Talk:June Uprising in Lithuania

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Lithuania (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

First, USSR could not have "military occupation" of Lithuania, since it wasn't at war with it at that time, and since Lithuania actually did join USSR at its own request. Second, calling Red Army soldiers "Russians" is, to put it mildly, inaccurate, and insensitive to the otheh nations, making up the army (Latvians, Ukrainians, Georgians, Jews, Belorussians, and so on...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 00:29, 23 June 2005

Fair point about the Red Army. Re: "military occupation" (which you seem to think has a negative connotation), you do not have to be at war to occupy a country militarily. Neither the US and the USSR was at war with Korea when they occupied their respective halves of the country militarily. "Military occupation" is merely descriptive of the Soviet military forces coming in to prop up their regime. In addition, you will find that saying Lithuania joined the USSR out of its own volition is a disputed statement, to put it mildly. It merely was forced to agree to an ultimatum from the USSR in the face of the other alternative of a Soviet invasion (cf. Winter War). The president, Antanas Smetona, was against accepting the ultimatum. You make it sound like the Lithuanians asked to Join the USSR. --Iceager 15:05, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"First Soviet Occupation" refers to the period, while "Joining the USSR" refers to a particular event; these terms cannot be used interchangably same as for example "period of Lithuanian independence" and "independence declaration". Also, unconstitutional communist government of Lithuania, estabilished because of actions of Soviet Union, requested joining USSR; this government was not recognised by Lithuanian president or such. DeirYassin 10:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Provisional or temporary ?[edit]

Was it "provisional" or "temporary" government ? --Lysy (talk) 4 July 2005 11:23 (UTC)

Litterally named in Lithuanian "Temporary government", but this wording can also mean provisional government. However, as I seen it is more translated to English as Temporary government DeirYassin 8 July 2005 10:07 (UTC)

The normal English usage is "provisional", as also in the Kerenskiy government in Russia in 1917. Lstanley1979 (talk) 18:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Article title[edit]

This title may be significant in Lithuania, but not in the English-speaking world. May I suggest that it be renamed to "June independence of Lithuania", or some such? Noel (talk) 02:07, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

It is not very significant in Lithuanian either; many different wordings (such as temporary government, 1941 independence, etc.) are used to refer to this that is why I made so many redirects. If you'd want to rename maybe "Independent Lithuania of 1941" or "Independent Lithuania during World War 2" or something would work okish. DeirYassin 08:25, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Is there one term that it used more than any of the others to refer to this period in Lithuanian history books? If so, what's the exact translation of it? If so, I'd like to start with that, and work out what the best English-language title would be, based on that.
I like the "June independence of Lithuania" because it emphasize the brief nature of that government; "Independent Lithuania during World War 2" sounds like it could have been some longer-lasting thing. Perhaps something like "June 1941 independence of Lithuania" (although I guess "Independent Lithuania of June, 1941" would be equally good) would be better, to give a good sense from the title as to what period of history is being referred to.
I understand why you made the redirects, but frankly I don't think many English-speaking readers would look under those titles. You're more likely to get people coming to this page because of a link from some other page. So I think the best thing to do is link to it widely, from all the relevant pages. Certainly all the Lithuanian and history pages which are related, but others as well. E.g. I don't know if it qualifies as an underground government, but if it was, you could link to if from there too. Noel (talk) 01:29, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I guess June independence is not the best title after all because the government had power through July, and existed for the start of August too. As for underground government, it was an underground government before the assumption of power. Lithuanian "pogrindinė vyriausybė" means exactly "Underground government" and it is the only way how it is reffered to that government before it took power. As for the refferance to period, I think just "temporary government"/"prvisional government" is used the most for this time of independence.DeirYassin 08:28, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

OK, I guess the best title would be Lithuanian 1941 independence then. (I think that flows better than 1941 Lithuanian independence, which is the other choice.) If that's OK with you, I'll rename the article, and fix references to it, etc.

Also, I did a copyedit pass on Lithuanian underground government to clean up the text (I discovered a lot of the text there was duplicated here, so I got rid of the copy here to make this article shorter); I'll do the same for this article at the same time as the rename. Noel (talk) 21:33, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

It'd be ok, but I am not sure if it is according to English grammar (Lithuanian 1941 independence or 1941 Lithuanian independence), I am not a native speaker so I dont know well though. DeirYassin 21:41, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
Either one is quite acceptable, grammatically correct, English. It's a fairly close call as to which one is better, actually. (Technically, "Lithuanian independence of 1941" would probably be the most precise, but I prefer a shorter title.) Noel (talk) 05:42, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

"Battle Box"[edit]

After skimming through the article (which needs a small copy edit), I just wanted to thank Renata for removing the absurd "Battle Box". Dr. Dan 03:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


The opening paragraph states, "brief period in history of Lithuania between the first Soviet occupation, and the immediately following Nazi occupation". Should this not read "immediately before the Nazi occupation"? --Quadrastreet 21:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Probably. I've done an edit and rewrite of several of the paragraphs in this article but I'll check that bit as I think I missed it. Lstanley1979 (talk) 18:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Already altered. The passage still is a bit clunky, but I can't think how it might be tightened up. Lstanley1979 (talk) 18:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

This is incorrect. It wasn't "before" Nazi occupation, it was concurrent. The LAF was created and run in Berlin out of the Lithuanian legation and according to all the sources probably with funding exclusively from the Abwehr, German military intelligence. The June Uprising and the Provisional Government were completely pro-Nazi and acted as Nazi proxies in Lithuania, see the resolutions by the PG welcoming Hitler's rule in Lithuania, discriminating against Jews, setting up a concentration camp (their words) in Kovno/Kaunas, etc. There really is no dispute on this outside of Lithuanian nationalist and patriotic historiography. The traditional Lithuanian excuse for the Holocaust which began with the June Uprising in Lithuania is that the PG wasn't valid, hadn't been democratically elected, and didn't represent the aspirations of the Lithuanian nation, i.e., that it was a Nazi puppet organization or proxy, that lived out its usefulness to the Nazis in the period of a few months. The wishful thinking of PG supporters--that the PG would convince the Third Reich to allow Lithuania to remain as a protectorate or even nominally independent like Slovakia--is interesting and certainly important to the real history of the period, but not of paramount importance concerning the objective facts as they are known to history. These considerations occupy central place in the Lithuanian narrative, but shouldn't be front and center in a neutral treatment based on facts and non-Lithuanian sources. Hypatea (talk) 10:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

No independence[edit]

There was no independence in the primary meaning of this word. Independence of 1941 is not recognised by Lithuania itself, events of 1941 are controversial and if users will insist for independence then Lithuania was responsible of killing jews. Lithuanian historians disagree if there was an independence ot not. Thus I mark this as WP:OR Tarakonas (talk) 07:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree that this article would need a better title. Even though the independence was proclaimed, the Lithuanian provisional government was quickly disbanded by the Germans. --Termer (talk) 09:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Different governments in post-Soviet Lithuania have recognized the PG as legitimate I believe. The formulation of the Allies--namely the US--following the Soviet incorporation of the Baltic states is very informative: without a final peace treaty, the United States would recognize the first democratically-elected government to arise in Lithuania, Latvia and/or Estonia. The PG wasn't democratically elected, it was clearly completely pro-Nazi, and it was a power that was a belligerent in World War II on the side of the Axis. The "June Uprising," the Lithuanian Activist Front and the Provisional Government are all the same thing: Lithuanian Nazis working out of the Lithuanian embassy in Berlin with funding from the Nazis.Hypatea (talk) 10:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

I would like to add a few notes, maybe a separate part. In September 2000 the Lithuanian Parliament voted to declare the Proclamation of Independence of 23 June 1941 to be the legal act of the current Lithuanian Republic. There were 48 votes in favour of this decision, 0 against, and 3 abstained. The text of this Proclamation is quite noteworthy - "The young Lithuania with enthusiasm promises to add up to the Europe organization on the new bases. Lithuanian nation horribly tortured by bolshevik's terror braces creating its future on the national unity and social justice" (using the word tauta for nation, which emphasizes etnic commonality, and usually does not refer to ethnically different population- "kitatauciai"). The proof-link is the "Parliamentary Chronicle" - "Seimo Kronika", 23(162) p.5-7. (talk) 17:19, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


In the 1931 Polish census, its population was almost 66 percent Polish. It is certainly a Lithuanian city now (although still with a large Polish minority), but it wasn't in 1941, because the Polish army had occupied it after the First World War. (talk) 06:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Miami is 70% Hispanic, but no one would suggest it is not an American city. (talk) 18:50, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Miami has been American during last 200 years. Xx236 (talk) 13:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)