- July 3, 2013
- 361
Presidency in the shadow of a scandal: how Landsbergis was playing dumb
The inauguration of the Lithuanian Presidency over the European Union was disturbed by a verbal attack on Prof. Mirosław Piotrowski, an MEP for Poland, by Vytautas Landsbergis for the former’s calling on the Lithuanian authorities to end the persecution of the Polish minority in Lithuania. Landsbergis said that Piotrowski’s words were lies that came from Polish nationalists in Lithuania. Landbergis’s attack was a demonstration of disdain for Poles from the Vilnius Region and it did not have anything to do with good parliamentary custom.
Lithuania has already taken over the presidency over the EU. President Dalia Grybauskaitė presented the priorities of the Presidency at the forum of the European Parliament in Strasbourg. The priorities were no different from what the EU has covered so far. The proposals of holding annual meetings to discuss climatic issues or celebrating the European Year of Citizens are not enough to solve the problems that the EU is facing now. “The Union should be open for the citizens. We should be a shining example,” said the President. This is true except that the words were said by the head of the state which denies full rights of citizenship to a large part of its citizens, belonging to national minorities. Therefore, those words sounded completely unreliable. No facts – this was the first impression that came to mind after hearing the President’s proposals for the next six months.
The speech made by Waldemar Tomaszewski, MEP, is noteworthy. Tomaszewski spoke on behalf of the whole European Conservatives and Reformists Group, which is one of the five largest fractions in the European Parliament. In his speech the leader of the Electoral Action of Poles in Lithuania presented concrete proposals that should become the top priorities of the Lithuanian Presidency. Firstly, “a Europe of equal opportunities,” which will put an end to the unfair, lower subsidies for farmers from the new Union. Secondly, “European solidarity,” which, in the question of European energy security, will ensure unanimity of the member states for only then will it be possible for them to guarantee their energy independence. The point is also to do everything possible to prevent the building of the nuclear power plant in Astravyets in Belarus, which is only 40 km off the Lithuanian capital. The unfortunate investment imperils the safety of the EU citizens. Next, “promoting the cultural and linguistic diversity,” which will ensure that the rights of the autochthonous national minorities are respected. Then, “a Europe of values” shaped by the universal Christian values. Finally, “a Europe of fatherlands,” allowing to preserve the various cultural and linguistic identities of the continent. These are the issues which Tomaszewski touched upon in his speech. These are issues of significant concern in the days of the economic crisis and the crisis of values in the EU. The debate demonstrated that the leader of the Electoral Action of Poles in Lithuania has worked out a very strong position in the structures of the European Parliament. He took the floor before all the Lithuanian MPs and, what is more, he spoke for the longest time. It is also noteworthy that he spoke on behalf of one of the largest fractions in the European Parliament.
Among the speeches there was the scandalous comment made by the leader of the Lithuanian conservatives, Vytautas Landsbergis. He attacked Prof. Mirosław Piotrowski, an MEP for Poland, for calling on the Lithuanian authorities to end the persecution of the autochtonous Polish national minority. Piotrowski had appealed to Lithuania to obey the EU law, including the right to use native language in public offices and institutions, the right to retain the original spelling of surnames, and the right to use the Polish spelling in the names of streets and places. Tomaszewski had also condemned the defiling of historic gravestones in the Polish graveyards in Lithuania. In his riposte Landsbergis reproached Piotrowski with a lie and then called the Poles living in Lithuania nationalists. Landsbergis’s discreditable comment was imbued with negative emotions and directed at the Poles from the Lithuanian Region. Is someone who calls on others to obey the rights protecting national minorities to be called a nationalist? Or is a nationalist someone who, like Landsbergis, fights against these rights? It is strange that the so-called “father of the nation” does not see the violations of the rights of the Polish minority in Lithuania. Does he imply that the Poles from the Lithuanian Region can freely use bilingual information boards, including those with the names of streets and places? Does he want to lead us to believe that the members of the local governments in the VilniusDistrictMunicipality and the ŠalčininkaiDistrictMunicipality are neither persecuted nor fined for bilingual names? Could it be possible to fill in documents with surnames written down according to the Polish spelling? Has he never heard that the gravestone of Jozef Piłsudski’s mother (with the famous inscription “A mother and the heart of her son”) in the RasosCemetery has been vandalised many times? I think that Landsbergis is merely playing dumb. If so, who is cynically manipulating the facts: Piotrowski or Landsbergis? Who is insolently lying? The answer is banally simple, so let’s draw a veil over Landsbergis’s speech. Needless to say, out of consideration for his grey hair.
Bogusław Rogalski, PhD, a political scientist
The ECR counsellor on Foreign Affairs in the European Parliament
Tłumaczenie by Elwira Łykus w ramach praktyk w Europejskiej Fundacji Praw Człowieka, www.efhr.eu. Translated by Elwira Łykus within the framework of a traineeship programme of the European Foundation of Human Rights, www.efhr.eu.
