Latvija nav izturējusi pārbaudi ar neatkarību, jo valsts ir sašķelta divās kopienās – latviešos un krievvalodīgajos, sestdien intervijā laikrakstam “Diena” saka rakstniece un publiciste, bijusī Latvijas Tautas frontes (LTF) aktīviste Marina Kosteņecka.
Viņa uzsvar, ka “barikādēs bijām vienoti”. “Es biju barikādēs pie visiem ugunskuriem naktīs, sākot ar Ulbroku un beidzot ar Zaķusalu. Neteikšu, ka krievu bija tikpat daudz, cik latviešu, tomēr krievvalodīgo bija gana daudz. Viņi tur stāvēja pret totalitāro režīmu un bija ar mieru dzīvot neatkarīgajā valstī un kopā to būvēt,” atmina Kosteņecka.

Taču tā neesot noticis, domā Kosteņecka, jo, tikko neatkarība bijusi atgūta, tika pateikts: “visi krieviski runājošie ir mūsu ienaidnieki”. “Mēs paši viņus atgrūdām (Tatjanas) Ždanokas apkampienos, un tie cilvēki tika nodoti, jo Latvijas aizstāvības dēļ viņiem pat savās ģimenēs bija skandāli. Darbavietās viņiem klupa virsū. Un pēkšņi - viņi tika atstumti,” uzsver publiciste.

Runājot par naturalizāciju, Kosteņecka saka, ka “tas nav grūti, tas ir aizvainojoši”. Kosteņecka šobrīd strādājot pie jaunas grāmatas, kurā vēlas apkopot tautas vēstules no atmodas laikiem, ko viņai tolaik rakstīja kā starpniecei starp krieviem un latviešiem – tādu viņai esot ap 3000. “Cik cēla dvēsele latviešu tautai ir šajās vēstulēs! Biju jau to aizmirsusi šajos 25 gados. Es tagad noliecu galvu latviešu priekšā. Nekad neatteikšos no savas dzimtenes Latvijas, lai kā tur lamātu krievus, un es pati esmu krieviete, - jo man ir šī bagātība,” uzsver Kosteņecka.

Tomēr viņa skaidro, ka krieviem, kuriem nav tādas latviešu tautas mīlestības, neesot “pie kā pieķerties”. “Tādam naturalizācija izskatās pēc pazemojuma, jo viņš bija barikādēs, viņš bija gatavs atdot dzīvību, un pēkšņi viņam saka: nē, tu neesi gana lojāls - tev vēl eksāmens jākārto,” saka Kosteņecka.

Rakstniece klāsta, ka šobrīd arī pati vairs neesot lojāla. “Tai brīdī, kad visiem krieviem pateica: “Moris savu padarījis, moris var iet”, es tai brīdī avīzē “Neatkarīgā Cīņa” nodrukāju rakstu ar nosaukumu “Es nevaru nepasacīt”. Es brīdināju - tas bija 1994. gads, kad pieņēma Pilsonības likumu, - ja šobrīd atgrūdīs visus krievus a priori pēc tautības, mēs iebrauksim lielā bedrē,” atminas Kosteņecka. Pēc tam viņa no latviešiem saņēmusi nosodošas vēstules: “Mēs jums ticējām, un jūs arī esat kangars, un tagad jūs varat iet pie Ždanokas, un Ždanoka jums aplaudēs.” “Pēc 20 gadiem Ždanoka man neaplaudē. Tur, kur es biju, tur es esmu aizvien.,” uzsver rakstniece.

Kā rakstniece Kosteņecka tolaik brīdinājusi, kas būs, jo “tobrīd bija skaidra šķirtne, kas bija un kas nebija lojāli”. “Mūsdienās pilsone ir Ždanoka, pilsonis ir Rubiks. Tagad saka - lojalitāte ir, ja zina valodu. Rubiks zina valodu, Ždanoka zina valodu. Viņi sēž Eiroparlamentā. Viņi ir lojāli? Atceros kādu krievu veci, kurš sēdēja pie ugunskura un kuram sieva bija iedevusi šņabīti līdzi, lai viņš tur ziemā nenosalst, un es viņam prasu: ko ta’ jūs te darāt? Viņš man krievu valodā atbild: sēžu pret Rubiku. Lūk, viņš bija lojālāks par Rubiku, kurš šodien sēž Eiroparlamentā,” uzsver Kosteņecka.

Lai novērstu divkopienu sabiedrību, kāda ir Latvijā, Kosteņeckai prātā esot “ļoti ķecerīga doma: jābeidz pārmest krieviem, ka viņi pulcējas 9. maijā pie tā pieminekļa”. “Ja viņi demonstrētu savu okupantu psihi, viņi tur pulcētos 13. oktobrī, kad Rīgā atkal ienāca krievu armija. (…) Krievu armija, kas ienāca Latvijā, to okupēja - tas ir skaidrs. Bet krievu zaldāts, nogājis no Staļingradas līdz Pleskavai vēl savā teritorijā, - cik viņi ir samaksājuši ar savām dzīvībām? Ar savu varonību viņi to otro ļaunumu - jo fašisms jau arī nebija nekāda paradīze - tomēr uzvarēja. To noliegt nedrīkst,” saka rakstniece.

“Bet jūs to paldies nepateicāt un paši panācāt, ka viņi iet pie tā pieminekļa. (..) Pirms 15 gadiem pie tā pieminekļa cilvēki nepulcējās. Jūs paši to panācāt, nepārtraukti saucot: okupanti, okupanti! Neko citu, tikai – okupanti,” uzsver Kosteņecka.

I think I can sign my name under almost every word.

Sveiki!

I have always had a great deal of respect for Kosteņecka, who I first heard speak during Dzejnieku dienas in 1991.  She is undeniably a great patriot of the Republic of Latvia.

However, she is mistaken about at least one point:

“Bet jūs to paldies nepateicāt un paši panācāt, ka viņi iet pie tā pieminekļa. (..) Pirms 15 gadiem pie tā pieminekļa cilvēki nepulcējās. Jūs paši to panācāt, nepārtraukti saucot: okupanti, okupanti! Neko citu, tikai – okupanti,” uzsver Kosteņecka.”

I wouldn’t know whether 15 years ago in 1996 there was a demonstration, but 16 years ago on May 9, 1995, there was indeed a gathering at the Soviet monument.  This was memorable to me only because I arrived - quite jet-lagged - that morning at RIX, and was met by friends who drove me to my apartment in central Rīga on Elizabetes iela (closest cross street at Antonijas iela).  This relatively short drive from the airport via Salas tilts literally took *two hours* as a result of the traffic jams caused by the demonstration.

These details do matter, if only because locals will remember them as vividly as I remember being embarrassed in September, 1991 when I couldn’t explain to relatives and friends why the US wouldn’t and wouldn’t for weeks on end recognize Latvia’s independence, despite Iceland, and even Russia and a dozen or more western democracies having done so. 

Visu labu,

E.

That’s right, Aleksejs.  Those poor Russian occupants - heirs of yesterday’s responsible and Soviet-loyal Soviet Latvia citizens who for years during their occupation of Latvia so valiantly fought and demonstrated alongside Latvians for the “minority” rights of Latvians and other minorities in the Soviet Union - are not embraced as dependable and enthusiastic nation builders of Latvia.  It’s just perplexing why this is so.  Latvians clearly need to do more to make Russians of the occupation (and Old Believers who still believe Latvia is Russia) feel welcome and wanted.  The Russians have done everything they can possibly think to do in their Russian-thinking to demonstrate how dedicated they are to the flourishing of the Latvian language and the Latvian nation.  After all that effort, what is possibly left to do but to speak Russian and read proudly-ethnic-Russian Marina Kosteņecka in Russian in Russian newspapers, go to May 9 and commiserate about the bad Latvians who don’t appreciate how they liberated Latvia from the Latvians, vote ethnic-Russian for the Russian-nationalist (and some die-hard Communist) SC party of occupation-denying Rubiks and occupation-tepid Ushakovs, hope that SC with Zhdanoka, Rubiks, Ushakovs will hasten the advent of Latrussia and the integration of Latvians into “Russian multicultural and Russian bilingual” Latrussia.  It must be hard for Russians to look at Russia and see all that progress for other Russians and question why they are still in a country and among people who don’t appreciate their occupation heritage and history and all that they have brought to thankless Latvia.  One need only to attend May 9 to learn about all that the occupant Russians have accomplished for Latvia and how dedicated and loyal is their Latvian citizenship.  It must be hard to live in Latvia knowing that Latvia could be so much more if only Russians were in charge for once (-or once again).

Just an aside - I don’t agree with anything that Ambersun posts on this forum.  Each sentence would need to be parsed, and I have neither the time nor interest in doing so.

E.

Yawn, ambersun. I’m with Elizabete. Each sentence would need to be parsed.

Elizabete, I don’t recall May 9 being such a huge event as it has been in recent years at all. 1995, I think, would be one of those jubilee years (50th anniversary), so I would expect some gathering there. I’ve been meaning to go through the old newspapers to see when it actually started.

With Harmony Center leader Ushakov’s recognition of the occupation, reading the Russian-language sites with connection to the Russian security services has become just fascinating. For the first time, Ushakov earned an -s at the end of his name in Russian. It would signify that he sold out Russians and should no longer be considered as such. Reading short blurbed on the Regnum news agency web site, it would appear as though they are not happy with Harmony being in the government, nor are they happy with Ushakov’s recognition of the occupation. An article places quotes around the word “Russian” to describe Ushakov is just one sign. The most recent story however quotes Klementjevs saying that the goal is to break up Harmony Center. So essentially, Ushakov’s recognition of the occupation is splitting up the Harmony Center.

Hi Aleks:

Taking your observation one step further though, I don’t think a splintered, internally strifed, dishevelled SC party would serve the purposes of a much needed “steady at the keel” ruling party coalition any more than having a divided and divisive turn-back-the-clock Latvian Nationalist group participate in a ruling coalition that needs to move the country forward during tenuous economic times.

Al

Certainly. The key difference is that the Lettish fascists, as I call them, have been in power. If people want change, you cannot let the same morphed parties run the country as they have done in the last 20 years. I also take these Regnum stories to mean that they are afraid: a consolidated society is a much stronger society than a divided one. Or to quote an American politician: A House divided against itself cannot stand.

I hear what you’re saying, Aleks, but you’re argument seems to be “the same old Letts” screwed it up in the past, so how much worse could SC’s collaboration screw it up?” And….you seem to contend in previous posts that SC likely will fail and that this will help remove some of the bloom off of SC’s rose and eliminate SC’s unblemished mystique in the eyes of their adherents.

I even allow the possibility that this may well be true and play out just as you suspect it will. That, in a manner of speaking, may indeed be a good thing. But, having said that, I certainly would be pained to see the country as a whole take its eye off of the cue ball (i.e. maintaining it economic health) while these other fringe issues are resolved.

What makes me uncomfortable is that these issues are apparently being decided behind closed doors in a very non-transparent fashion after voters were led to believe whatever they wanted to believe by some very clever politicians on all sides. I see this as a recipe for an unappetizing outcome whenever a decision IS reached on which way to go because there never was an adequate public debate to shed light on where this might end up.

Al

the public debate was the election….................

there are no fascists in Latvia.

I didn’t really mean “the same old Letts,” but the same old right parties. If there were a Latvian left party, then it would have been ok. Unfortunately, because the ethnic question was central when the independence was restored, Latvia’s political spectrum is determined not by the economic issues, but by the ethnic issue. So instead like in the rest of Europe where the left supports a huge government role in people’s life while the right wants to limit the government or in the US where these roles are reversed, in Latvia the key question was the ethnicity.

So we have lived in that soup for almost all 20 years as the economy went off the rails, it changed. Suddenly, both Russians and Latvians found themselves without work, packing suitcases to go to the greener pastures in Ireland. Latvia has been losing all of its people, so I doubt it can afford to be too picky about the ethnicity.

Another wrench in the political wheel was Zatlers with his new party, making the first genuine attempt to reach out to the Harmony’s electorate - the Russians. It completely changes the rules of the game. I doubt that Rubiks will remain in Harmony if it joins the government. Even if Harmony screws it up, it will no longer be an anathema to take in Harmony Center. If they get beaten at the polls, or if the government collapses, that is life. The nationalists will get in, but at least we will know there is an alternative to the past rule of right-wing parties.

I still believe that the benefit of taking Harmony in offsets the costs of leaving it out. As the coalition formula moves from the rainbow coalition to four-party, and now back to three-party coalition, I checked out the 1991 referendum results on the Latvian independence when all residents—including the occupiers sans the quotation marks—participated. I would like to remind readers that according to the 1989 census there were only 52 percent of ethnic Latvians in the republic at the time due to the russification policies. Others, I’m sure, will correct me if I am wrong.  The voter turnout was at 87.56 percent. For Latvia’s independence voted a total of 73.68 percent. Assuming every single ethnic Latvian voted for independence, we can suspect that many Russians voted for Latvia’s independence in 1991.

Also consider that the Soviet military was still present. The vote took place a bit more than one month after the famous events in January 1991 which Kostenecka describes as an interethnic affair. Rubiks and Zhdanoka at the time were marginalized. They were seen as communist dinosaurs. Yet, look where we are right now.

PS About closed doors. It is the nature of the forming a coalition government. The coalition agreement will be made public when it is signed.

peter B - 03 October 2011 07:54 AM

the public debate was the election….................

there are no fascists in Latvia.

Just as there are no occupiers :) My tongue was firmly in my cheek when I said it.

Pete:

I sincerely hope that you don’t believe your own soundbite reply. If voters - not just in Latvia - bought in to the idea that an election, by itself, constituted a complete and definitive public debate and not just the beginning of a discussion (and that in turn obviated the need to hold elected officials accountable), then democracy everywhere might be in a heap of trouble and make totalitarianism a rather attractive alternative….at least then you know what you’re getting.

As for there being no fascists in Latvia - or the US, Germany, Norway, etc., etc. - there are unfortunately some fringe fanatics everywhere, I suspect, and it does our collective credibility little good to advertise to the rest of the world that we alone have achieved a fascist-free zone because not only will the rest of the world not believe us on that point, but they will then have yet another reason to discount Latvian opinions when they DO make other VALID points.

Al

More and more bizarre things are happening. Kārlis Streips is talking to the Russian channel TV-5. In Latvian.

Maybe we will get to see the radical left drop out of Harmony and the radical right drop out of Vienotiba. That would leave the centrists together with ZRP. I could get behind that.
This BS about a rainbow coalition that Aboltina is spouting is embarrassing, apparently they are okay with ZZS being invited back in if it means VL/TB/LNNK can play together with Harmony, V, and ZRP.
I’d rather see Harmony in the coalition way, way before ZZS.

Maybe we will get to see the radical left drop out of Harmony and the radical right drop out of Vienotiba. That would leave the centrists together with ZRP. I could get behind that.

That is my hope too.