Lithuania had the best authoritarian ruler it could have had, says historian Černiauskas

Lithuania’s interwar President Antanas Smetona was “the best authoritarian leader the country could have had,” historian Norbertas Černiauskas said in an interview with LRT Radio’s Pas Nemirą programme, reflecting on the parallels between Lithuania’s early statehood and today’s geopolitical tensions.

Speaking on the challenges Lithuania faced after declaring independence in 1918, Černiauskas described the country’s birth as “not a clearly defined state, but rather a bold, fragile idea.” The day after the Act of February 16, Lithuania lacked institutions, an administrative system, or even a defined territory—only the determination of its people to build a sovereign nation.

“What is Lithuania on February 17? It is merely the resolute idea that we are truly committed to creating a state, that we are taking an independent path,” the historian said. Despite this uncertain start, he noted that within just two years, Lithuania established the foundations of statehood, formed institutions, and built governance structures—a transformation he called an “astonishing historical leap.”

Černiauskas suggested that many Lithuanians may not have immediately known about the Act of February 16. Citing the diary of writer Sofija Pšibiliauskienė (known as Lazdynų Pelėda), he noted that some learned of the declaration only months later. True national consciousness, he argued, emerged later—spurred by existential threats, such as the advance of the Red Army and the subsequent Wars of Independence.

“The very fact that volunteers or soldiers appeared in different parts of Lithuania wearing the tricolour cockade… they brought the idea of the state with them,” he explained. He emphasised that shaping national identity was a long-term process, requiring persistent effort to move beyond what he called a “serf mentality” and toward a European civic mindset.

Comparing Lithuania’s independence in 1918 and 1990, Černiauskas acknowledged that while the threat to survival remained real in both periods, the challenges differed. In 1918, Lithuania had to build everything from scratch, including a new capital in Kaunas. By 1990, the task was not reconstruction but ideological renewal—erasing the legacy of Soviet totalitarianism and restoring free thought.

“The Soviet system demanded not just loyalty but complete ideologisation from its subjects,” he said. While 1918 required physical rebuilding, 1990 demanded “removing totalitarian thinking from people’s heads.”

Reflecting on today’s geopolitical climate—marked by rising authoritarianism, wars, and shifting global power dynamics—Černiauskas cautioned against oversimplifying historical parallels. Though Lithuania now stands as an independent democracy, he stressed the importance of learning from the past to navigate contemporary challenges.