Latvian Newspaper Laiks on Facebook
Ņujorkā kopš 1949.gada iznākošais laikraksts LAIKS ir plašākais latviešu izdevums ārpus Latvijas.

Samnera Velsa (Sumner Welles) loma Latvijas okupācijas neatzīšanas polītikā un viņa godināšana Rīgā
24.07.2012

Publiskā telpa, vai tā būtu iela, parks, laukums (tāpat kā monēta, pastmarka un naudaszīme), ir sava veida skola, kas ik dienu atgādina sabiedrībai notikumus un cilvēkus, kuŗi veidojuši tās likteņus un apziņu. Ielu nosaukumi vai pieminekļi ir saite ar pagātni; tas ir pamats, uz kā mēs stāvam, un attaisnojums mūsu eksistencei. Ne vienmēr pietiek uzņēmības izlasīt skaidrojošu grāmatu par vēsturi, taču, gaŗām ejot, pamanot pieminekli vai paceļot acis uz ielas nosaukumu, mums kā īsā lekcijā tiek atgādināts, kas mēs esam un kā iepriekšējās paaudzes un labvēļi ir izkaŗojuši mums brīvību, pie reizes atgādinot pienākumu to sargāt.

Šis bija iemesls, kāpēc Okupācijas mūzeja Vēstures komisija nolēma iepazīstināt Latvijas iedzīvotājus ar kādu aizliegtu un aizmirstu notikumu un ar cilvēku, kas uzturēja dzīvu mūsu saiti ar nolaupīto brīvību un neatkarību. Pieminot un godinot šo cilvēku, mēs patiesībā nomaksājam vairāk nekā septiņdesmit gadu vecu parādu Latvijas, pareizāk sakot, visu Baltijas tautu tiesiskās eksistences sargam.

1940. gada 23. jūlijā tā laika Amerikas ārlietu ministra vietnieks (Under Secretary of State) Samners Velss nosodīja Padomju Savienības vardarbīgo iebrukumu Baltijas valstīs un deklarēja Amerikas ārpolītikas nostāju, kas neatzina okupācijas leģitimitāti ne de iure , ne de facto. Šī polītika turpinājās piecdesmit vienu gadu, un tai pievienojās gandrīz katra rietumu valsts un demokratiska valsts. Pusgadsimtu tiesisko Latviju brīvajā pasaulē pārstāvēja tās diplomāti. “Padomju” Latvija tātad bija atzīta nevis par tiesisku PSRS sastāvdaļu, bet gan par vardarbīgi okupētu territoriju. Drīz pēc neatzīšanas deklarācijas Samneram Velsam nācās šo nostāju aizstāvēt pret PSRS vēstnieka Vašingtonā Omanska iebildumiem. Velss noraidīja Omanska argumentu pret ASV neatzīšanas polītiku, paskaidrojot, ka Amerikas valdība “principā neredz atsķirību starp Krievijas uzkundzēšanos Baltijas tautām un mazo Eiropas kaimiņu okupāciju, ko savulaik bija īstenojusi Vācija”. Vēl divdesmit divas reizes Velsam nācās atkārtot Omanskim Amerikas polītiku - Baltijas okupācijas neatzīšanu. Pārzinādams Latvijas un PSRS diplomātisko attiecību vēsturi, viņš atvairīja katru argumentu par okupācijas atzīšanu, aizrādot, ka tie ir pretrunā ar iepriekšējiem PSRS līgumiem un principiem. Amerika noraidīja arī Maskavas pretenzijas pēc Amerikā deponētāa Latvijas zelta un Latvijas tirdzniecības flotes.

Latvijas vēstnieks Alfrēds Bīlmanis iesaistīja Latvijas mazo tirdzniecības floti kaŗā pret nacistisko Vāciju, nodotot floti ASV Jūrniecības komisijai, kuŗas vadībā Latvijas kuģi zem Latvijas karoga brauca Rietumu sabiedroto uzdevumā. Pec pirmā zaudējuma kuģi tika apbruņoti. Tā bija vienīgā leģitimā Latvijas valstiskā piedalīšanās Otrā pasaules kaŗā. [For PC, especially, and others to note about Professor Alfreds Bilmanis, author of A HISTORY OF LATVIA, dedicated “to the Latvian people”  - Princeton Univ Press, 1951.]

Velsam nācās atvairīt spiedienu arī no rietumu sabiedroto puses. Lielbritanijas ārlietu ministrs Īdens un vēstnieks Vašingtonā lords Halifakss, gan atzīdami savu cinisko rīcību pret Baltijas valstīm, tomēr bija gatavi pieņemt Padomju puses prasības. Velsa neapstrīdamais arguments bija: “Atzīstot brutālo Krievijas iekaŗojumu Baltijā, mēs atteiktos no būtiskām morālām pozicijām, kas ir mūsu spēks. Kur tad paliktu mūsu pārmetumi Hitleram, ka viņš apspiež holandiešus, beļģus un citas brīvas tautas?” 1941. gada februārī Velss atkārtoja, ka ārpolītikai “jaunā [pēckaŗa] pasaulē jāveido jauni principiāli pamati”, noraidot aprēķina un izdevīguma polītiku.

Samnera Velsa stingrā stāja diplomātijā ievadīja Latvijas un pārējo Baltijas valstu leģitimo eksistenci, kas netika pārtraukta līdz pat 1991. gadam, kad Latvija atkal stāvēja “uz savām kājam”.

Lai īstenotu Velsa piemiņas iedzīvināšanu, bija jāpārvar zināmi šķēršļi. Latvijas galvaspilsētā “trūka” ielas vai laukumu, kur sabiedrības apziņā jau nebūtu nostiprinājušās senākas saistības. Bija arī daži polītiski iebildumi. Risinājums radās līdz ar ASV jaunās vēstniecības ēkas būvniecību. Ar Rīgas domes, ASV Valsts departamenta, Latvijas Ārlietu ministrijas un Okupācijas mūzeja atbalstu un piekrišanu jaunās vēstniecības adrese tagad ir Samnera Velsa iela 1!

Notikuma nozīmi izcēla ASV ārlietu ministres Hilarijas Klintones piedalīšanās ielas jaunā nosaukumu atklāšanā.

Tagad ikviens gaŗāmgājējs, paceļot acis, saņem īsu skaidrojumu: bija okupācija, to ASV neatzina par leģitimu, Latvijas tiesību “sargs” Amerikā bija Samners Velss.

Paulis Lazda
http://www.uwec.edu/newsbureau/release/past/2000/00-12/121200lazda.html

Little bit late off the mark http://riga.usembassy.gov/pr_20120627_en.html 
Elsewhere, there was even a silly little argument about the Latvianization of Mr Welles’ name. Latvian/Americans felt it was silly to change the guys name to call a street after him. Curious that.

Tom,
Now back to thanks for Sumner Welles, someone I’m sure you learned about and knew to appreciate when still living in the U.S. for his moral stance on the illegal occupation of the Baltic States. 

Google assisted translation:
On July 23, 1940, the United States Under Secretary of State, Sumner Welles, condemned the violent invasion by the Soviet Union of the Baltic states and declared the foreign policy position of the United States, which did not recognize the legitimacy of the occupation, either de jure or de facto. This policy lasted fifty-one years, and in this the United States was joined by almost every western and democratic state. For half a century legal Latvia was represented in the free world by legal Latvia’s diplomats [such as Alfreds Bilmanis]. “Soviet” Latvia was therefore not recognized as part of the USSR, but a violently occupied territory.

Thanks to Paulis Lazda [real Latvian historian] in Laiks:

1940. gada 23. jūlijā tā laika Amerikas ārlietu ministra vietnieks (Under Secretary of State) Samners Velss nosodīja Padomju Savienības vardarbīgo iebrukumu Baltijas valstīs un deklarēja Amerikas ārpolītikas nostāju, kas neatzina okupācijas leģitimitāti ne de iure , ne de facto. Šī polītika turpinājās piecdesmit vienu gadu, un tai pievienojās gandrīz katra rietumu valsts un demokratiska valsts. Pusgadsimtu tiesisko Latviju brīvajā pasaulē pārstāvēja tās diplomāti. “Padomju” Latvija tātad bija atzīta nevis par tiesisku PSRS sastāvdaļu, bet gan par vardarbīgi okupētu territoriju.

Back to Bilmanis:
“Latvijas vēstnieks Alfrēds Bīlmanis iesaistīja Latvijas mazo tirdzniecības floti kaŗā pret nacistisko Vāciju, nodotot floti ASV Jūrniecības komisijai, kuŗas vadībā Latvijas kuģi zem Latvijas karoga brauca Rietumu sabiedroto uzdevumā. Pec pirmā zaudējuma kuģi tika apbruņoti. Tā bija vienīgā leģitimā Latvijas valstiskā piedalīšanās Otrā pasaules kaŗā. [For PC, especially, and others to note about Professor Alfreds Bilmanis, author of A HISTORY OF LATVIA, dedicated “to the Latvian people”  - Princeton Univ Press, 1951.]”

English translation:
“Latvia’s Ambassador Alfred Bilmanis involved the small Latvian merchant fleet in the war against Nazi Germany by giving the Latvian fleet to the the U.S. Maritime Commission, under whose direction the Latvian ships flying the flag of Latvia sailed on behalf of the US and Western Allies. After the first defeat, the ships were armed. This was the only legitimate Latvian state participation in World War II.”

By a strange coincidence, I posted this exactly 5 years ago:

Posted 30 July 2007 04:55 PM

>>>Yes, the Ciltvaira project was one of the more interesting (if totally unrewarding financially) projects I’ve ever worked on.  Seems only the Russian-language “Chas” was interested in doing any legwork on uncovering the details of this little-known story of Latvian sailors in WWII.  I did the archival research from the NY Times and other papers for Alex Krasnitski, who was the lead reporter on this, as well as some calls to captain’s widows in the US.

The highlight for me when this was all over was a spur-of-the-moment road trip with my son Voldis from NYC to Nags Head, North Carolina on May 8, 2003 for the joint overseas ceremony with the Latvian counterpart happening in Riga.  That morning, we stood on a stretch of beach near E. Ciltvaira Street in Nags Head with Yonkers Mac. Juris Saivars and local dignitaries for a prayer in Latvian and some speeches, followed by a 21-gun salute by the Coast Guard and a Sea Rescue diver who took a Latvian flag-colored wreath and swam out toward the wreck pictured in the link you sent.

This past May I met with Alex in Riga and he took me to see the memorial plaque for the sailors of the Ciltvaira and its sister ships.  You need a guide to find it unfortunately.  It’s on the side of a crumbling building that once housed the Latvian Naval Collega on the outskirts of Vecriga on the krastmala.  But I guess it’s better than nothing….

Back in 2003, the Latvian press eventually picked up the story.  For those new to this list who may not know what this is all about, here is a nice summary article of that day: >>>

http://www.balticsworldwide.com/Ciltvaira _ Latvian Sailors.htm

ak

ak,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latvian_fleet_that_fought_for_the_Allies_in_World_War_II

http://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/1267.html

But we digress and back to the real point of the thread. 
From Wikipedia on Sumner Welles and his persistent stand against the Russian occupation of Latvia,  his feeling that the plebiscites supporting the annexations were “faked,” and that the annexation was “indefensible from every moral standpoint…” . 

Soviet occupation of the Baltics
On July 23, 1940, following the principles of the Stimson Doctrine, Welles issued a statement that became known as the Welles Declaration. In the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of August 23, 1939, Germany agreed to allow the Soviet Union to annex the three Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Welles condemned those actions and refused to recognize the legitimacy of Soviet rule in those countries. More than 50 countries later followed the U.S. in this position.

The Declaration was a source of contention during the subsequent alliance between the U.S., Great Britain, and the Soviet Union, but Welles persistently defended it.[27] In a discussion with the media he asserted that the USSR had maneuvered to give “an odor of legality to acts of aggression for purposes of the record”.[28][29]

In a 1942 memorandum describing his conversations with British Ambassador Lord Halifax, Welles stated that he would have preferred to characterize the plebiscites supporting the annexations as “faked”.[30] In April 1942 he wrote that the annexation was “not only indefensible from every moral standpoint, but likewise extraordinarily stupid.” He believed any concession on the Baltic issue would set a precedent that would lead to additional border struggles in eastern Poland and elsewhere.[31]

ak,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latvian_fleet_that_fought_for_the_Allies_in_World_War_II

Thank you, ambersun.  Umm, where do you think that wiki entry came from?

And I apologize from deviating from the subject of the thread.  I am so guilty of that.

tata

Yes, “back to real point of this thread.”

>>>From Wikipedia on Sumner Welles and his persistent stand against the Russian occupation of Latvia>>>

Seems like if you’re going to talk about Welles’ persistent stand against the “Russian” occupation, you ought to pick quotations that support that idea.  Not the ones you posted, starting with the Title.  I’m sure if you dig around you might find some where he talks about “Russian” vs Soviet occupation.  If you do, I’d love to see them.

ak

ps   As someone asked recently, do you even read what you post?

A complete diversion except for the name ‘..Sumner..”

“Wiki:
Julius Sumner Miller was born in Billerica, Massachusetts the youngest of nine children. His father was Latvian, his Lithuanian mother spoke 12 languages.[1][2]

Miller graduated with a Philosophy degree and a Master’s in Physics from Boston University in 1933 but due to the Depression worked as a butler for a wealthy Boston doctor for the next two years during which time he married the doctor’s maid, Alice Brown; they were to have no children, but he was to go on to reach millions of children through his popular science programs.”

I loved watching his TV show “Why is it so?”

Sorry to rain on the Sumner Welles parade, but people should really read “An Intelligent American’s Guide to the Peace”, edited (“general editorship”) by Welles after the war (Dryden Press, 1945).

Latvia = more Fascist than Italy, Soviet relations cooled with rise of Fascism in Latvia, Nazis and Germans influenced and were privileged. The June 1940 Soviet invasion is characterized as ... well, you just have to read it, it never happened:

    WORLD WAR II: 1939-1944: Germany had refused to guarantee either the neutrality or inviolability of Latvia in 1934. Despite this implicit warning, the Latvian government refused in 1939 to permit an Anglo-Russian guarantee of her integrity on the ground that it was an affront to her independence.
    In September 1939, after the German invasion of Poland, the U.S.S.R. demanded of Latvia certain facilities for defense, which were granted. The following June, however, the Soviet Union charged Latvia with acting in the interests of Germany. Thereupon, the Latvian government (together with many German nobles) fled to the Reich.  In July, Latvia held a plebiscite which ratified her status as a new Soviet republic. The exiled government denounced this action as an election held under duress.
    The following year Nazi armies occupied Latvia, and Riga became the capital of the Nazi-designated province of “Ostland.” German colonists move in, and violently pro-Nazi Latvian noblemen recovered their lost lands and social importance under the new German puppet regime. It was not until 1944 that Soviet armies reconquered the region from the determined Nazi occupants.

Lithuania also joined the USSR in a “popular plebiscite”, at least there it’s mentioned that the Soviets entered in 1940 after the Lithuanian government “connived at the kidnapping of Soviet soldiers.” Estonia “sabotaged defense arrangements”, followed again by a plebiscite to join the USSR. Poland, too, is denounced for “refusing Russian aid” in March, 1939. As for collusion, as we know now, in partitioning Poland… “The Germans expected to take Poland within the week.” The Soviets invaded to protect the populace and after “sharp negotiations” obtained over half of Polish territory. Blah Blah Blah…

Finland, too, was invaded after rejecting perfectly reasonable Soviet demands, Finland was far too heavily armed merely to defend herself, also, another country refusing a guarantee of her integrity from Britain, France, and the USSR.

The article on the Soviet Union mentions nothing about Poland or the Baltics, only the war against Hitler following the German invasion and Soviet clap-trap about needing to insure it has friendly nations on its borders, etc.

Yes, indeed, our Ulmanis-more-Fascist-than-Mussolini pro-Nazi government all fled to Germany with the German nobility, they weren’t deported or killed by the Soviets, all per “edited by Sumner Welles.”

I thought folks should know what a load of pro-Soviet propagandic utter crap was lent legitimacy by Sumner’s name. We were:
> expendable pawns before WWII, we were betrayed long before Teheran and Yalta (Latvian et al. objections to Soviet guaranteed security did not torpedo security negotiations)
> the war merely affirmed our expendability
> our extinction as a nation-state was justified through being vilified after the war

It was only when the Baltics became a useful symbol and pawn in a new conflict that any sort of “moral” conduct by the great nation states materialized in our defense. I guess this answers what next I need to digitize and make available for a wider audience.

ak,
Maybe you first need to examine your unrelenting jabs at Latvians like the latest: “Seems only the Russian-language “Chas” was interested in doing any legwork on uncovering the details of this little-known story of Latvian sailors in WWII.”  Next, it would help to speak honestly and openly about the occupation of Latvia by Russians from Soviet Russia.  Your hysterical and unexamined defense of Russians while criticizing Latvians at any small opportunity prevents understanding between Russians and Latvians as is needed.  If the time-wasting and fatiguing denial of the facts of occupation by the Russians of Latvia and Russia was not still an issue as it should not be after all these many years of undeniable facts, I would not have to make a point of the Russian occupation of Latvia.  The Russians would long ago have acknowledged their role in WWII in the Russian/German Pact known now as the Molotov (Russian)/Ribbentrop (German) Pact planned from the the Russian city of Moscow and the German city of Berlin, signed in MOSCOW. 
From Wiki: “The Treaty of Non-Aggression between Germany and the Soviet Union,[1] also known as the Nazi–Soviet Pact and the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact (after its chief architects, Soviet foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov and German foreign minister Joachim von Ribbentrop) was a non-aggression pact, signed in Moscow in the late hours of 23 August 1939…”
Maybe you personally as self-identified “ethnically Russian” need to see “Soviets” where you don’t want to see Russians but it doesn’t change the reality on the ground in Latvia when it was occupied by the Russians.  It would be appropriate for Russians to make the connection after all these years and we could all move on.  This would be a helpful postion for you to take when commenting on an article that is about the occupation of Latvia. 
Maybe next deal with the agenda back in 2003 of your Russian journalist writing for the Russian-language paper CHAS who also fails to mention critical and relevant historical facts like the Russian occupation of Latvia. The story of the Latvian fleet fighting as free Latvians under the flag of Latvia’s independence loses much of the story without the appropriate and elucidating historical context of the Russian/German Pact that was to deprive Latvia of independence and make it “Russian” territory.
Here’s the Ciltvaira story as it was not in CHAS for Russians to know in the context of occupation of Latvia by Russians:

In Latvia, a remembrance of sailors from a forgotten fleet in the fight against Nazi Germany
MICHAEL TARM
Associated Press
RIGA, Latvia - More than 60 years after they joined U.S. Atlantic convoys in running the gantlet of German U-boats during World War II, 164 Latvian sailors were honored Thursday on both sides of that ocean.
The men were crews on eight Latvian-flagged freighters that defied Soviet orders and remained at sea after Red Army troops occupied the Baltic Sea nation on June 17, 1940 [my bold].
The newspaper Chas ran a several-part series about the fleet last month, telling Latvians about the sailors, their exploits and role in World War II.
The story - banned from history books and newspapers during five decades of Soviet rule - came as a surprise to virtually everyone in the country of 2.4 million that, over the past decade, has been rediscovering a history that was suppressed.
“It was a tremendous injustice that these men were never known in their own motherland, Latvia,” said Alex Krasnitsky, an organizer of Thursday’s memorials.
Commemorations included the laying of wreaths simultaneously in the Gulf of Riga and above the site where one of the ships, the Ciltvaira, was sunk off the coast of Nags Head, North Carolina, in 1942. A plaque honoring the sailors was also unveiled in the capital, Riga.
Aboard the Latvian naval frigate Virsaitis, Ilmars Leshiskis lowered brightly-colored wreaths into the calm, gray Baltic Sea.
As the wreathes broke apart, sailors and officers aboard the ship saluted, a Luthern and Orthodox priest flanking them.
“This is a very emotional day for me,” Leshiskis, commander of Latvia’s navy, told The Associated Press aboard the ship. “Those merchant sailors made a dramatic choice to go to war (alongside) the Americans - something they didn’t have to do. They were very brave men.”
He said the memorial would be an annual event as a way to commemorate the sailors’ memory.
Only one sailor aboard the ships is believed to still be alive. He lives in Boston and his family, who wouldn’t release his name, said he was too frail to travel.
After annexing Latvia, Josef Stalin’s regime ordered all Latvian vessels to return home, and threatened to deport the families of any rebellious sailors to labor camps. Dozens of ships did return - and some of their crews were exiled to Siberia and were never heard from again.
But crews on the eight ships refused the order and, along with Latvian embassies in Washington and London, became the last remnants of an independent Latvia.
After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the ships ferried coal, rubber and other raw materials needed by the United States to wage war in Europe. By this time, the Latvian nation had already been seized by the Nazis, an occupation that would last until 1944.
The Ciltvaira was the first of the Latvian ships destroyed. Within nine months, five others sank - the Everasma, Abgara, Everalda, Regent and Everelza. Only the Everagra and Ke’gums survived the war.

ambersun,

>>>Maybe you first need to examine your unrelenting jabs at Latvians like the latest: “Seems only the Russian-language “Chas” was interested in doing any legwork on uncovering the details of this little-known story of Latvian sailors in WWII.”>>>

Just the facts, ma’am, just the facts.  On a personal note, I was puzzled and disappointed by the lack of interest of the Latvian media.  I’m glad to have done my part to bring this little known piece of history to light.

>>>Next, it would help to speak honestly and openly about the occupation of Latvia by Russians from Soviet Russia.  Your hysterical and unexamined defense of Russians while criticizing Latvians at any small opportunity prevents understanding between Russians and Latvians as is needed.>>>

Please show me my “hysterical and unexamined defense of Russians” in anything I have posted here over the years.

>>>If the time-wasting and fatiguing denial of the facts of occupation by the Russians of Latvia and Russia was not still an issue as it should not be after all these many years of undeniable facts, I would not have to make a point of the Russian occupation of Latvia.>>>

As to Russian vs Soviet (and all the bigoted anti-Russian ethnic remarks) that have been posted on LOL over the past 15 years, let me go on record here that I have NEVER responded to such because that would be time-wasting and pointless.  Nor have I ever participated in discussions of “Russian vs Soviet” usage, for the same reasons. 

I responded to YOUR FALSE ATTRIBUTION to the usage of “Russian” by an American diplomat who seems to have consistently used “Soviet,” “USSR,” etc.  in the very clip you posted.  I personally don’t care if you use “Russian” in your hysterical, tedious rants; you are irrelevant.  But what you did in this case is simply intellectually dishonest and I called you on it, that’s all.

ak

ps Thank you for posting additional material on the Latvian ships.  I hope people here read it.  And I’m glad we did manage to get AP to write a good piece, in lieu of little interest by the Latvian media.

ps The “CHAS” article, which is extensively quoted by the AP writer, makes it very clear that the sailors refused to fight for EITHER of the occupying regimes, Nazi or Soviet.  I’m sure the readers of “CHAS” got the point (even if some didn’t like it).  Shame you didn’t.

ak

P. Vecrumba,
Here’s the value of “Sumner Welles” and the facts and issues that first need to be known before bringing on the rain: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welles_Declaration

The Welles Declaration, issued on July 23, 1940 by United States Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles, then acting Secretary of State, condemned what the U.S. and the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) saw as the USSR’s annexation of the Baltic states and initiated its refusal to recognize the legitimacy of Soviet control over these three states.[1] It was an application of the Stimson Doctrine to the Baltic issue.[2] The Declaration was consistent with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s attitude towards territorial expansion, and reflected the views held by the highest levels of the Roosevelt administration.[3]
/.../
The Welles Declaration established a five-decade non-recognition of the Baltic States’ annexation.[4] The document had major significance for overall U.S. policy toward Europe in the critical year of 1940.[5] While the U.S. did not engage the Soviet Union militarily in the region, the Declaration enabled the Baltic states to maintain independent diplomatic missions, and Executive Order 8484 protected Baltic financial assets. Its substance was supported by subsequent U.S. presidents and Congressional resolutions. The Baltic states re-established their independence in 1990.
/.../
The Welles Declaration was written by Loy W. Henderson in consultation with Welles and Roosevelt. Welles would go on to participate in the creation of the Atlantic Charter, which stated that territorial adjustments should be made in accordance with the wishes of the peoples concerned.[16] He increasingly served as acting Secretary of State during Cordell Hull’s illnesses.[17] Henderson, then the State Department’s Director of the Office of European Affairs, was married to a Latvian woman.[18] He had opened an American Red Cross office in Kaunas, Lithuania after World War I and served in the Eastern European Division of the State Department for 18 years.[19]

In a conversation on the morning of July 23, Welles asked Henderson to prepare a press release “expressing sympathy for the people of the Baltic States and condemnation of the Soviet action.”[19][20] After reviewing the statement’s initial draft, Welles emphatically expressed his opinion that it was not strong enough. In the presence of Henderson, Welles called Roosevelt and read the draft to him. Roosevelt and Welles agreed that it needed strengthening. Welles then reformulated several sentences and added others which apparently had been suggested by the President. According to Henderson, “President Roosevelt was indignant at the manner in which the Soviet Union annexed the Baltic States and personally approved the condemnatory statement issued by Under Secretary Welles on the subject.”[19] The declaration was made public, and telegraphed to the American Embassy in Moscow, later in the day.[19][21]
Text of declaration
The statement read:
  During these past few days the devious processes whereunder the political independence and territorial integrity of the three small Baltic Republics – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania – were to be deliberately annihilated by one of their more powerful neighbors, have been rapidly drawing to their conclusion.

  From the day when the peoples of those Republics first gained their independent and democratic form of government the people of the United States have watched their admirable progress in self-government with deep and sympathetic interest.

  The policy of this Government is universally known. The people of the United States are opposed to predatory activities no matter whether they are carried on by the use of force or by the threat of force. They are likewise opposed to any form of intervention on the part of one state, however powerful, in the domestic concerns of any other sovereign state, however weak.

  These principles constitute the very foundations upon which the existing relationship between the twenty-one sovereign republics of the New World rests.

  The United States will continue to stand by these principles, because of the conviction of the American people that unless the doctrine in which these principles are inherent once again governs the relations between nations, the rule of reason, of justice and of law – in other words, the basis of modern civilization itself – cannot be preserved.
/... ./

Next, for the “historians” who want to delve deeper and read more to really know what Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, and any members of their WWII political staffs writing memoirs really had to say about the Baltic States, get out the umbrellas.  This should be a big clue about who really needs “little Latvia” if not the Latvians themselves.  Nothing like having to grow up and face harsh reality before it’s too late - unless it’s already too late.

ak,

“Russian” and “Soviet” are interchangeable among non-diplomats.  Look at May 9 in Latvia or Russia.  You can’t be the patriotic “Russian” who claims “Soviet Red Army” glory for “liberation” one day,  and the next wash your hands of “Soviet Red Army” occupation because now you are only the “Russian.”

Your Chas journalist had the agenda not to feature the tragedy of Latvians valiantly losing their lives for a free Latvia against all foreign “occupiers” but to make Latvia full of all kinds of “heroes” no matter who they fought for.  Fighting “for Latvia” is not like “liberating Latvia” on May 9.  Read what he wrote.

Stop with the tiresome name-calling when addressing me.

>>>“Russian” and “Soviet” are interchangeable among non-diplomats.  Look at May 9 in Latvia or Russia.  You can’t be the patriotic “Russian” who claims “Soviet Red Army” glory for “liberation” one day,  and the next wash your hands of “Soviet Red Army” occupation because now you are only the “Russian.”<<<

Blah-blah.

>>>Your Chas journalist had the agenda not to feature the tragedy of Latvians valiantly losing their lives for a free Latvia against all foreign “occupiers” but to make Latvia full of all kinds of “heroes” no matter who they fought for.  Fighting “for Latvia” is not like “liberating Latvia” on May 9.  Read what he wrote.<<<

More projection of your own muddled thoughts onto others.  When will you ever stop (purely rhetorical)?

>>>Stop with the tiresome name-calling when addressing me.<<<

You don’t have a name.  I don’t know who you are.  Tiresome anonymous trolls are fair game.  When will you own up to your actual identity?  I don’t mind anonymous posters, as a rule, when they post comments on subjects discussed.  But you are a self-proclaimed great educator, defender, inspiration for Latvians in their own country and abroad, who routinely questions the motives and identities of real people while hiding behind a silly nom de plume.  What are you afraid/ashamed of?

Tell you what.  I’ll stop addressing you and your tedious rants completely, provided you don’t drag me into them (whether I belong in them or not).  Or post lies; I may call you out on that.  Deal? (Sorry, that was another question.  We all know you don’t answer them).

ak