08-27-2008, 05:35 PM
independent Wrote:As I say I believe that big majority of people in those countries didn't want to join = occupation
But I was only wondering how easily and without any resistance was it done. Thats why I think
that there might have been involved some kind of political treason.
For me it is strange when from Estonia came 3000 volunteers to support us at Winter War.
But in Estonia was done nothing when needed.
Many Thanks to Salomo who answered to it.
However I noticed that Russian officials coined a different political vocabulary. Talking their terms explanation might look like this:
Hitler and Stalin were looking for the way how to make their peacekeeping missions in Europe more effective. So the two partners decided to divide the continent into their respective areas of responsibility and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and its additional protocols were concluded between them.
The cooperation proved to be very fruitful in compelling the Polish authorities to peace. Then Russians started peacemaking operation in Finland. Although the operation was not finished completely, it served a good lesson to the aggressive regimes in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The USSR delivered very open messages to the leaders of these states: let us in so that we may defend our citizens in your countries or we launch our peacemaking operation upon you, too. Having witnessed the consequences of peacemaking in Finland and Poland, the Baltic States made no organized military resistance at that time.
But did it help these countries to escape from justice? No. Logically, some Estonians and Latvians later joined German peacemakers. Latvians were very brave defending Kurzeme but were overtaken by Russian peacemakers. Lithuanians organized active resistance after WWII but were forced into peace anyway. The difference was minor: bandits lost just a bit less than fascists.