From: thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet,talk.politics.soviet
Subject: Re: ESTONIA and human rights (Was. "de
Date: 13 Sep 92 15:16:04 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki


--------------------------------------------------------------
ESTONIA - MORE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
EVEN WITH SOME FACTS AND STATISTICS, IF YOU ARE PATIENT!
--------------------------------------------------------------

In article <1992Sep12.221809.22488@physics.ucla.edu>,
viznyuk@physics.ucla.edu (Sergei Viznyuk) writes:
> In article <1992Sep12.203344.1@cc.helsinki.fi>
thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>>
>>> 1. Estonian parlament by majority of votes deprived
>>> Russian-speaking deputies their mandates exclusively because
>>> of their non-Estonian ethnicity. And it was done by Estonian
>>> deputies who were elected on the very same elections with those
>>> non-Estonian deputies.
>>
>>The Estonian Supreme Soviet (which I suppose you are referring to)
>>suspensed its activities during last summer (after the referendum
>>in which the new constitution was accepted).
>>
>>Therefore: BOTH the Estonian AND Russian speaking deputies
>>lost their mandates. This decision had nothing whatsoever to
>>do with ethnicity, but with the restitution of the Estonian
>>Republic. Since the Soviet Union does not exist any more, there
>>will be no Estonian Supreme Soviet, but instead the Estonian parlament
>>that will be elected 20-09.
>
>   You are inaccurate, to say at least. Russian-speaking deputies
> were deprived their mandates definetely BEFORE this summer, if
> I'm not mistaken, at the begining of the year. And they were
> deprived by their Estonian "collegues" who took advantage
> of their majority in parlament. What would have happen in US
> if e.g. democratic majority in US Congress deprive the
> republican congressmen their mandates ? But in "democratic"
> Estonia all is possible.

I stick to my presentation grosso modo.
Even a more accurate description of the events: only
four (4) Russian (Soviet) officers lost their mandates in spring
1992 (Akhladze and three others, I just can't recall their names).
I suppose You are referring to that incident.

They were deprived of their mandates, because they represented
in the supreme soviet some soviet army units that had already
departed Estonia.

This was a curiosity in "independent" Estonia: the Soviet army
had it's quota in the supreme soviet (parlament) of Estonia!
But the decision was contested in parlament even by some
Estonians, because these representatives were elected
legally from their army units (even they had already left
Estonia). But I doubt I will research THIS INCIDENT any
further (the details might be endless).

The most important fact is that other Russian representatives elected
by civilians remained in parlament (like Lebedev, Petinov etc.).
These (about 20) deputies have now declared that they will hold
their mandates until 1994 march... (See my first post
ESTONIA and human rights).  And still, during this summer
one of Estonian parliamentary deputies was a (soviet) general
who has a permanent residence in Estonia!


>>>THIS IS FASCISM.
>>It is not, of course, ruled out that the next Estonian government might
>>turn to pursue fascist activities - although it is quite unprobable.
>
>   Do you mean that the future goverment in Estonia could be
> even more fascistic ?

Since there is no sign of fascism in Estonia and it has a democratic
(leftist) government just now, it is possible that some future
government in Estonia could be "more fascist" - although
the emergence of even a "militant right-wing" -government is quite
unprobable in the near future. I suppose we could leave
this topic...

>>> 2. Estonian parlament introduced the so-called "citizenship law"
>>> which aim is the depriving the non-Estonian people their
>>> civil rights, under the false pretex of "language requirement".
>>> Now come and say, dear Jarmo, that citizenship law has nothing
>>> to do with ethnicity, but only with "language" (or length of
>>> nose, or color of hair, or form of sculp, etc, etc.). Since Estonian
>>> goverment has met some difficulty with distinguishing Estonians
>>> from Russians by their appearance, they invented "language
>>> requirement".
>>
>>The law on citizenship has not got anything to do with language,
>>either:
>>You do not have even to speak (or write or read) Estonian in order
>>to be accepted as a citizen. Only one of your parents
>>must have the Estonian citizenship. Of course, the vast majority
>>of Estonian citizens speak Estonian, and the majority of non-
>>citizens communicate most fluently with the help of Russian.
>>The case mentioned above is not a fictive one: Imagine an Estonian
>>child born in exile, say, in the USA. If his/her one parent was
>>an Estonian citizen (speaking whatever language, perhaps German),
>>she/he will have a right to citizenship by birth, even if he/she
>>doesn't know any Estonian words at all!
>
>   And PLEASE, specify what would be with ethnic Estonian
> who was born in US, Russia, China, etc from EStonian
> parents who emigrated from Estonia before 1917 ?
>   And again:

Persons emigrated from Estonia before the Republic of Estonia
was established (1918) do not have any access to the Estonian
citizenship (if they have not acquired it later), and therefore,
their descendands can not claim it. (But I might be wrong here,
I am no expert in the inter-war legislation.)

I am not interested in re-establishing all possible states in
the world history, only to support those accepted by the
international community (League of nations, United Nations
the Conference of Security and Co-operation in Europe). And
I deeply support the rules set by these international bodies
their descendands can not claim it. (But I might be wrong here,
I am no expert in the inter-war legislation.)

I am not interested in re-establishing all possible states in
the world history, only to support those accepted by the
international community (League of nations, United Nations
the Conference of Security and Co-operation in Europe and the
Council of Europe). And I deeply support the rules set by these
international bodies for solving international crises.

>>The language requirements concern only those to be naturalized.
>
> ...to be expelled, to be more accurate..

Ad nauseam: no decent citizen is expelled, but some mafia criminals
and individuals with no place of residence. See details below:

>>                       *******
>>As I have previously said, it can't be a normal situation when
>>about half a million residents of Estonia would be non-citizens.
>>They can't be forced to become Estonian citizens (which is also one
>>reason, why they should not get their citizenship "automatically"
>>- even against their will?).
>
>   Why then "pure" Estonians are forced to become Estonian
> citizens automatically ?

Ad nauseam: with "pure" Estonians You refer to people, the other
parent of which was an Estonian citizen (that are eligible to
be citizens without any application).

An example: I wonder whether the Va"lbe family (an inter-marriage
by two famous cross-country skiers) had children... But let us
consider the following similar case:
A child is born in Siberia from Estonian and Russian parents. If the
other parent was an Estonian citizen, the child is eligible to
the Estonian citizenship, but - of course - not forced to be one.
He/she may choose.

>>The worst possible situation I could imagine would be North-East
>>Estonia with cities jam-packed with RUSSIAN citizens! It would
>>benefit neither Estonia nor Russia, only military adventurers!
>>
>>So far, only a small part of the Russian speaking population has
>>applied to the Russian citizenship. The most seem to be waiting
>                 ~~~~~~~~
>
> Definetely you meant "Estonian citizenship". Russians/Ukrainians
> and ALL other nations of xUSSR should NOT apply to become Russian
> citizens (unlike such "democracies" as Baltics).

No, I definitely mean "Russian citizenship". Please, check the facts,
if I am mistaken: The individuals residing INSIDE the Russian Federation
get the citizenhip without applying to it. The individuals OUTSIDE
the Federation (like in Estonia) must sign an application, and
then they acquire the Russian citizenship almost automatically
(until march 1993). There might be another regulations inside CIS,
but that should not concern us here, because Estonia never
was a part of CIS. Perhaps the rule You are referring to is
valid inside CIS.

So far about 10 000 Russian speakers inside Estonia have signed
this application (of a population more than half a million).

>>which way the tables will be turned (The magic word: Economy).
>
>   Some facts: there are about 1,500 Estonians living in Pskov
> region of Russia. None of them moved to Estonia !..though
> they consider themselves Estonian citizens (from Ostankino
> TV program). While, as I wrote, more than 13,000 Russians
> fled Estonia for Russia only for the last year.
>  So the "table" has already turned, it seems.

Pihkova/Pskov is just a minor detail, but still an interesting one:
Before the second world war, there resided about 10 000 Estonians.
After the war -- well, that's the usual horror story with
deportations and other such things, I would not like to dwell
on this much longer -- the population sunk to 5000 or less.
After fifties there has been a constant migration to Estonia
from Pskov district, leaving there about 1500 Estonians (most
of them in inter-marriage and russified).  Even some of
them moved to Estonia during this year. A friend of mine will
check exact figures of Pskov immigrants 1991 and 1992 from the
Estonian immigration office, if you like! There are some,
but they surely are not so numerous as before.

In 1991, about 8000 Russian-speaking civilians left Estonia,
and approximately 2000 soldiers of the soviet troops
(Even the Estonian government has not got accurate figures,
because it is not informed).
So far, in 1992, about 18.000 Russian-speaking civilians have
left Estonia and, approximately 12.000 - 15.000 troops.
The remaining (soviet) troops in Estonia amount about
15.000 - 17.000 (The Estonian government is not informed
of the exact figures).

Most of this is normal and healthy development. A part of
the Russian-speaking population does not want live in
independent Estonia, but prefers CIS (or is expecting to
find occupation there easier: this applies particulary
those involved with military industry).
The vast majority of Russian-speakers will stay, which
they are entitled to, and sometimes even encouraged by the
government, like the employees of the Dvigatel factories
in Tallin, because the enterprise is considered to be
important.

Moreover, the Russian population in North-east Estonia
controls most of the energy reservoirs of the Republic.
They are also well organized and will have their word
to say in Estonian politics! They will stay - and they
are needed to reconstruct the republic (which they will
not be doing for peanuts or just for the Estonian blue eyes).


>>Still, there is not much time to lose. Until march 1993 Russian
>>speakers in Estonia get the Russian citizenship almost
>>automatically, if they like. After that, they also need
>>some kind of "naturalization" (I would like
>>to know more about this... please inform me!).
>>
>>If we observe the North-east Estonia question with cold blood,
>>we might come to the conclusion, that some immediate government
>>action is needed to get the majority of Russian
>>speakers either apply for citizenship or to stay in Estonia
>>without citizenship. The government MUST offer something to
>>this population, like the following
>>
>>- reduction of the linquistic competences required for citizenship
>>- some kind of Russian home rule, AT LEAST some kind of
>>  economic special area ... (Perhaps one good example might be
>>  economic self-government as it is practiced in Aland islands
>>  between Finland and Sweden, an area that in the 20ies caused
>>  trouble between the two countries. Fortunately the problem
>>  was settled with help of the League of Nations)
>
>   If only you could get a seat in the parlament of Estonia!
> But unfortunately, there are other guys there...

The People's front represents roughly the same opinions as I do.
The Front and it's spin-offs (like the Social Democrats and
Centrist-democratic party) had about 35 seats in the supreme
soviet (since some of the Russian deputies supported them,
they could usually count on about 40 supporters; the supreme
soviet had 101 seats, no party or movement had a majority in
it).

>>> 3. Estonian goverment has deprived de-facto non-Estonians
>>> the electorial rights. THIS IS FASCISM.
>>
>>Every Estonian citizen is allowed to vote in next elections,
>>as the Russian citizens may cast their ballot in Russian elections.
>>The persons without citizenship can't vote anywhere.
>>This is international law.
>
>    So the Estonian goverment has deprived them at first
> the citizenship, and as a consequence the electorial rights.

I think I have answered this question.


>>The most paradoxal thing in North-East-Estonian question is that the
>>more Narva, Sillama"e and Kohtla-Ja"rve residents prefer the Russian
>>citizenship, the smaller changes for home rule they have.
>
>  ..and the more they prefer Russian citizenship...

At least, not yet! See the statistic above and my old post below.

>>> 4. Estonian goverment has sent additional police troops
>>> to Narva region to suppress Russians there and prevent the
>>> population of Narva region to hold the referendum on independence.
>>> to Narva region to suppress Russians there and prevent the
>>> population of Narva region to hold the referendum on independence.
>>> Even Soviet regime didn't prevent Balts from holding their
>>> referendum on independence. THIS IS FASCISM.
>>
>>I would not be suprised if there were additional police troops
>>in Narva region. There has been some (minor) skirmishes going on...
>>But Estonian police can't prevent the Narva population holding
>>some kind of vote on their future (might they actually be
>>striving for "indipendence"? I doubt that). But they can't call
>>it _referendum_, while it could not be organized according
>>the Estonian law and it would not, therefore, be binding (Could
>>they organize that according to Russian legislation? I doubt that
>>as well). But they could demonstrate their common will by some kind
>>of vote. Since they have not done that, I suppose that
>>it indicates that a common aim doesn't exist! Correct me,
>>if I am mistaken!
>>                 *********************
>>Narva is restless, that is beyond doubt. But there is no police
>>rule, state of emergency or martial law. At least, not yet.
>>
>>One week ago Vytautas Landsbergis declared that he had information
>>(from the Lithuanian army intelligence) that "some Russian groups"
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ah..here comes the most reliable source. We have already
> heard how they "discovered" that Russian army is training
> Iraqy officers few months ago...

I agree that Lithuanian secret service is not the most reliable source.
But Landsbergis just might have right information in this case.
Or, even better he might have prevented some restlessness in Narva by
releasing his "information". Personally, I hope that Landsbergis
IS mis-informed in this respect.

>>are preparing violent demonstrations in the Narva region
>>before the elections, that is, next week! Who knows...
>
>   So it seems, that non-Estonians don't have even a right
> for a protest ! No wonder, they SHOULD go along with
> their demonstrations, and make them as troublesome
> for "democratic" Estonian regime, as possible.

They do have the right to protest, of course. The Estonian
police has not prevented them of doing that. Perhaps
they are too perplexed of their aims that they do not
follow your advice.

Actually, some of them MIGHT protest violently during next week.
I am glad you have quoted me:
>>Anyway, that would be the worst possible thing to happen just now.
>>Riots in Narva would profit the extreme right wing in the elections.
>>With violence the Russian-speaking population could only get a
>>government that would not be inclined to make any concessions!
>>That's why the democratic Yeltsin government holds a low profile
>>in the Estonian question before the elections! Yeltsin does not
>>want to provoke conflict, fortunately!
>
>   Maybe Yeltsin doesn't want to provoke conflict, but
> Estonian goverment DOES want. At least to divert attention
> of their own "citizens" from economic problems, which this
> goverment is not able to cope with.

Only some adventurers (Russian and Estonians) need a violent
conflict just now. Do you?

Estonia is economically the most progressive part of the former
SU Empire, a fact I should clarify somewhere else with more
space and time... Of course, this does not imply that Estonians
were "well off".

>>> 5. Estonian regime is posing the territorial claims to
>>> Russia's Pskov region and even was engaged in direct
>>> agression in May-June. THIS IS FASCISM.
>>
>>The only treaty between Russia (which is accepting at least
>>most of the treaties made by XSU - correct me, if I am mistaken)
>>and Estonia is the Tartu peace treaty (1920), according to which the
>>territory of the Republic of Estonia covered 47.549 sq km.
>   Not true at all ! What about treaties signed by Soviet
> and Estonian goverments in 1939-and later ?
>   What about Helsinki agreements ? Did Estonian
> goverment sign these ? Or Estonian goverment prefers
> the treaties with ILLEGAL Bolshevik goverment 1918-1922 ?

You are referring to military aggressions of Estonians against
Russians during last years. THERE ARE NOT ANY. If you disagree,
please tell me some facts about these alleged aggressions. The
last interlude in Russo-Estonian border happened in August
as some drunken Russian soldiers (without any weapons) attacked
the Estonian border guards. Just minor skirmishes.

You are referring to treaties signes by Soviet AND Estonian
governments after 1939. THERE ARE NOT ANY, since Estonia
was not considered to be a state any more.

The Estonian governement signed the Helsinki agreements in Helsinki
last Autumn (It has nothing to do with the previous question,
however!).

It is better to have treaties with the bolshevik government
than to be occupied by it. Even the Finnish independency is
based on the treaty with the bolshevik government. Only after it,
the European powers and the USA recognized the Finnish
independency.

>>The negotiations of the border questions with Russia have not had
>>much success. Estonia will not (and could not, even it wanted to)
>>try to return these areas by force. These matters will be (and are)
>>negotiated according to the rules set by CSCE, to which we Finns
>>have even contributed.
>>                    *************************
>>I'll bet there will be some kind of mediation by NATO or EC
>>and some kinds of referendums will be organized in both sides
>>of the border - at least, I hope so!
>
>   Well, there was already referendum on Russian side
> of the border !!!! Result ?  More than 80% of population, which
> is not all Russian, btw, voted for staying in Russia.
>   BTW, only after that referendum Estonian "troops"
> ceased their attempts to seize that region by force.
> So now the turn is for Estonian side to let the
> population of Estonian "side of the border" to hold
> their referendum. But, it seems, the Estonian goverment
> clearly foresees the result of that referendum, once
> it prohibited it and even sent a police troops there
> to prevent it by force.

I wonder what referendum You are referring to. There was no
referendum either in Pskov or Ivangorod, as far as I know.
Many people signed a petition in Narva area that demanded that
some kind of referendum should be organized. This action was
legal and was not hindered by any police force. Since organizing
a referendum in Estonia requires about 20.000 citizen's
signatures, the 6500 Estonian citizens in Narva can't start
any referendum.

"To seize that region (which region) by force" refers to
nightmares, not to anything in reality. There was no military
conflict between Estonian and Russian military forces.

>   Was it you who called Estonia as "ultra-democratic"
> country ?

I called the Estonian constitution perhaps "ultra-democratic",
because it is designated to allow more rights to non-
citizens than any previous constitution.

>>>   Estonia IS a FASCIST STATE. And please, please, don't
>>> bother youself by posting articles from  Estonian "constitution".
>>> It is well-known fact that Stalin's constitution in xUSSR was
>>> also quite democratic from the first glance.
>>
>>Well, I refer to my treatment of this topic 11 sept. 1992
>>(ESTONIAN constitution...). Your repeating of the same slogan does not
>>qualify as an argument. And do not take the democratic nature of
>>the Estonian constitution and government from me, ask ambassador
>>Ms. Lalumie from the Council of Europe instead. She has scrutized
>>the Estonian jurisdiction during this summer and found nothing
>>undemocratic whatsoever in it. And do not be suprised, when Estonia
>>will be accepted to be a member of the Council of Europe!
>
>   It will only underscore the bullshit nature of this
> "council".

Is that REALLY what you are saying about the Council of Europe?
I wonder whether I should have started discussions with You
about "democracy" in the first place! Please do not call 
OTHER human beings fascists any more! Even Le Pen in France 
or Schoenhuber in Germany would not have signed what 
You have written above! It is a shame.

>>It seems to annoy you that I keep posting things about Estonian
>>constitution. That is exactly what I will continue to do, since
>>very few people have direct acces to Estonian documents. In the
>>very near future I will be dealing with the Estonian legislation
>>on language.
>
>   Yeah, you have some advantage before me: I have neither
> time nor desire to post here the articles from Stalin's
> constitution. I could only assure you that it no less
> "democratic" than Estonian "consitution".

Even comparing the written form of the Stalin and Estonian
constitution might be intresting. Stalin did not even on paper
dare to give his subjects as many rights, not to speak about the
rights of non-citizens.

And, if You do not come with fresh arguments and confess
that You might have partly been disinformed, I will not
continue this conversation.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Tapani Hietaniemi, University of Helsinki

Our common (?) aim: Peace, multiculturality, democracy and prosperity
around the Gulf of Finland.