The origin of March 16th
Eighty years ago, the two largest units of the Latvian Legion fought together, for the first time and only time under a Latvian commander, against the Soviet forces soon to re-invade Latvia. In battles lasting three days—March 16-18, 1944—on the banks of the Velikaya, a mere 40 kilometres from Latvia's eastern border, the Latvians managed to defeat Russian forces to re-capture strategic Hill 93.4, near Sapronovo1.
Hill 93.4, the Velikaya Riverlies about 15 km to the west
In 1952, the Latvian soldiers' welfare organization, "Daugavas Vanagi" ("Daugava's Hawks"), passed a resolution to recognize March 16th as a day of remembrance of the Legion. For nearly half a century, Latvians in exile celebrated Latvian Legion day without incident: former Legionnaires gathered with friends and family to remember their comrades—wounded, missing, dead (some 30-50,000 Latvians died in the hope of restoring Latvia's independence)—and to mourn the loss of their homeland's freedom. The day typically included a public church service including a moment of silence, and ceremonial and social events. Those same traditions were taken up in Latvia after independence—where the commemoration continued to be observed with no controversy until Russia launched its allegations of Nazism in 1998.
The three-day battle
The Red Army began its expected attack at 6:40am on March 16 with a massive artillery barrage. At 7:00, their tank and infantry attacked the village of Sapronovo and Hill 93.4—Hill 93.4 was a strategic target—possession of the hill gave the the Russians control over the entire Velikaya River valley and the villages of Sapronovo and Oshidkovo. By 7:10, Soviet tank had overrun Sapronovo, and the defeated 2nd Company of 15th Reconnaissance Battalion under Second Lieutenant Krastiņš began its retreat toward the Velikaya River. Hardest hit was the 11th Company of the 43rd Grenadier Regiment, nearly wiped out. Bolstered with newly arrived reinforcements, Russian forces captured Hill 93.4 by 11:00.
The 15th Division's reserve battalion, about 140 men, had already received the order at 7:05 to mobilize and move to Novy Put. A battle group was organized there under Colonel Silgailis consisting of the reserve plus another battalion and company, ordered to launch a counter-attack at 12:10. Their first attack was partly successful, eventually retaking Sapronovo and Oshidkovo, but failing to retake Hill 93.4. The battle group suffered heavy casualties in dead, wounded, and a large number missing in action. After additional action that evening, Sapronovo and Oshidkovo was firmly in Latvian hands and remained so for the remainder of the day. It is worth noting that the 15th Division's official (German) casualty record understated losses as compared to Latvian records of 187 lost within the units most directly engaged in battle by nearly 100 men.
Reinforcements arrived early on the morning of March 17th, however, both companies of antitank gun crews had no guns. Even with reinforcements, the individual companies reassembled averaged no more than about 15 men, a disastrous state of battle strength. The battle group commenced another counter-attack at 9:30 but failed because the Russians attacked at the same time, and with tank support—recall, the Latvian antitank companies had no guns. Latvian forces suffered another dozen killed, 46 wounded and two missing in action. That evening, additional reinforcements were added via redeployment of existing forces, however, the 15th Division was not granted any of the additional reserves it requested in time.
After harassing the enemy overnight and into the the next day, March 18th, the battle group was to counter-attack again at 17:00 with the assistance of air support. The first set of air strikes came at 15:47, followed by another coinciding with the ground attack. Hill 93.4 was back in Latvian hands by 17:40—after relatively light casualties as compared to the prior two days, suffering another seven killed, 20 wounded, and five missing.
After a failed attack, Russian forces ceased action and began to prepare for an attack elsewhere along the battle front.2
Commemoration after Latvia restores independence
Russia launches propaganda campaign, others pile on
That Latvians were alleged to have fought "on the side of the Nazis" was raised as issue during Latvian President Guntis Ulmanis' February 1998 visit to Israel. (A month earlier, Ulmanis had caused an uproar in the Latvian parliament when he apologized for Latvia's role in the Holocaust.) During his visit, the Simon Wiesenthal Center accused Latvia of not doing enough to prosecute Latvians who participated in the Holocaust. The Israelis told Ulmanis that Latvia needed to hunt down Nazi war criminals living in Latvia; Latvian prosecutors responded that they had no such information.
The ensuing debate in politics and the press included accusations in the Western—not only Russian—media that Latvia was a fertile haven for anti-Semites and neo-Nazis. Indeed, Swedish television irresponsibly reported that a commemoration was planned for the upcoming March 16th to celebrate the 55th anniversary of the formation of the Waffen SS—indicative of the instant power of the "Latvian Nazis" narrative.
That year's commemoration, with some 500 participants, was still conducted mostly without incident.3 However, a small number of Russian "demonstrators" screamed at the participants, calling them "Nazis!" and "murderers!" Moreover, there was heavy local and foreign media coverage including by two Russian television stations. This marked the launch of an intense anti-Latvian campaign in the Russian press and the Duma which continues to this day, with Kremlin-funded "anti-fascists" hosting Holocaust memory activists and enlisting foreign participants in protests at the commemoration.
Latvian parliament retaliates against Russia
In retaliation to Russia's provocations, the Latvian parliament (Saeima) voted to establish March 16th as an official state holiday commemorating all Latvians veterans, regardless of army or war, and raised the ante.
On June 17, 1998, the Latvian parliament passed and on July 8, 1998 the president signed a resolution adding March 16th as "Latvian veterans' remembrance day" (Latviešu karavīru atceres dienu, "karavīru" means soldiers' — there is no native word in Latvian for "veteran"), and the first Sunday in December as "Memorial day for the victims of genocide against the Latvian people by the totalitarian Communist regime" (pret latviešu tautu vērstā totalitārā komunistiskā režīma genocīda upuru piemiņas dienu)
The Latvian parliament had declared Russia's narrative that the Soviet Union "liberated" Latvia was a lie. To make sure the point was clear, the speaker of the parliament followed up with a declaration on October 29, 1998 specifically defending the Latvian Legion.4
Twisting the narrative to serve politics
European politicians (fearful that Russia would cut off its gas supply in retaliation?) ran away from the "controversy" or declared that the murderous Waffen-SS and Nazism ought not be celebrated — and then twisted the controversy for their own purposes, denouncing any of their political opposition who support the Latvians as having gotten in bed with neo-Nazis. Even Holocaust scholar Efraim Zuroff joined in the fray and denounced the Tories in 2009 in the British press.
In 2012, The Council of Europe’s Commission against Racism and Intolerance published its report on Latvia (fourth monitoring cycle), in which it condemned commemorations of persons who fought in the Waffen SS and collaborated with the Nazis.5 European Parliament Spokesperson on Human Rights, British MEP Richard Howitt, issued a highly politicized statement condemning the commemoration (2014, see British MEP Richard Howitt, European Parliament Spokesperson on Human Rights, Issues Statement on Riga Waffen SS March), invoking Russia's propagandist code language alleging the "rewriting history" and also using the opportunity to denounce his Tory political opposition for suggesting the Legion were "liberation fighters."
Activists unaware that the Kremlin has hijacked the cause of anti-Nazism extoll their own membership in World Without Nazism and join in the anti-Latvian rhetoric as they stand side-by-side with Putin's paid lackeys "protesting" the annual commemoration. (See Richard Brodsky's 2013 interview.)
It is easy to point to a German issued uniform and equate it to Nazi sympathies (see Latvian Nursery School Posts 'No Jews' Sign, where the school did not actually post the sign, nor is teaching school children about the Legion, in uniform, confirming a "history involving Nazi sympathies"). It is more difficult to defend against such accusations, explaining that so-called collaboration fighting against the re-invading Red Army had nothing to do with and in no way constituted fighting for the ideals of Nazi Germany. Russia now pours well over half a billion dollars a year6 into its global propaganda campaign, making the defense for a factual history of the Latvian Legion all the more challenging.
No rest for the dead
Commemorations today are considered the private affair of the veterans and their relatives.7 Yet even those are under the assault of moral indignation (see Monica Lowenberg's comparison: "Ceremonies in churches and cemeteries are also forms of honouring the deceased (whether they deserve it or not). Witness the masses held in Zagreb and Split, Croatia, last December in honour of the Croatian mass murderer and leader of the Ustashe Ante Pavelic.").
Below, a short clip on Kremlin media trolls.
For those genuinely interested in the security situation in Latvia including the activities of foreign and foreign-sponsored actors, we recommend the relativeliy recent Public report on the actvities of Latvian Security Police in 2017.
| 1 | Duplication of place-names within Russia results in map searches returning locations other than actual villages referenced in the battle account. |
| 2 | Kuzmins, Valdis. The 15th Division of the Latvian Legion in the Fight on the Velikaya River, at the Latvian War Museum website (summarized from source, see Additional Reading) |
| 3 | Legion veterans had begun commemorating March 16 in Latvia in 1990, observing it without controversy. |
| 4 | Declaration on Latvian Legionnaires in the Second World War In 1998, the world media, foreign governments, as well as international organizations were misled that Latvian legionnaires who fought against the USSR in the German Armed Forces in World War II had been supporters of the Hitlerite regime. In order to protect historical truth and the good memory of Latvian soldiers, we declare: In the 1930s, two major totalitarian terrorist states emerged in Europe. The realization of the aggressive goals of these countries began with the conclusion of the so-called Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, as a result of which the state independence of the Republic of Latvia was abolished and it was occupied alternately by both the USSR and Germany. The occupation regimes committed repeated violations of international law and human rights, and even war crimes against the people of Latvia. Both occupying powers violated the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907 on the Laws and Customs of Land War, which prohibits the mobilization of the country's population in the army of the occupying power or their involvement in paramilitary activities (Article 52 of the Convention). Both occupation powers recruited the citizens of occupied Latvia into their armed forces and involved them in various paramilitary formations. Escape from concentration camps or the death penalty threatened to escape. As a result, Latvian citizens had to fight each other during the Second World War. Forced membership in the USSR armed forces is not considered support for Stalin's bloody regime, while forced membership in the Latvian legionaries who fought in the German armed forces is now considered by some political demagogues to support the German fascist regime, although the inclusion of the Latvian legion in the Waffen did not depend on Latvian citizens. Indeed, a certain number of Latvian citizens joined the Latvian Legion voluntarily, but this happened because the USSR carried out genocide in Latvia in 1940-1941. Hundreds of people were shot without trial, tens of thousands were deported to remote areas of the USSR. Germany also committed war crimes and genocide in Latvia during this time, but they affected Latvian citizens to a much lesser extent. Therefore, a certain part of Latvian citizens believed that by joining the Legion, they were protecting themselves and their families against new mass repressions in the USSR, which later really followed. The aim of the soldiers enlisted in the Legion and who joined voluntarily was to protect Latvia from the restoration of the Stalinist regime. They have never taken part in Hitler's punishment of the peaceful population. The Latvian Legion, like the Finnish army, did not fight against the anti-Hitler coalition, but only against one of its member states - the USSR, which was an aggressor against Finland and Latvia. When the Command of the German Armed Forces tried to send legionnaires in battles against the armed forces of the United States, Great Britain and France, all officers and soldiers of the Legion categorically refused. Therefore, the Western Allies - the USA, Great Britain and France — lready in 1946 clarified the issue of the Latvian and Estonian legions and granted the legionaries the status of political refugees. The US mission reiterated in 1950: "The Baltic Waffen SS units (Baltic Legions) are considered to be special units different from the German SS in terms of their purpose, ideology, activities and the qualifications of the soldiers." The rights of Latvia as an occupied state against violations of international law by its occupying powers in its territory are ensured by the above-mentioned Hague Convention, which stipulates: "A belligerent who has violated these regulations must pay compensation." Therefore, the Latvian government has a duty to:
Speaker of the Saeima A.Čepānis Riga, October 29, 1998
(translated from Latvian, at likumi.lv/ |
| 5 | ECRI Report on Latvia (fourth monitoring cycle), February 2012, page 9. LINK |
| 6 | Since writing this originally, Vladimir Putin announced on 28 April 2015 an annual spend of 36 billion rubles equivalent to €643 million. |
| 7 | Eva-Clarita Onken. The Baltic States and Moscow's 9 May Commemoration: Analysing Memory Politics in Europe. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 59, No. 1 (January 2007), pp. 23-46. |