How come Ambersun isn’t worried about the heavy hand of our closest ally and trusted partner? Look, Ambersun—the Kremlin must have Foggy Bottom by the balls, too:

«Mēs ik gadus gatavojam ziņojumu par cilvēktiesību situāciju visās pasaules valstīs. Pēdējo gadu laikā mūs visvairāk interesē minoritāšu tiesības,» viņš [Jeffrey Krilla, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Rights, Democracy and Labor, US State Dept.] izteicies intervijā krievu laikrakstam «Čas», kur virsrakstā likts: «Džefrijs Krilla: Vašingtona aizliks vārdiņu par krieviem…»

“Vašingtonas savdabīgās rūpes Latvijā”

Vysu lobu,
/P

http://www.alfa.lt/straipsnis/c64008
Interview: Alfa talks to Edward Lucas about The New Cold War
2008-03-11
Virgis Valentinavicius | Alfa.lt

Edward Lucas (b.1962), a journalist for The Economist, is regarded as one of the foremost experts on the politics and economics of Eastern Europe.

He has lived in cities across the region and has been writing about Eastern Europe for more than twenty years.

Lucas was the first foreigner to receive a Lithuanian visa after the country proclaimed its independence from the Soviet empire exactly eighteen years ago today, on March 11, 1990.

His first book, The New Cold War: How the Kremlin Menaces both Russia and the West, was launched at the beginning of February. A Lithuanian edition was released three weeks later.

Lucas is a self-proclaimed friend of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. His book is the first to examine Russia through the eyes of the Baltic states.
[. ...]
The first bulwark of defense is good government. I’m actually more worried about Latvia at the moment than I am about Lithuania. Perhaps one thing Lithuania should do is look at Latvia to make sure it doesn’t get itself into that sort of mess.

I wouldn’t hold up Estonia as a model because I think they have been quite smug. Their particular problem is the Estonian Russians—their integration has not gone as fast as it should have done in the past few years. The Bronze Soldier riot was a wake-up call to them. They’re not getting the solid allegiance of a new generation of Baltic Russians. Fifteen years ago no one would have dreamed that Russian teenagers would be rioting in the streets of Tallinn shouting ‘USSR forever!’
[. ...]

(my bold)

You know, ambersun, the New Cold War is widely available in Latvia and will soon be published in Latvian. Perhaps then ethnic Latvians will finally know the truth about Gazprom and Russia. Oh, wait, they already do.

Besides, no one in Latvia is shouting USSR forever. Russians in Latvia and Estonia are of different ilk. Russians in Latvia, for example, are more educated, whereas Estonia’s Russians tend to be working class folk.

But if I were you, and the Latvian patriot, I wouldn’t worry so much about Estonia’s Russians and integration. I’d bold this part
- The first bulwark of defense is good government. I’m actually more worried about Latvia at the moment than I am about Lithuania. What does it tell you about a government of ethnic Latvians in Latvia?

Aleksejs,
From Edward Lucas in http://www.alfa.lt/straipsnis/c64008 :

I think the best defence for any country that’s threatened by Russia is good government at home. If the political system is robust and healthy then it’s harder for Russia to influence it. If there is a healthy foreign investment climate then there’s no danger of Russians coming in to buy things up on the cheap because Westerners will be coming in and paying top dollar. If the public service is full of patriotic bureaucrats who can’t be bribed, then it would be very difficult for Russian intelligence agencies to subvert them.

Aleksejs, convince me that the Russians in Latvia really are interested in becoming healthy Latvian-speaking, loyal, and patriotic Latvian citizens who are ready to call themselves the Latvians of Latvia rather than contintuing to be in a Russian Latvia that Russia perceives as its ‘near abroad’ and wittingly, or unwittingly by failing to transfer loyalty to Latvia and to reshape their identity to being a “Latvian” identity, serve as Russia’s fifth column in Latvia: Russians who live isolated in a Russian cultural space, read and view news almost if not exclusively from Russia which has no free press but only disinforamtion and propaganda, who are being actively agitated by Moscow to aggressiviely assert Russian “minority” rights in Latvia while growing in estrangement from any Latvianness, who are provoked by Moscow to transfer loyalty to Russian interests in political decisions, who refuse to learn Latvian right now not just someday soon and refuse to speak Latvian unless absolutely required, who think Putin’s authoritarian rule of the KGB brotherhood is positive for Russia, whose Russian/Latvian politicians openly display greater allegiance to Russia than Latvia, who think greater “friendship” with Moscow would benefit Latvia, who don’t think Latvia was occupied, etc.

Please tell me, what positive citizenship on Latvia’s behalf is being shown by the Russian-Latvians in Latvia?

Ambersun,

Russia’s fifth column in Latvia: Russians who live isolated in a Russian cultural space, read and view news almost if not exclusively from Russia which has no free press but only disinforamtion and propaganda, who are being actively agitated by Moscow to aggressiviely assert Russian “minority” rights in Latvia while growing in estrangement from any Latvianness

The sentiments described above sadly have more to do with the Latvian Government’s policy of disenfranchisement that was pursued since the regaining of independence with the nationalist aim of Latvia for Latvians. The recurring pain of that bite in the ass is making itself felt beyond the borders of LV. Russia is just taking advantage of this.
The policy they pursued back then is essentially the same one you espouse now. With the benefit of this free hindsight, anyone and everyone should recognize what is clearly a failed policy. Do you think it will be any better to stoke this fire further?
This alone should help convince you that a policy multiculturalism and integration (advocated as an alternative to nationalism) is worth pursuing.

ambersun, How do you want me to prove it to you? List names of famous Latvian Russians who wave Latvian flag? You’d say those are the exception. The wave of naturalization ain’t going to do it either.

I’ve been trying my damnest to show you that your sentiments echo the situation in Latvia in 1994, not in 2008. But you refuse to listen.

I’ve told you repeatedly that it’s the Latvian government that appears to be willing to sell their country to Russia and I, as a Latvian citizen, find it appalling. Wouldn’t you say that the outed Russian, I ought to welcome such a development? The Lucas quote, by the way, is straight on - now we have to figure out if there are any patriots left in the current government. I suspect there are a few. The leadership is after the money, not the revolution. Estonia had taken a tough stand on Nord Stream, Latvia opes to benefit from the gas pipeline by building an underground storage in Dobele. I personally am concerned (and I am a Russian, no?)

Ints is right in some sense. Policies pursued by the Latvian government in regards to Russians doesn’t exactly serve as a cause for warm fuzzies when one thinks about Latvia. There’s still lots of resentment toward the authorities for promised and not fulfilled citizenship to all, or at least to those who voted for Latvia’s independence in a 1991 referendum. In fact, the government pursued the very ideology that you espouse - Russians are the occupiers that should go home to their motherland. Heck, some people have told me the same thing at the time. Years went by and policies have changed. Gone are the naturalization windows that would have stretched out the naturalization process for centuries. Gone are quotas for language broadcasting deemed unconstitutional by our own court. The laws have been amended several times, including to make it easier for children who have been born to non-citizens after 1991 to obtain citizenship.

A wave of Russian non-citizens obtained it following Latvia’s joining the European Union. Now te wave is gone and I think the remaining people are really bitter toward everything Latvian. I wouldn’t want them to have citizenship in the first place.

Now the Latvian government, run by ethnic Latvians, including even patriots from the Fatherlanders, is negotiating with Russia, doesn’t object too much when Russian elections are obviously a sham, doesn’t support Estonia immediately and waits for a week before adopting a resolution, opposes the EU push for energy market liberalization largely because of Russian economic interests here.

These are the real reasons why Edward Lucas is concerned about Latvia out of all three Baltic states. And it was the Latvian politicians with power that took the country there, not the Russian minority, or non-citizens who do not even have a right to vote.

I’ve mentioned it several times here - Russians in Latvia do not live in a vacuum. Russian press here is poisonous and everyone knows it, including the Russians. A friend of mine reads 5 Min, a free bilingual newspaper available in public transportation in Riga every morning. She said, she wants to know the news, not the opinions. And Russian papers here are full of them.

But I have also mentioned that Echo Moskvy, Russia’s independent radio station, is available on the airwaves. In fact, it’s one of the most popular stations in town. Russians have a choice, so accusing them of living in some kind of informational vacuum is absurd. Those days are gone.

Hi, Into,
I guess it’s safe to greet you in English, even if the two of us both live in the multicultural United States, where so many languages are known and spoken, but where English is the still the country’s common language.  You seem young and probably were born in the U.S.  Please correct me if I’m wrong.  I’m just curious whether you consider English or Latvian as your native language and whether you identify yourself as an American or a Latvian?  Also, if you are now bilingual English/Latvian, how long did it take you to learn the non-native language?  Did you learn it in your public school?  Which language do you speak at work?  Which language do you speak while conducting daily business? When do you use the non-native language? 

What do you want for the future for Latvia?  What is your vision for Latvia?  What do you think Latvia will look like in fifty years?

Hi and sveiks, Aleksejs,
I greet you in the languages we have in common.  How shall I greet people on the streets in Riga when I need to get their attention for assistance? 

You wrote that the Edward Lucas book will be available in Latvian for Latvian-speakers to read.  Will it also be translated into Russian for the Russian-speakers in Latvia and Russia?

Did the Russians in Latvia protest the recent sham election in Russia and demand democratic reforms for their brothers and sisters in Russia? 

Who are the Russian politicians who are true Latvian patriots and outspokenly loyal to Latvia and Latvia’s interests?  What are their names?  Who is Tatjana Zhdanoka?  If SC is the most popular party with Russians, what are the major issues SC is supporting and promoting? 

Who are the Russian businessmen who are exposing and fighting the corruption and bribes in business? Which Russian businessmen are advocating transparency in business dealings with Russia and working to reform the business culture?  Are there many exposes in the Russian-language press about Russia’s bribery in Latvian business dealings and of the involvement of Russians and the Russian Mafia? 

The majority of the top 100 millionaires in Latvia are Russian.  Are there any flag-waving Latvian patriots among them?  Have they created many philanthropic organizations and foundations?  What are some of the better-known names of the millionaires and foundations? 

Aleksejs, what do you want for the future for Latvia?  What is your vision for Latvia?  What do you think Latvia will look like in fifty years?

ambersun - 13 March 2008 10:31 PM

Hi and sveiks, Aleksejs,
I greet you in the languages we have in common.  How shall I greet people on the streets in Riga when I need to get their attention for assistance? 

Outside of my home, I speak Latvian and English - never had a problem. I refuse to speak Russian unless I’m definitely sure that the other person is a Russian, but it’s becoming harder and harder to determine.

ambersun - 13 March 2008 10:31 PM

You wrote that the Edward Lucas book will be available in Latvian for Latvian-speakers to read.  Will it also be translated into Russian for the Russian-speakers in Latvia and Russia?

I have no idea. The Dissidenta Nave, for example, never was. But it’s also the question of marketing. I don’t think the book would sell as hotcakes among Russians here or anywhere.

ambersun - 13 March 2008 10:31 PM

Did the Russians in Latvia protest the recent sham election in Russia and demand democratic reforms for their brothers and sisters in Russia? 

Why should they? The Russians in Latvia (other than those who are Russian citizens) don’t have a political interest in Russia. The more important question is why Latvia didn’t protest it on the government level, which appears to be its job and an appropriate venue for a protest. The Russians in Latvia protested many things in Latvia - the citizenship laws and education reform—and all those protests had to do with policies that impact them. Whoever is in charge of the Kremlin doesn’t impact them.

ambersun - 13 March 2008 10:31 PM

Who are the Russian politicians who are true Latvian patriots and outspokenly loyal to Latvia and Latvia’s interests?  What are their names?  Who is Tatjana Zhdanoka?  If SC is the most popular party with Russians, what are the major issues SC is supporting and promoting? 

The SC is the most popular party period. It has been for several months. I’m sure you know the policies - however, the SC is not promoting the two official languages and it’s not promoting changes in the language laws. On the other hand, I personally, don’t believe in separating parties by ethnic principles (I voted for Jaunais Laiks in the last election), so as long as we separate them, the two segments of the population will remain separated.

ambersun - 13 March 2008 10:31 PM

Who are the Russian businessmen who are exposing and fighting the corruption and bribes in business? Which Russian businessmen are advocating transparency in business dealings with Russia and working to reform the business culture?  Are there many exposes in the Russian-language press about Russia’s bribery in Latvian business dealings and of the involvement of Russians and the Russian Mafia? 

Are there any Latvians who do that?

ambersun - 13 March 2008 10:31 PM

The majority of the top 100 millionaires in Latvia are Russian.  Are there any flag-waving Latvian patriots among them?  Have they created many philanthropic organizations and foundations?  What are some of the better-known names of the millionaires and foundations? 

Sure, Parex, owned by a non-Latvian Kargins, and Diena recently opened up a Saulainas Dienas donation charity for the 10th year in a row to help Latvian children with the assistance of what is perceived as a Russian Latvian bank. The only one locally owned, by the way.

ambersun - 13 March 2008 10:31 PM

Aleksejs, what do you want for the future for Latvia?  What is your vision for Latvia?  What do you think Latvia will look like in fifty years?

I have already answered that question, please consult the archives. MY vision hasn’t changed in the last month.

I totally disagree with Ints. The main trouble, again, is with definitions—“nationalism,” “multiculturalism,” and “integration” can mean anything, and even “Latvia for Latvians” meant something very different to Meierovics, Ulmanis, and Pērkonkrusts (in addition, “latviska Latvija” is quite different from “Latviju latviešiem”).

The non-citizens weren’t disenfranchised—the country they were citizens of, which had forcibly occupied Latvia for nearly half a century, ceased to exist. They were never citizens of the Republic of Latvia. Citizenship was not granted along ethnic lines—it was granted to those who had a legitimate claim to it, regardless of their ethnicity or their language skills. About six of ten ethnic Russians in Daugavpils held citizenship by descent in 1992, for example.

I think Latvia made a big mistake in not granting citizenship to those who registered with the Citizens’ Congress—those non-citizens have a right to feel pain at a bite in the ass. Others? I think it is regrettable that the Popular Front promised citizenship to all—but the circumstances were those of occupation. The Supreme Soviet, elected when even soldiers in the occupying army could vote, had no right to extend citizenship. The restoration of independence proclaimed a transition period. The collapse of the USSR led to full independence. Should a Parliament elected by the inhabitants of an occupied country, reduced in status to that of a province, have the right to offer Soviets—a large portion of whom opposed the very existence of this Republic—automatic citizenship? No, not in my view.

With the benefit of this free hindsight, anyone and everyone should recognize what is clearly a failed policy. I don’t think it’s a failed policy. There was a huge exodus of people who could not reconcile themselves to living in an independent Republic. Good riddance. With all of the problems we had with Baltic Germans between the wars—they’d have been a lot worse if the worst element hadn’t fled with Bermondt-Avalov (a few of them later happily influencing Hitler and his friends in Munich). I think we lost a part of the Alksnis crowd in the early 1990s, and I think restrictive citizenship laws played a part.

I also think that one can safely argue that the political complexion, and probably the Western orientation, of Latvia would have been and would be quite different had we taken the zero option. Pabriks has said that we wouldn’t be in the EU—and I think he’s right. I don’t think we’d be in NATO, either. With all of the problems Latvia has (and with all of the negatives of both structures)—those are two very real accomplishments that are far-reaching and vital to Latvia’s future.

The idea that nasty Russkies exist only because the Letts stabbed them in the back by promising citizenship and later betraying them is a silly myth, methinks. I know people who feel betrayed, and I can sometimes sympathize—another mistake, besides not granting citizenship to those who asked for it when it was a risk to do so, was messing with “windows” rather than quickly coming up with a path for those who were already integrated or were willing to integrate to obtain citizenship. But every polity makes mistakes. The Popular Front fell apart—its promises weren’t binding upon those we later elected.

Plenty of nasty Russkies are nasty ‘cause they’re nasty, i.e., they are Russian chauvinists and imperialists—somebody was at those Interfront demonstrations, and that wing came about before this mythologized backstabbing took place. One doubtless amplifies the nastiness by making Latvia more Latvian (latviska)—but most people in Latvia did not and do not want to live in Ruslatviya. I, for one, definitely don’t.

Latvia exists because of the Latvian nation, and it is the result of Latvian nationalism. It is supposed to be the home of the Latvian people. It is also home to Russians, Belarusians, Gypsies, Jews, Poles, etc. But it is not their national home—except for the Gypsies, they have mother countries and nation-states elsewhere. Does that mean they’re second-class citizens, or that they ought to turn “Latvian” per Ambersun’s world-view? Nē. But if the Latvian people (the “titular nation") does not feel at home in its own country—what’s the point of having one? Look down the road to Belarus, where you can see the results of a vanquished nationalism and a weak national identity… and where even the President almost never speaks Belarusian.

What does “integration” mean? That has been the policy for a while. Failed? Why is it that more than half of the ethnic Russians now speak some Latvian, as opposed to maybe one in five in 1991? Is it “multicultural” to foster the development of Russian ghettos?

Most people, and the vast majority of Latvians, want Latvia to be more Latvian. That’s what’s happening on most every level—at independence, nine of the ten largest cities were minority Latvian, and today that has changed drastically (Daugavpils still has a Russian majority, whilst Rēzekne still has a Latvian minority but not a Russian majority). The “language of prestige” is Latvian, as it should be. 

[To be cont’d.]

[Cont’d.]

Naturally, such pressures can result in a backlash, or at least in a digging in of heels. This is why one needs to focus upon individual rights, concretely. We’re in the CoE, and anybody whose rights have been violated can take Latvia to court in Strasbourg. Latvia often loses. Latvia won against Mme. Zhdanok, though.

The pressure remains—because Latvians want to live in a Latvian nation-state, where the lingua franca is Latvian. It is a tiny language facing a resurgent major language (hey, even in China, people who study Russian get hired before they leave school). Latvia is never going to pay as much attention to Russian as it does to Latvian—because that would be absurd. The largest country in the world speaks Russian and promotes Russian. Handing thousands of lati to a Pushkin festival is just idiotic—the focus of Latvia is and should be on the Latvian culture and language. Minor languages cost more, and we don’t have the luxury of petrorubles.

That means plenty of pain in the brainy asses of those who would promote traditional Russian communities, then. Not that this can’t get financial support from the state—I invite Ambersun to go to the Slavic shindig in the Old Believers’ hamlet of Slutišķi, for example; it’s gorgeous. 

The trouble is that there’s little pašdarbība. There are no obstacles to preserving Russian culture in Latvia. For some reason, however, too many Russians play at a culture most lack. I’m not talking about just the chauvinists in the lower classes—I know Russophones in responsible positions in the establishment who neither speak Latvian nor know anything about Latvian culture. That’s nekulturniy, sorry.

Regards,
/P

You seem young and probably were born in the U.S.  Please correct me if I’m wrong.  I’m just curious whether you consider English or Latvian as your native language and whether you identify yourself as an American or a Latvian?

Ambersun,
It’s probably my naiive optimism, but more likely my simplistic view that leads to the conclusions above. I was born in California in 1968 (jaunais cilvēks dažiem, vecčuks citiem) and for reasons partially beyond my control, I only really began learning speaking Latvian in earnest in my early teens. From this it is obvious what is my first language. What I consider my native language would obviously depend on if I identify myself as a native of Latvia or the US of A. I consider myself native to neither country. I just do not fit into either pigeonhole. Based on this, some of the following questions are not applicable while the rest are, in my opinion, rhetorical.

Also, if you are now bilingual English/Latvian, how long did it take you to learn the non-native language?  Did you learn it in your public school?  Which language do you speak at work?  Which language do you speak while conducting daily business? When do you use the non-native language?

What do you want for the future for Latvia?  What is your vision for Latvia?  What do you think Latvia will look like in fifty years?

I will try to answer these last three as best I can. I want a future for LV that has a government that doesn’t so readily peddle off themselves or the remaining assets of LV to the ir buddies or the highest bidder. It would be nice for them to work for “Latvijas un tās iedzīvotājiem interesēs” for a change. Now I know there are people in govt. there who are not part of the fire sale and I support them but for the most part it has not gone their way. I also see (my vision) a LV that builds upon the wealth of natural resources (functioning habitat, species and ecosystems that are in decline or extirpated elsewhere) and a connection to place/nature/landscape to support the cultural values of the indigenous culture. In fifty years, hopefully LV will be an inclusive country with the indigenous peoples comfortable in their identity and the non-indigenous feeling comfortable in theirs as citizens of a democracy.

I hope that this answers your questions.

Pēteri,
my simplistic answer in my previous post reflects my limited knowledge of the recent history of LV. A blanket amnesty wasn’t the way to go in Latvijas case, regardless of my implication of that. Also, was the exodus really that huge? My impression was that most of the Sovietization transplants didn’t want to go back to the Rodina.

I am more interested in current issues, namely development, sustainability, natural resources, and the integration of nature and natural systems in policy and planning process. I’m a Landscape Architect by profession who tries to consider the broad range of scales from global to local and the relationship of nature and culture in my worldview. This drives my interest in the forums on LOL.

Priekā visiem!

Also, was the exodus really that huge?

Depends who does the counting and how you count, but no matter how you slice it or dice it—yes. Maybe 200 000 people left in the 1990s, massive percentage-wise on our scale (nearly a tenth of the population). Not all emigrants were Russian, of course, and other factors (deaths, births, self-identification) come into play… but Latvia went from being about 52% Latvian in 1989 to almost 60% Latvian in 2005. The shift in urban areas was even more dramatic. The shift continues apace, for various reasons.

Re habitat/ecosystems/landscape—without diminishing individual Russian, Polish, Jewish or other contributions to environmentalism in Latvia, I think one can say that environmentalism here (in almost all its forms) is Latvian, and that it was and is integral to the national revival. The roots of the independence movement were steeped in it. The Greens and the Far Right shared a list once, even.

There are a lot of reasons for that. Cities under the Soviets came to be dominated by Russophones, while Latvians were primarily rural—also, many urban Latvians retain an intimate relationship with the countryside, not so many of us having urban roots that stretch back more than a couple of generations, and almost everybody having family that is still of the countryside.

These cultural values run deep, and it’s not the Russians who chain themselves to dižkoki or violate the funky laws by objecting to Finnish pulp plants with signs saying “Daugava dirsā!” ...in fact, it’s Daugavpils’ neo-Soviet politicians who tried to rekindle the dam project that D. Īvāns killed at a dramatic moment at the beginning of the Third Awakening.

Even after it sullies itself, the environmentalist movement will still be intertwined with nationalism (I wrote a bit about that here). That’s just logical—our “connection to place” is naturally a lot stronger. The Daugava is our likteņupe—the Dvina is not the Russians’ (or even the Belarusians’) river of fate. The baltkrievu sūdi that float downstream upon occasion could convince anyone of that.

Even among the Old Believers at Daugavas loki, it was people like Bruno Jansons who did the work.

There are exceptions—a lot of Russophones care a lot about local history, hence the fresh statue of Dubrovin in his park (the first park in Dvinsk) and the dubious efforts of Gomberg.

But what does coming into place really mean? Can one “integrate” without learning the language and absorbing the lore? The really derogatory epithet for Russians in Latvian isn’t kolonisti—it’s migranti.

When Stradiņš talked about how we would all live happily ever after an independence the Russkies, who could never be second-class citizens, would share (oops—non-citizens aren’t second-class citizens—they’re nekas!)-- he talks about how we all came to inherit Rīga. It wasn’t a Latvian city until not so long ago, after all. The groups Kristovskis invoked in what I quoted earlier were notable—not just Old Believers but those from the courtyards of Grīziņkalns, i.e., the lower class Latvians, recently come to the big city, who made that neighborhood what it is… and, eventually, made Rīga Latvia’s capital.

Even now, we take on what is sometimes only tenuously ours—Rothko as Dvinsk’s favorite son, for instance, though he had nothing whatsoever to do with Latvia or Latvians.

Latvia’s multiculturalism before Ulmanis was based on segregation, not integration. That was seen as “liberal” at the time—give autonomy to any viable collective ethnic unit. Did it work? I doubt it. I don’t think anybody was happy—not the minorities, and not the majority.

The mix is unutterably different today—and I’ve not heard whining from any minority trying to rebuild itself; the Polish community didn’t complain about the education reform, for example—their schools were already reformed, graduating trilingual students who could keep their heritage, function in Russian, and “integrate” in Latvian.

What most Russians want is a continuation of their imperial entitlements. I think Aleks is blowing smoke in saying that SC doesn’t want to change the language laws—SC is all about taking concrete steps to dilute the language and citizenship laws. It is about taking a “soft” path to exactly where PCTVL would take us—the same gun with a silencer.

Vysu lobu,
/P

Peteris hit the nail on the head.  I agree with him completely.  There is no need to add more.  PERIOD.

ambersun, chained to the dizkoki

Actually, I think you agree with what you think Peteris said, not what he said.

He was speaking of “Russians”, not “Latvians (of whatever background)”.