DELEGATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA

AT THE CSCE REVIEW CONFERENCE

INTERVENTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES

AT THE WORKING GROUP III

Budapest, 3 November 1994

Mr Chairman,

I would like to present few Lithuanian observations on the matters regarding national minorities in the light of implementation of respective CSCE commitments.

From the very beginning of the re-established Lithuanian state the question of national minoritieswas attributed enduring attention by the Lithuanian authorities. Lithuania regards full protection of minorities rights and their harmonius integration into society as the essential prerequisite of building a democratic state.

Such approach was not an easy task to implement. It goes without saying tthat the so Soviet colonization policies have affected demographic developments in the Lithuanian society, as well as introduced potentially destabilizing disparities in the social and economic evolution of the different ethnic groups. Furthermore, the process of gradual change in this field was hampered by the constant outside interference which, until the very demise of the Soviet empire, has used the issue of minorities as the tool to provoke tensions in the newly restored state.

The policy of interethnic harmony was reflected and upheld by numerous legislative acts and comprehensive steps aimed at their implementation. Law on Citizenship which pursued the introduction of zero option, providing for eligibility of virtually all country residents to the Lithuanian citizenship, Law on Ethinc Communities establishing the complex of rights of national minorities which compares favourably with international standards and in certain aspects is even more advanced, could be mentioned among most important steps undertaken by the Lithuanian autorities.

Despite the self-obvius problems which are still sometimes faced and which could explained as pertaining both to the ongoing process of crystallization of the society and economic and social circumstances which limit ability of the state to assure desired level of support, one could easily observe that harmoniiius co-existence of multinational society in Lithuzania is the not an objective but the achieved goal rather.

Far from lacking necessary sense of self-criticism and fully realizing that there are areas which call for further improvement, we still fell that our pattern of interethnic tolerance policy enables us to possess relevant expertise in assessing situation of national minorities elsewhere. Particularly, as regards the state of affairs of Lithuanians residing abroad. Both historical and political reasons have determined the fate of hundreds of thousands of Lithuanians to leave their homeland. We are happy to notice that in most of the accassions their communities reside in the democratic societies able at guaranteeing to the fullest extent their rights.

A number of most recent developments in our relationship with the neighbouring countries have also resulted in positive shifts which have yet greater potential in future. In this context, I would like to express our belief that the understanding we enjoy with our Polish friends, particularly after the ratification of the Lithuanian-Polish treaty, lays down a solid foundation for further co-operation in magnifying the role of respectively Polish ethnic community in Lithuania and the Lithuanian one in Poland into an important factor contributing towards closer ties between two countries.

At the same time we cannot escape noticing that there are areas where progress reached so far is hardly satisfactory. That regads the situation of the Lithuanian community residing in the Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation. Especially alarming is the situation in the field of the education in their mother tongue. Despite the fact that Lithuanians make up 2% of the region population, there is no Lithuanian secondary school, adn only three Lithuanian classes at the Russian schools. By the way, the wages to the teachers concerned are paid by the Lithuanian Government. In the whole region there is only one Lithuanian group at the kindergarten. We do not wish to draw any comparisons, but the russian minority in Lithuania has 79 Russian kindergartens, 84 secondary schools, Russian taught groups at virtually all universities, everything fully financed by the Lithuanian state. Lithuanian authorities also support financially six newspapers in Russian, broadcasting of Russian TV and radio. Lithuanian minorit

y in the Kaliningrad has no means of mass media in mother tongue, and no steps were undertaken from the Russian side to create conditions for at least rebroadcasting of Lithuanian radio stations.

We fully realized that Russian minority in Lithuania is more numerous than a group of Lithuanians residing in the Kaliningrad region. We also comprehend the enormity of other tasks which the Russian authorities encounter in the process of economic and social reforms. We hope, however, that these factors will not affect full and genuine implemntation of the CSCE commitments pertaining to the rights of national minorities. While talking about commitments, I would like to recall, that there is already a solid bilaterial legal basis in our relationship with the Russian Federation in the filed of national minorities. The inter-governmental agreement On the Co-operation in the economic and Social-Cultural Development of the Kaliningrad Region of 1991, as well as the agreement On the Co-operation in the Field of Education, signed in 1993 by the the respective ministries of education offers substantial framework for improving the situation. The only necessary component is the desire to put these agreements into pra

ctice. The only noticable result we have witnessed recently was rather discouraging. A monument in the honour of Herkus Mantas, the last chief of Prussian uprisal against the Teutonic Order, who is viewed in Lithuania as a symbol of Baltic struggle for independence and selfidentity and was erected at the expense of Lithuanian state, was brought down by the order from the Kaliningrad region administration.