In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

THE LITHUANIAN-JEWISH POLITICAL DIALOGUE IN PETROGRAD IN 1917 DARIUS STALIŪNAS The document published herein is an important source for LithuanianJewish political collaboration during World War I.1 The earlier historiography , while analyzing the collaboration of various political groups representing these two nationalities in 1914–1918, often focused on the events in Lithuania, particularly in Vilnius. The basic plot in this context was the activity of the Lithuanian Council (Taryba) and the problem of co-opting representatives of other nationalities into the Council.2 It is understandable that attention was concentrated on the events in Lithuania, which from 1915 was under German occupation. World War I weakened the great powers and created a geopolitical void, which allowed Eastern European nations to build their national states. This is one of the reasons the relations of Lithuanian political forces with other nationalities in the Russian empire have so far received less attention from historians.3 This document reflects the political processes that took place in the then-capital of Russia, Petrograd, which had little impact on Lithuania’s fate or the course of Lithuanian-Jewish political relations. Nonetheless, it is important because it reflects the attitude of public figures who represented the interests of both sides toward other national groups and a possibility of collaboration. In the spring of 1917, the Russian Provisional Government committed itself to observe the principle of self-determination of nations, which had to be implemented in the ethnographic territories of respective nationalities .4 The new center of power of Russia intended to transfer part of the governing functions to the fledgling national institutions (e.g., the Polish Liquidation Committee, the Ukrainian Central Rada). The Council of Russian Lithuanians established on 13 (26) March 1917 sought to obtain similar powers; it formed its own executive body—the Provisional Committee for Lithuania’s Administration (PCLA).5 The PCLA was to take under its jurisdiction the Lithuanian institutions that in Russia, administrate the areas of Lithuania liberated from the German army, facilitate the 232 A Pragmatic Alliance return of refugees to the homeland, seek the compensation of war damage, and hold the Lithuanian Constituent Assembly, “which would be based on general, equal, direct and secret vote without gender distinction, and which would establish the interior order in Lithuania, as well as Lithuania ’s relations with neighboring countries.”6 The PCLA had two urgent tasks: to receive a license to act both from the Provisional Government and the Petrograd Workers’ Council, and to enlist the representatives of other nations living in Lithuania. At the outset, the first task seemed to be carried out successfully. A delegation of the PCLA (two Duma deputies—Martynas Yčas, Mykolas Januškevičius—and Vaclovas Bielskis) visited the head of the Provisional Government G. Lvov, who hailed the Lithuanians’ initiative and asked them to name their representatives for the governors’ posts.7 The PCLA obliged,8 but received no response. One of the reasons was that the Lithuanians sought to administrate (and undoubtedly later also to build a national state) the Kaunas, Vilnius and Suwałki gubernias.9 Poles also had claims to this territory or at least its part, and the Provisional Government was not willing to spoil relations with them. The attempts to include representatives of other nations in the PCLA by allotting to them the same number of seats as for Lithuanians (i.e., twelve—six for Belarusians, three for Jews, two for Poles, and one for Russians),10 was met with resistance. As was already mentioned, Lithuanians planned to build a national state, and thus the required territory not only had to embrace the historical capital Vilnius, but also to have a predominantly Lithuanian population. According to the ideal of the national state, Lithuanians had to become the dominant nation and also hold the majority of administrative posts.11 Thus it was not surprising that voices of dissatisfaction with such a large number of people of other nationalities in the PCLA were raised in Lithuanian society.12 Lithuanians expected the least problems from the Belarusian side. According to the Lithuanian press, Belarusians agreed to join the PCLA, but not before holding a relevant meeting in Minsk.13 Russians also seemed to be in concord, although it was unclear which political forces their candidate represented. Poles posed the most problems: they were not satisfied with the number of seats allotted to them and the projected structure of Lithuania with the dominant role of Lithuanians; thus Polish political forces did not intend...

Share