nearest railway station. The father was seriously affected by the nervous strain, but he kept silent as usual and hid commotion in his soul.”

State Council member Gennady Kalachev was a less fortunate tourist on his way back home via Eastern Prussia. On July 19 he left Switzerland and arrived in Berlin. He took a night train that left at 23:45. Already before Konigsberg passengers began to doubt whether they would be allowed to go through Eidtkunen. At one stop Kalachev bought a newspaper which alleged that Japan had attacked Russia. In Gumbinnen the passengers were told the train would not proceed, but those who want back to Russia may go. All of a sudden soldiers surrounded a group of tourists, including adjunct Sipyagin of Grand Duke Konstantin Konstantinovich and declared them prisoners of war. They were put into a train and sent back to Konigsberg for interrogation. From there they were sent to Braunsberg (now Polish city Braniewo). The group included Counts Kankrins, Baron Kaulbars with his wife, Senator Ivanov and other travelers. They further went to Stettin and then Sweden.

Less titled tourists were less fortunate. Everybody noted a sharp and rude change in the attitude to Russians. Russian media published reports about the cruelty of the enemy and various infringements which Russian citizens were subject to. There was an hysteria about alleged German atrocities which paramounted into reports about a small Polish town of Kalisz (Russian media claimed the Germans massacred local residents).

Naturally, reports about misfortunes of Russian travelers fanned up anti-German sentiment and described the Germans as “cultural Barbarians” who rudely and immorally defied all laws of God. Arrogance, self-glorification, and rudeness were the main vice attributed to the enemy in the war years. Naturally, not everyone believed in hysteric propaganda. However distinguished art expert Baron Nikolai Wrangel (junior brother of future supreme commander of Russia Petr Wrangel) wrote: “Indignant at German atrocities everyone stubbornly repeated exaggerated rumors about brutality of Germans to Russians they held.”

What happened in reality?

The above said shows there was no major brutality in the first days of the war. There were adequate security measures and excessive suspicion to the adversary. Many German citizens were confused as they were unaware of what to do regarding travelers from hostile countries. Some diaries and articles published in post-war time confirm that rudeness and humiliation did take place. Many Russian tourists were used to another treatment and were shocked by the change. Chauvinistic rage seized Germany. Count Felix Yusupov who was in Berlin in those troublesome days recalled in his memoirs: “We went to the Russian embassy in early morning and from there to the Copenhagen train. There was no escort required for a foreign mission. We were put at the mercy of an outraged crowd. They threw stones at us and we survived by miracle. There were women and children from diplomatic families with us. Some of the Russians had their heads hit by a stick, others were beaten half to death. The crowd hit off hats from people and tore off their clothes.” However the Yusupovs who were initially arrested were later allowed to freely travel in Berlin and arrange for departure with the Russian embassy.

The Russian media in 1914 carried a lot of publications about misfortunes of returning tourists which reflected the fervor of the days. Eyewitnesses cannot be blamed for lying as too many people wrote in different outlets about the same. They all faced similar circumstances but described them through the prism of their personal suffering. It is not easy for an historian to separate reality from emotions and produce an objective picture.

By analyzing the Black Book of German Atrocities which came out hot on the trail in St. Petersburg on the basis of media reports the author arrived at the following conclusions.

If we drop expressive epithets and curses expressing human attitude (“beasts who lost any human dignity”, “animals”, “rude Barbarians”, “brutal Germans”) the rest (“brazen”, “militant”, “crazy”, “brutal”, “drunk soldiers”, “angry population”, “non-cultural”, “rude”, “Austrians were drunk”, “excessively rude”, “outraged people revenging for trifles”, “angrily mocking people or silly and indifferent”, “haughty Germans”) can hardly produce something more than an image of a crowd excited by patriotic moods and conviction that Russians are to blame for the war.

If we drop epithets and expressions which reflect the attitude of the narrator to the developments (“refined brutality”, “outrageous”, “humiliation”, “Barbarians”, “spared nobody”, “growing black pile of German brutality”, “terrorists”) and look for confirmations of humiliation we shall find out that many of them were oral and pointed at extreme rudeness. Here are some examples: ” they persecuted for trifles”, “cursed and sneered”, “hit the duchess with gun-butts and rudely searched her”, “brazen crowd shouted”, “insulting formalities”, “readily accepted bribes despite patriotism”, “insulted ladies”, “humiliating searches”, “extremely rude pronouncements about Russians”, “pulled through the whole city”, “rude and insulting tone”, “rude curses”, “excited laughter”, “rude and unscrupulous”, “said vulgarities”, “tried to kiss”, “viperous smiles”, “dishonest deception”, “specific Prussian stupidity”, “insulted and even beat”, “sneering”, “gave no food or water”, “there were no porters” (sic!)…

It is also to remember that tourists were in a suppressed mood as they were on hostile territory surrounded by hostile people. Disgust and fear promoted by unclear situation and danger dominated the conscience of misfortunate travelers making their perceptions subjective to the maximum. It is only natural that in such a situation the same actions were perceived differently by various people who were in different circumstances – Russian and German citizens. What a German could perceive as mercy to the enemy a Russian traveler considered utmost rudeness and injustice. Back home they did not spare colors to express their emotions. It backed military propaganda which worked to create the negative image of the enemy.

Definitely, there were cases of beating, looting, bad conditions for displaced people, and several tragic events. However, reports are based on rumors, e.g. “they said the workers were executed”. One and the same episodes are repeated (when the Germans shot dead a father who slapped an officer for rudely searching his daughter). It is an additional indirect evidence that such facts were rare. Episodes of Barbarianism are always distinguished on general background.

Despite hardships and adversities most tourists succeeded to safely get back home.

A big part of Lithuanian society views the concessions to ethnic minorities, first and foremost the Poles, as a threat to the very existence of the state. Rallies were staged in the country under the motto “No to Polonization of Vilnius Region!”, “Protect the land of ancestors, the state language, and integrity of the land!”. But experts insist there is no threat to the Lithuanian language as there is no problem of integrating national minorities into Lithuanian society. Young people from non-Lithuanian families experience no communication problems and successfully enter local institutes. After joining the European home Lithuanian citizens have to tolerantly comprehend the processes undergoing in the EU.

Language as economic factor

The education, science and culture committee of Lithuania and the European information bureau in Lithuanian Saeima have recently initiated a discussion on whether the European Union pays sufficient attention to the implementation of the multilingualism policy. Much of the discussion directly relates to national minorities in Lithuania, as well as to millions of other Europeans whose native language does not correspond to the state language of their countries of residence. Experts say such people comprise a majority in modern Europe.

The discussion was started by Agne Kazlauskaite, language and translation coordinator of the Lithuanian mission to the European Commission. “Multilingualism is the wealth of Europe,” she said adding that yet in 1958 the founding documents of the European Union stressed the importance of preserving various languages and cultures on its territory. Since then all important EU documents have been translated into all official languages of EU member-countries (23 at present and Croatian is to become the 24th) and billions of euro are allocated to advocate multilingualism. Kazlauskaite said besides official languages EU countries speak over 60 regional and national minority languages. A special European charter has been designed to regulate their preservation and use (Lithuania has not inked it so far). It gives grounds to state that multilingualism is an integral part of the EU legal system while the right to speak the native language is the basic freedom of modern Europeans. Kazlauskaite said the aim of the European multilingualism policy is to preserve the current language wealth and use it for efficient de velopment.

It has been calculated that EU enterprises annually lose up to 11 percent of profit simply because they cannot properly agree with potential partners. The vital task today is to make as many as possible EU citizens speak their native and one-two other languages since childhood. To advocate the idea the European Language Day has been widely celebrated on September 26 since 2001. There are so many important and interesting events that celebrations usually last for a week. To intensify foreign language studies by various Europeans – students, teachers, scientists, professionals in various spheres, and senior citizens international programs Socrates, Erasmus, Leonardo Da Vinci, and others have been designed and successfully operate. Kazlauskaite said the language sector of the European economy which is not always visible to outside observers accounts for 8.4 billion euro. Oral and written translation of all EU speeches and documents into 23 official languages costs a lot! Although the European Commission plans this summer to begin introducing machine translation the demand for skilled interpreters keeps growing.

Discussion participants who already had experience in dealing with machine translation said its efficiency for Roman languages reaches 89-90 percent while for Lithuanian language it is 65 percent so far. Kazlauskaite recalled that each spring various countries, including Lithuania, hold competitions for 17- year old beginning translators who fluently speak two or more languages. Success in such a contest offers the shortest way to a prestigious employment in EU institutions.

Director of the Lithuanian Language Institute Iolanta Zaborskaite calculated that two euro are allocated for translation each year per every EU citizen. It is clear the total result is considerable. There were calls to stop translating EU documents in all official languages and save money by translating them into three-four most popular languages – English, German, French, and Spanish, for example. “Genuine democracy cannot be cheap”, supporters of true European integration objected. “It is specifically important for a relatively small number of Lithuanianspeakers. Besides, we have a strong argument as Lithuanian language is the oldest of all living languages in modern Europe which is an attractive trademark for its preservation and use”, said Zaborskaite.

Europe in search of treasure

Senior research fellow of the Institute of Social Research Julija Moskvina and Chairwoman of the State Language Commission Daiva Vaisniene presented at the discussion the first stage of the project Language Treasures of Europe which in 2009-2012 was held in 19 countries by the British Council jointly with other European partners and national institutes of culture. The project mostly aimed at researching local language policies and practices in order to reveal “language treasures” buried in each European country. The state of all languages in a determined area was studied – both official, foreign, regional, national minority and immigrant. Researchers believe the obtained result should encourage politicians, scientists, and public leaders who formulate and implement the European multilingualism policy to actively cooperate with each other along the guideline and promote benevolent and viable cultural and language exchanges in schools, universities, and society in general.

Experts say Lithuania should study Polish, Russian, Belarussian, or Latvian as the first foreign language rather than English.

Conclusions of scientists made on the basis of the results of the first stage of the Language Treasures of Europe project look unexpected at first sight. For example, although all European Union countries focus on the studies of English as the first (and often obligatory) foreign language and it absolutely dominates in this capacity the European Commission recommends to gradually sidetrack from the practice. Experts say languages of close neighbors should be studied as the first foreign language and English should come second. It means in Germany the first foreign language should be French, Polish or Czech, in Lithuania – Polish, Russian, Belarussian, and Latvian.

The European Commission insists that for preserving and developing European multilingualism it is extremely important to support educational establishments of all levels – from kindergartens to universities where they speak national minority languages. It is also necessary to stop dubbing foreign movies and TV shows, there should be captions instead so that spectators can hear the original language.

Lithuanian Education and Science Minister Dainius Pavalkis expressed caution regarding the recommendations and called not to interpret them literally as “such laws can make us recognize the Polish language as the second official like Greeks have actually to do regarding the Turkish language.” The minister explained why not all European recommendations should be followed: “Relations between countries are a very sensitive issue.” For interaction within EU and in order to avoid mistakes Pavalkis called to use English as lingua franca because “the most active and educated residents of Lithuania are ready for that.”

Socio-linguistic map of lithuania

How is multilingualism developing in Lithuania? The question was answered during the discussion by Professor of Russian philology desk of Vilnius University Ala Lichaceva and her colleague, lecturer at the Polish Studies Center of the University Kinga Geben who have recently completed a special research called Socio- Linguistic Map of Lithuania: Cities and Towns.

Is the traditional multilingual situation changing in various regions of Lithuania due to massive emigration and considerable decrease in population? How are the multinational composition of population in various regions and their languages interlaced? Does multinational Lithuania remain multilingual? Which languages do they speak in our cities? And what are language preferences of Lithuanian residents depending on their nationality, age, and education? The researchers tried to provide exact answers and under the leadership of Vilnius University Professor Meilute Ramoniene summed up the data of the Cities and Languages project carried out in 2007-2009 in Vilnius, Klaipeda, and Kaunas and compared them with fresh results of the Socio-Linguistic Map of Lithuania project held in 2010-2012. The latter project polled 2660 respondents in 67 cities and towns (with a population above 3000). The total number of respondents in both projects was 4697.

What do the results of the project show ?

First of all, they showed that representatives of 154 nationalities live in Lithuania today. It is natural that big cities are mostly multilingual – Vilnius and Klaipeda. But there are also relatively multilingual regions. In Jurbarkas, Kalvarija , Silute, Seduva they mostly speak Lithuanian. Eisiskes, Nememcine, Salcinikai and other southeastern towns mostly speak Polish. Visaginas, Ignalina, and Zarasai speak Russian. In general the language repertoire of Lithuania is broad enough and continues to expand. Schoolchildren named 37 languages when asked which language they speak at home.

Naturally, the Lithuanian language occupies the strongest positions. It is native for 81.22 percent of respondents and practically all those polled said it was a language which they know most of all. Among foreign languages 94.57 percent said they speak Russian, 51.97 percent – English, 34.96 percent – Polish, 21.67 percent – German, and 5.26 percent – French. Good knowledge of Russian and Polish depends on the nationality of respondents most of who live in big cities and in the southeast of the country. French is spoken where it is possible to study it in school. Young Lithuanians mostly speak English, German or French, older people – Russian and Polish. All respondents clearly demonstrated that native language is the most beautiful for representatives of all nationalities. The Lithuanian language sounds better for residents of small towns, while Russian, French and English are most attractive for residents of big cities.

The most necessary language for Lithuania was naturally Lithuanian. It was named by 65.7 percent of respondents. The second necessary language was English (52.69%). Russian was the third (21.42%) followed by German (3.66%), Polish (1.64%), and French (1.58%). Priorities directly depend on the age of respondents: young people are loyal to English and the elderly prefer Lithuanian, Russian, and Polish.

In general the language repertoire of Lithuania is broad enough and continues to expand. Schoolchildren named 37 languages when asked which language they speak at home.

Dialects complement linguistic variety in Lithuania. Their preservation and use is very important for residents of homogenous ethnic regions – northern Samogitija, northern and central Aukstaitija, southern Dzukija, and western Suvalkija, and less important for ethnically motley southeast of Lithuania. Lichacheva and Geben arrived to the following conclusions. Firstly, territorial and social multilingualism is clear in Lithuania as even in one and the same family people often speak various languages or dialects. Secondly, major cities in the country begin to resemble megacities of the world where multilingualism is common in business, culture, and higher education. Thirdly, the evident expansion of the English language poses no threat to the official Lithuanian language as its positions are very strong in the country .

At the same time experts believe the increasing number of studied foreign languages and migration-triggered changes in the ethnic palette of Lithuania should strengthen linguistic variety in the country and public tolerance to it. Therefore, to promote the policy of multilingualism it is specifically important to encourage the preservation and spread of native languages of all strata of society, promote positive spoken forms of residents and use the existing linguistic situation to design methods and ways of stimulating multilingualism.

Tatyana Yasinskaya,

for Amber Bridge

The Russian-Estonian border still lacks proper legal demarcation. That the two countries are headed for a likely solution became obvious in April as a delegation of Estonian parliament (Riigikogu) visited Russia. The intensive program schedule was compensated by a friendly spring atmosphere at Moscow meetings.

The upper chamber of Russian parliament hosted a joint meeting of the Federation Council committee on international affairs and foreign affairs commission of Riigikogu. “The meeting continues the work to resume and revive permanent consultations between us which testifies to the importance of parliamentary ties between neighboring countries”, said committee chairman Mikhail Margelov who represents Pskov region that borders on Estonia. His Estonian counterpart Marko Mihkelson agreed and was pleased to say that such meetings have become traditional and allow parliamentarians to frankly discuss all vital issues.

Margelov specified that consultations have been held for over ten years and interlocutors know well how to discuss relationship “regardless of the acuteness”. Only last year three meetings were held on various platforms in Estonia and Pskov. “Now we know the more practical the discussed issues are the better it is for general relations between peoples,” he told Amber Bridge. The senator admitted that numerous unresolved issues have accumulated related to various agreements that have not yet become documents. Border treaties are the main ones.

The Russian-Estonian state border line was established in 2005 after nearly eleven years of negotiations. Treaties on land and water borders were signed. However during ratification Estonian parliament introduced in the preamble a reference to 1920 Tartu peace treaty in a context which preserved the possibility of territorial claims to Russia. In response Moscow recalled its signature and the border issue remained legally unresolved. Consultations resumed in 2012.

Margelov refused to elaborate on textual details. “Diplomats discuss them. We should not interfere. It is important that lawmakers are ready to do their job.”

The main thesis of the talks in April was that life demands to finally resolve the issue. Cooperation is to build up on the basis. The four “M”, like journalists dub Margelov and Mihkelson by the first letters in the names and surnames, assured that both sides are interested in constructive and good-neighborly relations. Therefore, the dialogue has resumed on three levels – foreign ministry, parliaments, and prime ministers.

Margelov recalled the wellknown Marxist postulate saying that “politics are concentrated expression of economy” and recalled that Russia occupies the first place in Estonian exports. The flow of Russian tourists is growing and cross-border cooperation is expanding. His Estonian counterpart agreed: “Good-neighborly relations with Russia are very important important to us. Many projects which we discussed in July in southern Estonia and Pskov region are being implemented. They prompted us to again discuss the border treaty.” Asked about a possible “reset” in the sphere the lawmakers were unanimous in saying the political and economic situation has changed. Mihkelson expressed hope the problem may be resolved this time in the interests of both parties. Parliament has issued a clear mandate to the government regarding negotiations. For Tallinn the legal regulation of the border and the principle of legal succession are important.

Speaking about changing relationship Margelov cited an important fact: when Federation Council members were in southern Estonia in July they for the first time visited Estonian military base – Kuperjanov Battalion, and then Estonian colleagues visited the 76th airborne division in Pskov. After a meeting in Estonian Otepe they also visited Barclay de Tolli Mausoleum in JЫgeveste. The level of trust at negotiations is high enough for parliamentarians “not to argue what we can cede or not, but tell each pragmatic, and aimed at future.” Moscow and Tallinn have to dismantle artificial mistrust to each other. Reciprocal visits by politicians to military units on both sides of the border promote it. It is a political signal. Russia and Estonia are and will remain neighbors forever. We have to help each other live together in united Europe specifically when the global financial system and economy are facing serious challenges.”

After the signing of border agreements it will be necessary to make an inventory of joint projects. The talk is about the abolition of double taxation and renovation of border infrastructure in the area of Narva-Ivangorod. In summer lawmakers inspected operations of border checkpoints and got acquainted in detail with Koidula checkpoint. Margelov believes upgraded railway communications are a vital issue. Why is there no shuttle train between Pskov and Tartu? For many residents of Pskov and Novgorod regions it would become a convenient and cheap route to EU border space. Margelov also recalled the initiative of the colleagues to create in Pskov region a partner of Estonian research project Julemiste City or a smart business city .

Jointly with Singapore a big business incubator is being built in Pskov region. It is a technopark with a free economic zone which can be of interest for neighbors. Estonian seaports are unique and can be successfully used by Russia. For example, handling of some types of chemical products is still impossible at Russian terminals. Therefore, the port of Sillamae operates like a docking unit for Russian companies.

Cooperation could progress better on all guidelines had the issue of border treaties been finally dropped, Margelov said. Their signing would give an impulse to active development of mutually beneficial relations and enhanced trust. The senator said he is optimistic that discussions now focus on technical details as political issues have been resolved to a major extent.

The head of the Estonian delegation quoted Prime Minister Andrus Ansip as saying that the signing of border treaties will positively influence economy. After the conference of heads of government of the Baltic Sea region held in St. Petersburg on April 5-6 and a meeting on its sidelines with Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev Ansip said in an interview: “We have an operating border but we would like to settle relations in the issue. When border agreements come into force. . . Russia will invest into simplified border crossing.” As a result the “agreement will render positive longterm influence on the economy.” The prime minister also said that Tallinn and Moscow “have come very close to the signing of a border document however there is no final solution yet.” Ansip expressed hope the sides will find it.

A vital issue for both countries is the introduction of a visa-free regime. There are no major contradictions between parliamentarians on it. Estonia sees no political obstacles for signing an agreement with Russia on visa-free travel. Marko Mihkelson said: “We have been discussing the idea with our colleagues in Brussels for long. Not only we but also the EU is interested in visa-free regime.” The introduction of the regime will considerably increase the flow of Russian tourists and business activity .

Despite positive dynamic in negotiations it is impossible to claim that “everything around is blue and green.” Dmitry Medvedev admitted that for the given moment the bilateral relationship “unfortunately, is not on the highest level by many parameters.” ” If we abandon the schemes which are often ideological, we can give a good impulse to economic cooperation and people-to-people contacts.” This is the main recipe for normalization of relations.

The delegation of the foreign affairs commission of Riigikogu also met Federation Council Deputy Chairman Alexander Torshin who represents the Republic of Mary El in the upper house. He called on Estonian lawmakers to visit not only Moscow but also Russian regions and shared his positive impressions of a recent tourist trip with his wife to Estonia. In response Marko Mihkelson said it would be good if womenspeakers of both chambers meet – Valentina Matviyenko and Ene Ergma – to discuss parliamentary cooperation of both countries.

After the talks in the Federation Council the guests noticed a piano of Estonia brand in the lounge. Riigikogu lawmakers checked its sound and remained satisfied.

The next item of the program was lunch with Vladimir Titov, Russian deputy (now first deputy) minister of foreign affairs. The meeting took place in the Reception House of the Russian foreign ministry in Spiridonovka Street. According to Mihkelson, they discussed border negotiations. The talks exposed no obstacles to further work on the text of the agreement. However the time of the third meeting of delegations from both countries was not agreed. An agreement on avoiding double taxation was also discussed, as well as agreements on higher education and interaction in case of emergencies.

The Riigikogu delegation also met Chairman of the State Duma committee on international affairs Alexei Pushkov and President of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Alexander Shokhin.

The finishing stroke of the Moscow visit by Riigikogu delegation was a meeting with lecturers and students of MGIMO. Together with lawmakers the institute was visited by Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Republic of Estonia to the Russian Federation Juri Luik. Guests were welcomed by MGIMO Director for international cooperation and public relations Andrei Silantyev and Director of MGIMO Institute of International Research Alexander Orlov .

Summing up the results of the Moscow visit Marko Mihkelson said State Duma lawmakers plan to visit Tallinn (by the end of the year) while colleagues from Federation Council will meet on the river, i.e. in Narva and Ivangorod to discuss border infrastructure.

Alexander Orlov told the guests about MGIMO which is one of the biggest scientific and educational centers in Russia. He said there is major interest in MGIMO in Estonia. He expressed hope relations will mount in future to cap a shortage of creative contacts between scientists and experts of Russia and Estonia. Professor Lev Voronkov called on Estonian guests to pay major attention to students present in the hall. Many of them will work in the Russian embassy in Tallinn in the near future and will do everything possible to enhance our relationship. Speaking about cross-border cooperation lawmaker from Ida-Vyrumaa Yevgeny Osinovsky said the absence of a border agreement does not create obstacles for cooperation and it develops fruitfully. However he recalled bureaucratic problems existing in the current fiscal year of the European Union which impede the allocation of EU funds to organizations dealing with infr astructure problems.

Osinovsky also spoke about renovation of fortresses in Narva-Ivangorod and expressed hope that after completion it would be possible to build a new bridge across the Narva River which is very necessary today. He also recalled important precedent in 2012 when auditors of the Russian Audit Chamber and Estonian State Control prepared a joint report with recommen dations of controlling agencies for environmental protection of Chudskoe Lake and reasonable use of trans-border water reserves, as well as movement of goods and vehicles through border and customs checkpoints of Russia and Estonia. The lawmaker stressed that cross-border cooperation in Narva-Ivangorod has specific humanitarian significance as for many years the region was the only space where people did not perceive the presence of the border. A visa-free regime is therefore specifically vital for the region.

Senior MGIMO research fellow and Executive Director of the Baltic Civilization Institute Alexander Chechevishnikov asked Estonian guests to specify the major aspect of negotiations. “Estonian political circles are currently discussing the possibility to “package” border agreements and the solution of a number of infrastructure problems in cross-border cooperation. Can such “packaging” jeopardize progress in border agreements? You also met Vladimir Titov yesterday. Can you add something to the information posted on the Russian foreign ministry website?

Marko Mihkelson thanked for the question which “allows to clearly state that you are wrong. Naturally, the fact of discussing various issues can be interpreted as their interdependence. Our position aims at resolving various issues without interlinking them.” He stressed that border agreements are drafted in strict compliance with the approach and recalled that yet in 2004 Estonia ratified the agreement on avoiding double taxation which still awaits Russian ratification. The drafting of other agreements is on a high level – on diplomatic property, cross-border cooperation, etc. An agreement on pensions has been concluded. They were all drafted separately. As for the meeting with Vladimir Titov, it was constructive. “We spoke not only about border. We discussed a wide range of problems as Mr. Titov is in charge in the foreign ministry of cooperation with European states. Ninety minutes of the meeting passed quickly. It w as very interesting.”

Lawmaker Vladimir Velman noted a radical improvement in tonality of communications during the visit to the Russian capital. He recalled that last time Estonian lawmakers met colleagues from the State Duma nine years ago. Much has changed since then. Today many Pskov residents go on holidays to Tartu and other Estonian regions. Contacts are not only limited by Pskov, they develop also with Novgorod region. Velman noted also positive work of foreign affairs ministries of both countries in promoting conditions for economic and cultural development of Setu people living in border territories. Thus, the resolution of the border issue will crown multi-faceted cooperation taking place on the Russian-Estonian border.

In answer to the question from Lev Voronkov about the initiative of Thorvald Stoltenberg who proposed in 2009 to five northern countries a program to strengthen military and foreign policy potential Ambassador Juri Luik said there were numerous proposals regarding the security policy of regional countries. Stoltenberg proposed to create a common peacekeeping force for northern European countries. However the reality showed that to carry out even soft operations it is necessary to have at least one major country which would provide logistics, hardware, and arrange evacuation. “So far we have not identified a peacekeeping operation in which only weak countries would participate.” Luik recalled there were problems in airspace defense. Practice showed it is impossible to resolve them without major countries only by North European countries. The ambassador said a positive aspect of defense cooperation were joint military purchases , e.g. radar purchases by Finland and Estonia. He stressed that numerous interesting ideas are voiced but not all of them can be implemented in the region.

MGIMO director’s aide Vladislav Vorotnikov complained that for nine years since he entered the institute there was no possibility to meet Estonian parliamentarians in the building of the institute. Now time has come. Vorotnikov spoke about public and academic diplomacy and asked whether it was possible to launch a Russian-Estonian commission of historians like it happened with other Baltic countries. The question was answered by Marko Mihkelson, an historian by education. He said historians should have free access to archive sources. The Estonian embassy in Moscow has intensified presentations of historic publications including joint ones of late which is more productive than other formats.

Juri Luik, in his turn, said Estonian historians often complain about problems in accessing Russian archives and expressed hope MGIMO would help resolve them. In this connection it would be appropriate to recall the opinion of distinguished Estonian historian and Professor Magnus Ilmjarv expressed in an interview with the Amber Bridge (2011 #4, page 37). He said Russian archives are open while Estonian historians often lack money for work in Russia. Work in archives is an art and is productive only when researcher understands which documents can keep a trace of various developments and how to find them in archives.

Several questions were asked by students. Chairwoman of Estonian Student Club of MGIMO Sonya Afanasyeva asked lawmakers to comment the intention of Chairman of the State Duma committee on international relations Alexsey Pushkov to file a request to the Strasbourg Court regarding the activities of the language commission of Estonia. Yevgeny Osinovsky said the issues related to the Russian language were discussed a day before at a meeting in Duma and assured that Estonia has always been inclined to cooperate with international organizations and comply with its international commitments. However he admitted that language issues in Estonia are very emotional for well-known historic reasons. Another student from Estonia, Georgy Makhmurov, asked about prospects of construction of a high-speed railway from Moscow to Tallinn. Marko Mihkelson said the agenda currently includes simplifying customs procedures on railway transport according to those enforced on Moscow-Helsinki and St. Petersburg-Helsinki trains.

In one of the interviews Marko Mihkelson said both countries are engaged in constructive dialogue although there are still many problems. Time is necessary for major changes. It is in the interests of Estonia to have integrated society and common home. It is necessary to take steps which make us competitive on the international labor market. Estonians currently speak also Russian, Finnish, and English.

In Estonia like in many Baltic countries there are calls to stop living with old hard feelings. Historian Mihkelson agreed we should not always and everywhere speak about the past as it sets up “an emotional trap”. We have to remember the past but look into the future. Estonia wants to maintain very good-neighborly relations with Russia which are beneficial for both countries.

Lyudmila Yermakova,

ITAR-TASS,

for Amber Bridge

using the site materials imi-mgimo.ru

Unforgotten past

Finland built ships yet for the USSR – in the 1960s the shipyards of Suomi produced 1200 vessels for the big neighbor and many of them are still navigating. For example, six nuclear ice-breakers built by the Finns are still operating. The Taimyr and the Vaigach were built by Finnish shipyards, as well as diesel icebreakers Yermak, Krasin, and others. Therefore, a new ship ordered by Russia in Finland is rather a tradition than news.

“Thirty years ago the Soviet Union accounted for a quarter of Finnish exports and ships comprised a major part of it,” said Ilpo Kokkila who heads the Central union of business life in Finland.

Today shipbuilding partnership is profitable both for Russia and Finland as joint experience and know-how help guarantee high quality of production for own needs and bid for joint fulfillment of international orders. Most experts are convinced that Russian and Finnish shipbuilders can properly cope with the task.

The Finnish Maritime Industry Association estimates the country controls one percent of the global shipbuilding market which is a good result for a small country with a population of five million people. The Finnish share in the global production of cruise ships and ferries is close to 20% and in design and production of ice-breakers and ice-rated vessels – nearly 60%. Today the maritime cluster in Finland employs a total of 21 thousand people who work in over 60 companies. The annual turnover of the industry is close to 60 billion euro. Russia is considered a major strategic partner and shipbuilding for the Arctic as the most promising guideline.

“The potential of Russian-Finnish interaction in the Arctic region is immense and is not currently used in full,” said Russian trade representative in Finland Valery Shlyamin. The national Arctic strategies adopted by both countries open prospects for expanded transportation possibilities in the region and development of its natural wealth which mostly comprises energy carriers. Forecasts estimate close to a quarter of global undiscovered hydrocarbon reserves are accumulated there. The development of the Russian Arctic shelf by 2030 will demand new technical means and servicing infrastructure for production and transportation of close to 110 million tons of oil and 160 billion cubic meters of gas. Experts estimate close to 150 vessels – 30 platforms and terminals, close to 50 specialized transportation ships and 70 servicing vessels – will be necessary by 2030. The big demand cannot be satisfied only by Russian shipbuilding capacity. Besides, Arctic development demands modernization of the ice-breaker fleet while oil and gas industry needs gas tankers for liquefied natural and hydrocarbon gas, container carriers and oil tankers, as well as universal multipurpose vessels. “On such a background Russia and Finland have all possibilities to efficiently develop mutually advantageous cooperation both in shipbuilding and in the creation of a joint maritime cluster,” the Russian trade representative said.

The future of the cluster was discussed by the Russian-Finnish Intergovernmental Commission for trade and economic cooperation and the Russian-Finnish Partnership in Modernization of National Economies business forum on its sidelines.

The forum of businessmen, experts and politicians named shipbuilding and biotechnologies as the most promising avenues of bilateral innovative cooperation. New developments are expected soon, f i r s t and foremost, staged emergence of the mentioned Russian- Finnish maritime cluster of recognized international scope. Its prospects were discussed by participants in the round-table Challenges in Maritime Industry in Russian-Finnish relations – Arctic Cooperation held on the sidelines of the business forum in Turku attended by nearly 90 representatives of the industry, including up to 30 Russians delegated by ship and machine-building companies and R&D organizations.

Modernization and the search for new forms and points of growth come to the foreground instyle Russian-Finnish business partner ship.

Round-table participants agreed the task of the Russian-Finnish maritime cluster in the geographic boundaries from St. Petersburg to Helsinki and Vyborg was to “create trans-border technological chains and networks of suppliers and efficiently use international labor division.” It is also important to mount the Russian participation in joint projects implemented for Russia and supplies of Russian materials and pre-fabricates, equipment and devices for the Finnish maritime industry .

Naturally, activities within the maritime cluster are not simply industrial cooperation as they also envisage cooperation of R&D and design bureaus in designing maritime hardware and new conceptual shipbuilding guidelines, etc.

Joint ventures which will emerge in the framework of the Russian-Finnish cluster will specialize in production of engines, electro-technical and onboard equipment, as well as systems for civilian ships and maritime hardware for the use in Baltic and Arctic Seas. New environment-friendly technologies have to be developed, such as the use of dual-fuel propulsion plants. Innovative cooperation will target the design of new materials for operation in Arctic conditions. Russia and Finland will jointly build shelfoperating vessels, oil and gas drilling and production platforms, multifunctional specialized icebreakers for fishing and research in extreme conditions, etc.

The idea to modernize the existing shipbuilding infrastructure and create new one will be entrusted to the Russian-Finnish technopark to be created on the Kotlin Island near St. Petersburg on the basis of the Kronstadt maritime works. Both countries declared it a priority.

The Bering and Chirikov are back to the Pacific

All principles of future partnership have been already implemented in the joint project of icebreaker construction for Sakhalin fields.

The Arctech Helsinki Shipyard created in December 2010 is considered by experts as a base for the emerging Arctic Center of shipbuilding companies which targets customers who need to modernize their Arctic fleet. That determined the basic guidelines of Russian- Finnish cooperation: construction of high-tech vessels – icebreakers, logistic ships, and other specialized ice-rated vessels.

Such is the new series of Russian-Finish icebreakers. Its identity is beak design with asymmetric hull and several propulsion plants which provide efficient forward and backward run and side motion. The diesel-electric icebreaker has a capacity of 13MW and can crush ice of up to 1,7 meter thick and navigate for 20 days at temperatures up to minus 35 degrees Centigrade. The two-year project costs 75 million euro. The icebreakers help supply production platforms and protect them from ice. “It is likely a unique vessel among existing ones and the best in its class,” said Sovcomflot CEO Sergei Frank.

The lead ship of the series named after legendary seafarer Vitus Bering is already operating in the Pacific Ocean. It will be backed by the Alexei Chirikov, the second icebreaker in the series named after great Russian seafarer and explorer of the northern part of the Pacific and companion of Bering in Kamchatka expeditions. Like three centuries ago the seafarers are again sailing the same seas and serving Russia.

The Arctech Helsinki Shipyard hopes the two icebreakers built in cooperation with Vyborg Shipyard will be followed by the third and fourth. However customer Sovcomflot said modern shipbuilding means competition and Russia can build the vessels at its own shipyards. Tender winner has to offer the best. “Competition today depends not only on money, but also on know-how ,” said Sergei Frank.

Joint ventures will specialize in production of engines, electrotechnical and onboard equipment for civilian ships and maritime hardware for the use in Baltic and Arctic Seas.

The significance attributed to shipbuilding in both countries is confirmed by the presence of heads of state at name-giving ceremonies in St. Petersburg and Helsinki. The Vitus Bering got its name in the presence of Russian President Vladimir Putin, while the Alexei Chirikov – in the presence of Finnish President Sauli Niinistö.

“It means a lot for our company,” said Arctech Helsinki Shipyard Director General Esko Mustamäki. “Good contracts demand good work and current ones open a new era of Arctic shipbuilding. I am convinced that in five years Sovcomflot will become the biggest operator in Arctic waters while Arctech will supply vessels for its Arctic fleet,” said the shipyard CEO full of optimism.

Keep afloat

Finnish economic experts say the Arctech Helsinki Shipyard founded by Russian USC and STX Finland (a unit of STX Europe within Korean STX Business Group) is the most successful business component of the Finnish coowners. STX Finland runs two other shipyards in the country: Turku Shipyard in Turku and Rauma Shipyard in Rauma. The enterprises of STX Finland employ a total of 2500 people. In January 2013 Finland admitted that its shipbuilding industry was in a deep crisis which intensified after STX Finland shipyard in Turku lost a major contract for the construction of a deluxe cruise liner for American Royal Caribbean Cruises. The multibillion-dollar contract went to STX Europe in France which was a blow to Finnish shipbuilding as the order could have provided 23 thousand jobs, according to experts. The Finnish government refused to issue guarantees to the shipyard worth 50 million euro and said it had no right to risk the money of taxpayers and support a loss-making company. The shipyard had to work itself to win the order.

Lack of contracts begins to tell on the Russian-Finnish shipyard in Helsinki which in February began negotiations about temporary personnel cuts. As a result 15 people had to go on an unpaid forced leave.

Esko Mustamäki said the shipyard “did not receive sufficient orders to ensure full load on the personnel.” In such a situation partnership with Russian shipbuilders offers both a way to survival and a path to growth.

The opinion widely spread after Korean and the Finnish media announced in the spring of 2013 that STX can sell its subsidiaries abroad, including in Finland, to raise money for the parent company and preserve priority production guidelines. The news was completely unexpected for Finnish shipbuilders. Experts say it is hardly possible to find a buyer of the shipy ards in Finland.

“There is an unstable situation at the shipyards which can result in a change of owner,” said Finnish Prime Minister Jyrki Katainen adding the sale of the enterprises to a private owner can offer “a chance for Finnish economy”.

Finnish experts and media cautiously but persistently suggest that a buyer can be found on the other side of the border – in Russia. “In the coming decade the role of Arctic shipbuilding will considerably grow and Russia is a major actor on the market. Consequently, it needs hundreds of new vessels and additional capacities for their construction,” said Professor Jorma Tajna, a leading Finnish maritime expert. Like many people in Finland he concluded that “Russia may be interested in buying the Finnish shipyard.” Time will show whether Finnish experts are right.

Fall is not alwa ys fail ure

Trends in bilateral economic relations can be traced by the very name of the annual information analytical bulletin of the Russian trade mission in Helsinki – Finland – a Russian Partner. In 2012 the bulletin came out under the motto Finland – Russian Economic Partner while in 2013 the country was called Russian partner in modernization of national economy .

Modernization and the search for new forms and points of growth come to the foreground in Russian-Finnish business partnership. Old methods of trade and economic ties which until recently ensured stable positive result are losing their previous force. New time sets new tasks while trade statistics urge to accelerate their solution to the maximum.

Professor Jorma Tajna: “Russia may be interested in buying the Finnish shipyard.”

“Our economic relationship faces a major challenge as trade turnover fell 10 percent,” said Valery Shlyamin. “The problem is not only the world market situation and decreased activity in the euro zone. Traditional trade forms in which commodities – oil and petroleum products, gas, timber, etc – comprise 88 percent are outdated.” The trade representative believes Russia and Finland have to find new spheres of cooperation, first and foremost, technological. “It is wrong to stake on increased commodity exports in kind. Trade turnover figures may change but it is important that technological cooperation changes.” Regional cooperation is also important, he believes. “Our relations are multi-faceted and flexible enough and it is necessary for public-private and municipal partnerships to profit from them,” Shlyamin said.

In 2012 trade turnover between Russia and Finland comprised 17 billion dollars, twelve of which were Russian exports to Finland and five – Finnish exports to Russia. Despite the mentioned 10-percent fall Russia remains a major trade partner of Finland and accounts for 14% in its trade turnover. The share of Finland in Russian turnover is 2.1 percent.

The Russian co-chair of the Intergovernmental Commission and Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Kozak suggested at a meeting in Turku that “Russia and Finland can succeed in restoring the trade turnover in a year or two.” “Russia and Finland work to create a favorable investment climate and the agreement signed today will promote simplified border procedures. The growing number of border crossings which currently comprise 12 million a year will give an impulse to trade turnover growth,” he said and recalled that “not everything depends on us, the world economy is unstable so far and it would be wrong to give exact forecasts.”

The Finnish co-chair of the Intergovernmental Commission and Minister for European Affairs and Foreign Trade Alexander Stubb believes such processes, as Russian membership in the WTO and further integration in the economic system of Europe will play a positive role in restoring trade indicators. “They enhance the trends existing between Russia and Finland,” he said.

At present there are close to 600 Finnish companies operating in Russia.

Polls held by the Russian-Finnish Chamber of Industry and Commerce show that every third Finnish businessman operating in Russia plans new investments into the Russian economy. Business activity is on the rise on the other side of the border: according to Finnish research company Asiakastiedot, every sixth company which opened in South Karelia and Kymenlaakso provinces in 2011-2012 was registered by Russian owners. The Russian business already owns nearly six percent of private companies operating in the region in the sp here of tr ansport.

However both countries mostly stake on innovations. Shipbuilding, as a sphere of innovations and their implementation, will preserve in the coming years its status of one of the most promising guidelines in Russian- Finnish cooperation. It means points of joint economic growth will increase which is so important in conditions of continuing global financial instability.

Yulia Andreeva, ITAR-TASS,

Helsinki – for Amber Bridge

When will Russia deploy its troops on the border with Baltic countries?

There is no necessity in it as we regard a military conflict with NATO as extremely unlikely in at least 15- 20 years. Today there is a different configuration of threats. They mostly come from the south. It is because the United States and NATO failed to accomplish the tasks which they set before the invasion in Afghanistan. Modern security forces of Afghanistan are incapable. The government is actually controlling only Kabul. Various warlords charge NATO forces for save passage of convoys. This extortion developed into a business – we shall shoot if you do not pay.

Today the presence of NATO in Afghanistan is beneficial for all, including Russia, because the threat does not expand beyond its borders. We believe that after the Americans and NATO forces withdraw the government of Hamid Karzai will be toppled and the Taliban will again seize Kabul. A question will arise where they will advance from there? We forecast that Islamic extremism will expand to former Soviet republics in Central Asia. That will trigger large-scale destabilization in a number of countries. Without counteraction the threat may become real also for Russia. Therefore, the Central military district is being strengthened as it is in charge of repelling threats from Afghanistan.

Still many Baltic politicians claim that Russia poses a major threat to them. Is it smoke without fire?

The image of an outside enemy consolidates a nation and makes it easier for politicians to brainwash the public. It is prestigious to engage in politics: there is good money, a possibility to travel the world at state expense, appear on TV, and when possible dive hand into state coffers. Therefore politicians want to engage in politics all their life. The image of an outside enemy helps manipulate the moods of the voters and achieve the desired result in elections.

However the Latvian defense minister several times expressed concern over Russian-Belarussian military exercises close to our borders. Do you mean there was no reason for it?

There is the Latvian embassy and military attache who has to inform his defense ministry about the aims and tasks of the Russian military planning. If the minister is concerned it means the work of the Latvian military attache in Russia is bad. It means he cannot communicate proper information that will dispel the concern of the minister. On the other hand, I understand that it is important for the defense minister to always express concern about threats in order to secure an acceptable budget in Latvian conditions. Another explanation is a recurrence of past mentality and the absence of a broad perception of the world. We describe claims that Latvia can become a victim of aggression from Russia as political paranoia.

But many Latvian residents are still scared by their history… How do you believe it is possible to agree dividends from an enemy image with mutually beneficial and good-neighborly relations?

As for history, I can also say that we can advance claims to Latvia for activities of Latvian secret police. As you know, the organization created by Felix Dzerzhinsky had a disproportionately high share of senior Latvian officials who also participated in mass non-judicial executions of Russian officers on the territory of Soviet Russia. Should we issue a historic invoice for Latvia to pay? Russia does not do that because it is absolutely counterproductive. Who will benefit from it? It will only cause anger and deterioration of relations.

We describe claims that Latvia can become a victim of aggression from Russia as political paranoia.

I cited the example to show that it is possible to get any skeleton from the closet if necessary. We are interested in good relationship with Latvia. Our foreign policy aims at resolving security problems not through an arms race, but by political agreements which guarantee us from military force majeure on the western avenue.

The main thing which I want to say is that it is necessary to get rid of the occupation in the minds. The heads of many politicians are occupied by the Russian military threat. Honestly speaking, we laugh at the paranoid fears. We do not understand the logic. If you analyze the composition of the military grouping in the west of Russia you will see that it is purely defensive. It is not an invasion army. Secondly, I believe we have to help politicians establish contacts with non-governmental experts. Together with my colleagues I am planning to set up a non-governmental structure shortly – the institute of national security problems which will analyze military-political activities in all regions of the world. We are open for contacts with Latvian experts to jointly assess the threats. We call on politicians to change something in our existing bilateral relationship. I repeat – Russia is very interested in good-neighborly relations and Latvia can enjoy major economic benefits from partnership with Russia. Favorable political conditions shall be created for that.

The technical might of the armed forces has increased. But did the strength of guarantees against the might increase the same way? The question is actually about the possibility of a nuclear war.

I believe the threat of a nuclear war is minimal today because the nuclear powers are aware of. . .

Are they?

Definitely, they are. I can say that legal (I am not speaking about India, Pakistan, Israel) members of the nuclear club – Russia, France, the UK, China, and the United States – are very responsible in planning the use of nuclear weapons. The fear of guaranteed mutual extermination in case of an exchange of massive nuclear strikes makes their use in modern warfare practically impossible. Today nuclear weapons are a political weapon, a peacekeeper. Nuclear weapons are a political surety and a non-aggression guarantee. But I have to recall that Russian military doctrine says: if Russia becomes a victim of large-scale aggression with the use of conventional armed forces which threaten the very existence of Russia as a state it will have the right to a preventive nuclear strike against the aggressor. Thus, we are sending a message: if you launch a conventional war against us we can retaliate in a different way.

But you recently wrote yourself that existing and potential military threats will considerably increase by 2030.

They will increase mostly because of global uncertainty.

How would you rate modern threats in general? By the level of danger.

I believe Islamic terrorism is the main threat for Russia. Another equal threat is internal instability mostly in North Caucasus. The problem there is not military, there is a self-reproducing terrorist environment which is dangerous.

It is necessary to get rid of the occupation in the minds. The heads of many politicians are occupied by the Russian military threat.

Then there is uncontrolled proliferation of mass destruction weapons and missile technologies. In the third place there is considerable supremacy of NATO military capabilities over us. The fourth potential threat is China from the point of view of military planning which it can carry out in future, not now. Today China’s interests are in Southeast Asia. There is also uncertain situation in a number of regions in the world. Small conflicts can provoke a big war. Cyber wars are another threat. There are examples of cyber threats related to an impact of one country on another. The United States and Israel launched a virus which switched Iranian centrifuges into an off-design regime and they actually broke down. The same weapon can be used against a nuclear power plant and trigger a large-scale environmental catastrophe. Consultations are necessary among civilized countries to drop the threat.

I nevertheless believe that as long as there are states wars will remain a means to resolve irreconcilable contradictions between the states. There are new wars in store, wars for resources and new colonial wars. Actually France launched a military operation in Mali to secure free access to African uranium on which French nuclear power-engineering relies. It is an example of a new colonial war. I believe it will become a reality more and more as all economies need resources today. Look how China actively enters Africa and Southeast Asia. It goes where it is allowed to come and the Americans naturally do not like it.

We have also to bear in mind that an army can win a war against a regular army of another country, but it cannot act as regulator of policing and anti-insurgency functions. The Americans routed the government forces of Saddam Hussein and won a military victory in Iraq. But they failed to regulate the situation in Iraq. It is still a pot of various terrorist groups. In this respect nonmilitary conflict settlement forms are becoming important.

What does the notion of “international terrorism” mean?

It is a myth and a bluff used by the Americans to free their hands for military operations. In reality the United States failed to achieve a single aim either in Afghanistan or in Lebanon or with Al-Qaeda.

What is the European Union in military context?

Nothing, except for declarations. No viable armed forces have been created in the European Union. The economic situation in the EU does not promote them. Europe prefers to fight somewhere if the United States bears the main burden.

Why should Europe put the carriage before the horse? The main threats for the EU today are economy and migration control. Look what is happening. Shariah patrols are in the streets of London. Mujahedin in Switzerland call from minarets. In certain conditions that can result in internal destabilization and unrest like in Paris. The accumulation of a critical mass which does not accept European values but has a residence permit is very dangerous. Terrorist cells can emerge. It is clear that wars are impossible between European countries. On the contrary, there is integration. Balkan wars were US aggression against sovereign Yugoslavia which ended in its disintegration. At present the threat of a conflict in Europe is next to nothing. Therefore, geopolitics move to the front stage.

Who are Russian allies today?

As Alexander III said, Russian strategic allies are its army and navy. There is a coalition of interests but it is still inefficient. In the military sphere the closest relations are maintained with Belarus. But I repeat that Belarussian army will not fight for the Russian army. We can support each other but the Russian army can rely only on itself. There is nothing like the Warsaw Treaty today. Russia is strategically alone. It has to repel existing threats by military but mostly political means. It is the task of the Russian diplomacy to decrease the risks of military conflicts. We cannot afford an arms race and we do not want confrontation as they all hit our economy. I repeat there is no Russian threat for Baltic countries. We are interested in good-neighborly and peaceful relations. We absolutely do not need any tension on our western borders.

What is the current breakdown in world arms trade?

The United States is in the lead and Russia is second. But our performance improves every year. Last year we sold arms worth 15 billion dollars although we lost some important markets.

Can the arms flows indicate where conflicts are coming?

No, they are not related. A growing number of countries want to have an army as a guarantee. The main arms race is developing today in Southeast Asia or broadly speaking in Asia and the Pacific Rim. China began to convert its economic might into military strength and project its force on oceanic theater of warfare. China said it will build aircraft- carrying fleet. It means it has an expansion plan. Other countries are concerned with it and begin to re-arm themselves, from Australia to Singapore. It is a very conflict-fraught region. Firstly, there are disputed islands and, secondly, there is shelf where hydrocarbon production is possible.

You were born in Riga. Is Latvia an alien country for you today?

Riga is my native place and Latvia is my motherland. As they joked in a TV show I am a third-generation occupant. My grandfather was an officer in the Baltic military district and graduated from the Alksnis military school. I am also an officer. It so happened that I wasn’t here for the last fifteen years. I came now and am very glad. There are good recollections and warm feelings. I love Latvia.

Viktor Avotins,

for Amber Bridge

The conference moderator, Professor Heiko Droste, talks about how past and present connect on the Baltic coast.

Political changes since the early 1990s in Central and Eastern Europe resulted in a renewed interest in the Baltic Sea region, both as an important trade zone and as a historical region with a certain Baltic Sea culture. This culture, however, is not easy to define. Historians like to perceive the Baltic Sea in itself as a node and infrastructure, which for centuries enabled migration and encounters. The history of these encounters, however, is in many parts still to be written. We have pieces of a puzzle, but the cross-national and cross-cultural perspective does not come easily. On the contrary, after centuries of migration movements and encounters, the mental map of historians and societes alike is still shaped by the nation state. These nations are usually perceived as rather stable entities with homogeneous cultures and clear borders. Migration and cultural encounters have therefore mostly been discussed as disturbing and problematic. Two Swedish examples might illustrate this mental map.

Three years ago, the Swedish historians’ conference met in Gothenburg to discuss the guild’s understanding of its relation to the Swedish nation: ”Bound by the nation?” The question was rather rhetorical as the evident answer was: yes. Only few Swedish historians deal with non-Swedish subjects. Fewer still work on those foreign provinces and colonies that Sweden had during the so called great power era. There was also a debate on today’s historians’ language skills as a prerequisite to international and cross-border studies. There is a clear trend to a bilingual research culture, where English is not only the foremost foreign language in almost all countries. It tends to be the only one, due to a growing focus on other, more ”labour market” oriented subjects at school. This is by no way an exclusively Swedish trend.

In early April, Sweden was shook by a political scandal. The Social democratic party congress voted for a well known muslim, Omar Mustafa, to become a member in the party leadership. Omar Mustafa had just everything that made his entry meaningful from the party’s perspective. He was a young and successful immigrant; he had a long lasting engagement in public life and a background in the muslim community. Just a few days later, this election exploded right into the face of the very same party. It turned out that Mustafa not only was a muslim, he was religious. He was also less than clear in certain discussions concerning the equal rights for men and women, equal rights for homosexuals and the question of his alleged antisemitism. Mustafa explained himself poorly. However, the major problem seems to have been his engagement in a muslim community that did not concur with all those values and positions that the ethnic Swedish party organization deemed crucial. There was simply too much otherness, it would have meant too much trouble for the party to stand up for the right of immigrants in Sweden to disagree with the majority society’s values. The party was obviously washed with antimuslim sentiments both from within and outside of the party. A media hype had its share in a campaign that resulted in Mustafa’s forced retreat.

This case demonstrates that diversity even in modern democracies is not self-evident. On the contrary, the framework for what lies within the approved public discourse seems to be getting ever more tight. Several of the antisemites that Mustafa had invited for discussions and that were turned against him had previously been invited by other Swedish politicians, without causing a public uproar .

Whereas we often perceive cultural encounters as beneficial, part of migration movements diversity is often considered as a threat to prevailing ideas of national and cultural homogeneity in nation states.

The Baltic Sea region has since its historical beginnings been shaped by migration movements and cultural encounters. Some of its aspects have been understood as beneficial, not the least the trade in and out of the Baltic Sea region. Other aspects concerning cultural and political hegemonies, be it the Teutonic order and its heathen mission, which resulted in a predominant Baltic German culture for centuries, be it Danish, Swedish and Russian hegemonial positions due to warfare and oppression, are mostly deemed negative (with some interesting exceptions).

Our conference focuses on migration and cultural encounters in a long-term perspective with a starting-point in the middle ages. Historians from a range of different countries gather at Södertörn University in order to discuss different topics. Although most lectures clearly focus on specific subjects, they all open up for comparison. And comparison is needed, not the least as our mental maps seem to be hard to shake.

This conference is also part of a long series of Russian-Swedish historical conferences. The previous conference in Moscow in June 2011 opened this bilateral conferences for participants from other Baltic countries. The conference in Stockholm in 2013 took an even further step in this direction. The participants originate from Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Germany, the United States of America, Canada, and the not the least Russia and Sweden.

The Baltic Sea history is clearly in need of many studies on the perception of migration and cultural encounters. The political and economic aspects of this history are well analysed for the most part. What seems to be needed now is to examine, how societies reacted to change, how migrants and their culture were incorporated, transformed or rejected. The reactions to change often came from within society, with a limited influence from the part of the government. We also need more studies concerning the obvious fact that the national cultures we are used to think of are a conglomerate of different cultures. They, too, can be an expression for a majority culture that denigrated or neglected other, socially inferior cultures. The Finnish, Estonian and Livonian peasant societies of the early modern period are clear examples for that. There are many more.

The conference also showed that different perspectives are useful, combining economic, political, social and cultural aspects. The different lectures were often based on conflicts or forms of a cultural hegemony that in itself could be seen as an expression for political claims. In this respect, similarities and cross references between different lectures were obvious. Maybe, historians focus too much on conflicts – due to the simple fact that conflicts produce our source material. However, this focus possibly mirrors the prevalent negative perception of change in societies that tend to see themselves as stable.

A common Baltic Sea culture or ”identity” is not easy to grasp and shows itself most of all in the region’s important role for trade and commerce. Here, the Baltic Sea truely is a node, an infrastructure that connects. In cultural aspects, the Baltic Sea is probably more of a barrier. Communication s are often land – bound . In these matters, however, we need many more studies. We also need more conferences to gather and discuss these matters. I hope that this conference will be just one in a long line of discussions and meetings. We need to meet each other outside of our national communities, in order to experience those cultural encounters that shaped the Baltic Sea region in its long history. That these conferences most likely will have to be held in English – the modern lingua franca – might be perceived as ironic, with regard to the rather subordinate role of this language for the Baltic Sea countries until recently. It might also give all the participants a feeling for the problems of cultural encounters in previous societies. There was never just one language that all members of the society understood as its own.