T H E F I R S
T M O N T H S O F T H
E W A R
M R. M U N T E R
S S P E A K S A
T T H E U N I V E R S
I T Y
Talking on the above subject before a large
audience of academicians and students at the Latvian University on February 12,
the Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr. Munters began by referring to
Latvian-Soviet relations. "Exactly four months have passed since the
enforcement of the mutual assistance pact with the Soviet Union, and this is a
period sufficiently long to judge of the way in which it has been carried into
effect. It must be said that both sides have approached the matter in a spirit
of friendship and trust, in accordance with the ideas which inspired the
negotiations in Moscow in October last. The stationing of Soviet garrisons on
our territory was an entirely novel task for both Parties. Notwithstanding
this, it was done as planned, and without the slightest hitch. The presence of
these garrisons in our country is linked with many practical problems,
beginning with the technical question of accommodation and winding up with
questions of supply and communications. In these respects too, both sides were
facing novel tasks, unprecedented in the past, but step by step the various
problems have been solved, and no insoluble difficulties have been encountered.
One feels convinced that also in the future we shall always find a common
language, both sides approaching the various questions with goodwill and a
desire for mutual understanding.
"We have followed carefully the comments of
the foreign press on the Pact of October 5th, and I cannot say that they
— at least at first — were such as to satisfy us. Much in this
respect may be ascribed to ignorance of the circumstances, but still more was
due to propaganda conducted for certain purposes. Lately, however, the foreign
press has adopted a different tone, as everybody can see in what an atmosphere
the Latvian-Soviet relations are developing. Just to mention the two principal
assertions which crop up occasionally in the foreign press, I should like to
ask, where now is the sovietisation against which we were warned with more
or less compassion? And is there anyone anywhere in Latvia who could say
that the Soviet Union has in any way interfered in our internal affairs? The
other frequently heard allegation takes the form of a mournful reference to us
as a protectorate, a country which has lost its independence. Here too, the
actual situation, which may be reviewed by everybody, proves without any waste
of words the unfoundedness of this allegation. And in the face of the
successful economic and other negotiations which have been conducted between
the two Governments lately and have already yielded tangible results, —
we have every reason to describe the relations existing between Latvia and the
Soviet Union as very satisfactory. There are people who will say that these
favourable conditions are of a temporary nature only, and that sooner or later
we shall have to reckon with internal-political and foreign-political pressure
on the part of the Soviet Union. The foundation on which they base these
prophesies is a secret of the prophets themselves. The experience of our
Government certainly does not justify such forebodings. The Government is of
the opinion that the Pact of October 5th safeguards the interests of both
countries, especially considering the conditions brought about by the war. We
know that both Parties concluded the pact in good faith, and that it fully
respects the sovereignty of both contracting Parties. In this connection, the
following declaration made by President Ulmanis in his speech of October
12, may very appropriately he quoted here: 'Our country is absolutely
independent. We are free in our domestic and foreign policies, and will remain
so. And this we shall maintain ourselves.'"
Passing on to the subject of
Latvian-German relations, Mr. Munters said: "The agreement of October
30, 1939, concerning the repatriation of citizens of German nationality, was an
event of enormous domestic-political, foreign-political, and, one might say,
also historical significance. The agreement embraced in all six important
tasks: 1) the actual repatriation; 2) the liquidation of movable property; 3)
the liquidation of rural immovable property; 4) the liquidation of immovable
property in towns; 5) the liquidation of trading and industrial enterprises;
and 6) the liquidation of non-profit-bearing organisations. There remains still
the task of settling the claims of, and claims against, the persons
repatriated. This will require a fairly considerable time, because the
examination of such claims. as well as possible litigation or administrative
protests in connection with them, may tend to complicate matters. The other
tasks arising out of the agreement are being dealt with very satisfactorily.
The actual exodus was completed on December 15, and, as a result of the
energetic action of the German Legation, the discipline of the emigrants, and
the exemplary activity of our authorities, not only 45,000 persons left this
country, but also all the movable property which they were allowed to take with
them, chiefly furniture and personal luggage, was taken out of the country.
Movable property not permitted for exportation may, under the provisions of the
agreement, be disposed of by May 15, 1940, and there is not the slightest doubt
that this will be done in due course. Rural immovable property to the extent of
45,000 hectares has already been placed at the disposal of the General
Agricultural Bank, and now it is only necessary to deduct the mortgages and
other encumbrances from the value of these properties, and to turn over the
balance, in non-interest-bearing bonds, to the fiduciary joint stock company
UTAG. In a similar manner negotiations have been started between the Latvijas
Kreditbanka and the UTAG with regard to taking over all the urban real estate.
As soon as these negotiations are brought to a successful issue, this matter
too will have been fully settled. As regards the trading and industrial
enterprises, an undertaking was reached already on December 8, that 46
establishments should continue to operate in Latvia, while 17 are to wind up
their affairs between January 15 and April 1, and the remaining enterprises,
— about 800 in all (not including petty trading and artisan shops) are to
be liquidated without delay. The winding up of non-profit-bearing organisations
presents no difficulty, as the whole procedure is based on Latvian laws. The
immovable property of these organisations will be dealt with in accordance with
the dispositions of the Ministry for Public Affairs. The task of the
Latvian-German mixed commission attending to the division of cultural values is
more complicated, but in this connection too the negotiations are progressing
satisfactorily. Thus, it may be said that in the main the agreement has been
fulfilled, and that by May 15 all matters pertaining to material interests will
have been fully regulated. There will remain then only the question of reaching
an agreement with the German Government about the transfer of the proceeds of
the liquidation. The transfer will take the form of supplementary exports, or
will be effected in some other way. And when it comes to drafting the
respective agreement, Latvia's economic possibilities, as well as her balance
of trade and balance of payments will have to be taken into consideration. War
conditions are not conducive to transfer operations on a large scale, but we
are confident that the German Government will understand our situation and meet
us accordingly. I shall quote here an excerpt from the official
communiqué published on December 16 regarding the negotiations between
the German Minister and the Latvian Minister for Foreign Affairs: ' . . . both
Parties testify that the repatriation agreement and its execution in a spirit
of mutual goodwill constitute a very important step towards the consolidation
of Latvian-German relations as well as towards the creating of a cloudless
atmosphere of confidence between the two nations and Governments. Both
Parties will use their endeavours so that also in future their mutual contact
in all respects may develop and progress in the spirit of this
relationship.'"
 The festive hall of the Jelgava Academy of Agriculture in
Viesturs' Memorial Castle. On the wall is a portrait of President Ulmanis,
painted by L. Liberts.
Referring to the European War, Mr.
Munters said: "The first months of the war have opened our eyes to the great
national and social changes which are typical of the present age, and which we
had almost forgotten in the period of seeming peace, which in reality was only
a respite after the last conflict. These months of war have also gradually
opened our eyes to the future, and we wonder if the collapse of European
civilisation, which we perceive as the inevitable result, is really justifiable
in comparison with the situation which prevailed before the war. And we also
wonder if this great clash will lead at least to lasting peace. There is no
answer as yet to this question, but sooner or later it will be forthcoming.
"We must go still further and ask what is the
attitude of our nation and our State in this war and in the conflict of forces
and ideas caused by it? As far as this attitude is determined by
foreign-political considerations, it was defined long ago and in various ways,
but it can always be reduced to one fundamental principle, viz., the
safeguarding of our independent national existence. Throughout a whole
generation, all our steps in the field of international policy have been
directed toward this one aim. In recent years, in view of the increasing latent
tension between the Great Powers which shape the fate of Europe, in view of the
weakening of the system of international security, and the constant crumbling
of the edifice of international collaboration, we have endeavoured more and
more to steer a neutral course, though we fully realise that this is a passive
policy, the sole aim of which is to prevent our country from being drawn into
armed conflicts for causes which are not ours. We have emphatically refused to
bind ourselves to any power-political or ideological blocs. We have gone still
further and declared, in 1938, that we would take no part in any automatic
collective international actions. We pursued the same political course also in
1939, and are able to say today that, in this way, the chariots of the god of
war have gone past us.
"This statement in itself is no cause for
particular joy or satisfaction. Our present situation merely shows that
hitherto we have been able, or have known how, to adhere to our formulated
fundamental political principle. viz., the protection of our independent
national existence. But heavier ordeals are still ahead of us. Not only once
shall we have to answer the fateful question: Is this independent national
existence really the highest aim of our nation, the purpose of our most sacred
aspirations? Does this remain so even if this existence is full of hardships
and difficulties? Also if sacrifices have to be made for its sake, and if we
have to fight for it?
"To all these questions I can confidently
answer with an emphatic 'Yes.' For under no circumstances will the free Latvian
nation give up its present attitude or renounce the creed which it professes
today. Besides the ungaugeable and irreplaceable power which lies in our
national unanimity, we can draw fortitude also from the soundness of our
national and social structure. Latvia's national life has left the plane of
primitive and vague sentiments, and progresses now boldly and broadly on the
road of our own creative culture. Learning and art have reached in our country
a level not lower than in countries, the independence of whose national spirit
is questioned by no one.
"And as we envisage our social
problems, we can again, with a clear conscience, assert that social justice
is more highly respected in Latvia than in some other countries, which try to
meet the demands and claims of the age with political alms and formulas.
Moreover, there are concrete achievements which testify to the consolidation of
social justice in this country. With this audience before me, I may, perhaps,
be permitted to mention here, as a convincing proof, the laws for promoting
handicraft education and higher education, which are of a scope not equalled in
any other country. But this is only one of the fields in which Latvia's policy
of social justice finds expression. Mention may also be made here of the policy
of establishing an equilibrium between town and country life, — in the
pursuance of which our President can without exaggeration be regarded as one of
the most fervent and persevering protagonists of modern sociological science,
whose teachings and concrete achievements will yet be fully appreciated by
coming generations. I might further mention the Chamber system in renewed
Latvia, and our labour policy, which is not confined to narrow trade
organisation, but aims at organisation on the broadest scale, embracing the
whole country and the whole nation. Many concrete examples could be given here
of the epochal social policy pursued in Latvia, but this would take us too
far.
"One thing is clear, — every day offers
proof of the truth of the President's words uttered in his first speech after
the 15th of May, 1934, and several times repeated since: 'We are those who
go forward.' This involves sacrifices and struggle. It implies a constant
renunciation of romanticism and conservatism, which is not so easy for an
agricultural nation; but it also gives the assurance that everything is done to
keep abreast of the times, and to ensure to the Latvian nation, besides its
inalienable past, which was so rich in struggles, also a future rich in work
and lasting achievements." |