Anti-Lithuanian sentiment (sometimes known asLithuanophobia)[1] is the hostility,prejudice,discrimination, distrust,racism orxenophobia directed against theLithuanian people,Lithuania orLithuanian culture. It may also include persecution,oppression or expulsion of Lithuanians as an ethnic group.
Some Belarusian academics are known for engaging inhistorical negationism and trying toculturally appropriate Lithuanian culture, national identity and history of statehood by arguing that the Belarusian wordlitoutsy (літоўцы), meaning ‘Lithuanian’, historically refers to modernBelarusians instead whereas present-day Lithuanians are pretenders who should actually be identified asletuvisy (летувicы) and are accused of stealing theirethnonym as well as the historic name of their homeland.[2][3] Some Belarusian scholars consider the statehood of theGrand Duchy of Lithuania to be primordiallySlavic, rejecting the notion that its origins come from Baltic Lithuanian tribes. HistorianMikola Yermalovich claimed thatKingMindaugas was Belarusian whereas the epicentre of historic Lithuania was actually in central and southern Belarusian lands.[4]
During theBelarusian opposition protests in 2021, a Lithuanian woman was arrested and beaten up by BelarusianOMON forces after they found out she was a Lithuanian citizen.[5]
In 2023, statistics from the previous year alone indicated that a significant number of Lithuanians were exploited or faced discrimination at work inBelgium withFederal Public Service Employment getting around 400 complaints: 168 of cases were from Lithuanians who did not receive their paycheck or it got delayed whereas 234 of them received smaller payments than their coworkers for the same work because of their background. There were also accounts of Lithuanians facing racist or humiliating comments such as being called ‘dirty’, ‘Eastern European’ or noted as coming ‘from the Soviet Union’ in their certificate of employment.[6][7]
In 2007, a scandal began to surface as it emerged that some Irish schools forbid Lithuanian children from using their native tongue. There was a reported case of Lithuanian girls suffering physical abuse because they were considered to be more attractive than their Irish peers. Inspector for Children’s RightsRimantė Šalaševičiūtė stated that “Lithuanian children are feeling unsafe and face discrimination” and concluded that Lithuanian and Irish children were not being treated as equals.[8] In 2008, three Lithuanian men were beaten up because of their nationality by bouncers who claimed that people like them are not welcomed.[9]
After the creation of theGerman Empire in 1871, the population of Prussian Lithuanians inEast Prussia started to decline even further due toGermanisation. Many Lithuanians who wanted a better life were forced to adoptGerman culture and eventually abandoned their native tongue. In Prussian governance and within the clergy, German colonists were regarded as the emissaries of "the chosen people" tasked with the mission of Germanizing the Lithuanians as well as other ethnic groups. Prominent officials consistently underscored national disparities in their writings, characterizing the Lithuanian peasantry as belonging to an inferior human race predestined to serve the Germans as theirslaves.[10] They also believed their culture being superior toLithuanian culture whereas the nation itself was considered to be politically inept. In 1916, a German science publicationDer Koloss aut fonernen Fusen inMunich wrote:
[T]he Lithuanian himself has a tendency to superior German culture and by taking this path, he can become a loyal citizen of theReich. [...] those who think that a Lithuanian is already mature enough for even the most primitive form of self-governance are deeply mistaken.[11]
DuringWorld War II, in accordance withGeneralplan Ost, theNazis planned to commit a mass-scale genocide of Lithuanians — 85% were to be physically exterminated, which was the second-highest percentage of planned killings of an ethnic group inGerman-occupied Europe only to be surpassed byLatgalians.[12]
Historically, Lithuanians in Latvia were calledleiši, which apart from its primary meaning was also used to refer to someone who is negligent, lazy, uneducated and illiterate. Following Latvia’s declaration of independence, this term was soon replaced by aneologismlietuvieši due to its negative connotations and official complaints from theLithuanian Government regarding the designation of the nationality of their compatriots inLatvian passports.Philologist Aistė Brusokaitė suggests that Latvians were the first ones to call Lithuanianszirga galva, meaning 'horse head', which was later adopted as an insult by Lithuanians themselves:
Since Latvians were economically more well off than Lithuanians, Latvians that lived by the border used to take young Lithuanian workmen to serve on their farms to do all the dirty work. Latvians wereLutherans and Lutherans always paid more attention to education. Because of this, Latvians were more educated than Lithuanians, which is why less educated, illiterate Lithuanians were sometimes looked down upon and called ‘zirga galva’.[13]
Before World War II, theGovernment of Latvia closed Lithuanian organisations and schools, which contributed to many Lithuanians fleeing the country as they could no longer ensure proper education for their children. In the 1950s and 60s, however, economically struggling Lithuanians were once again resettling in Latvia where they faced some degree of discrimination from the locals who did not consider them to be equal or trustworthy. There were reported cases of inciting tensions and insults directed at the Lithuanian people as well as children bullied at school for having Lithuanian parents.[14]
The earliest depiction of Lithuanians, found in the few sources dating back to the 13th century, is decidedly negative. They were portrayed as semi-wild, greedy, and cruel pagans.[15] This stereotype emerged as a result of numerous Lithuanian raids on Polish lands, which continued until the end of the 14th century.[15] It was largely repeated by the chroniclerJan Długosz in the 15th century, who was also the first to attribute honorable Roman origins to the Lithuanians.[15] During thePolish–Lithuanian union, interactions primarily took place at the level of the nobility. The Lithuanian nobility gradually adopted the Polish language and cultural elements, yet they were often perceived by the Polish nobility as uncouth and poor. Lithuanians were viewed as stubborn, distrustful, and cunning.[16] Despite this, they were treated as "one of us."[17] The Lithuanian nobility, on the other hand, regarded the Crown nobility as arrogant braggarts prone to megalomania and fond of drunkenness, referring to them as "monkeys."[18] By the 18th century, there was a widespread belief in Lithuania that the Lithuanian nobility spoke Polish better than theCrown nobility.[18] The common Lithuanian people, as well as the lower nobility, often referred to as Samogitians (Polish:Żmudzini), were considered by Poles as barbaric and semi-pagan, speaking an incomprehensible, "bird-like" language.[17]
In the 19th century, ethnographers and researchers became increasingly interested in the simple Lithuanian folk, who, unlike the nobility, did not use the Polish language in their daily lives.[19] This interest was connected with the "mythologization of Lithuania" in Polish literary culture, which portrayed Lithuania as a land of peace and tolerance, where robust, simple folk lived in harmony with the Polish manor.[20] In the Polish language, a term analogous to "chłopomania" (lit. 'peasant mania') appeared: "litwomania" (lit. 'Lithuania mania') referring to obsessive fascination with peasant Lithuanian identity.[21]
The term took on a pejorative connotation when theLithuanian national movement emerged, which generally viewed Polish influence in Lithuania negatively.[22] One of its demands was for Polish-speaking Lithuanians to return to the language of their ancestors and embrace an ethnic Lithuanian identity.[23] In response, a historical theory emerged, claiming that a significant portion of Lithuania's inhabitants had Polish origins, being descendants of thousands of captives brought to Lithuania during the Middle Ages. This theory originated in the early 20th century, primarily in the writings of historiansWładysław Abraham andZygmunt Gloger. Although challenged by subsequent generations of historians, it persisted until the second half of the 20th century.[24]
In Polish public opinion, there was often a lack of understanding regarding the emerging Lithuanian movement, which was perceived as a harmful division of the Polish-Lithuanian community. Many saw it as a Russian, and later also as a German, conspiracy.[25] Litwomans were often perceived as renegades, deliberately abandoning Polish culture and language.[26] The possibility of Lithuanian culture functioning independently of Polish culture was frequently questioned.[27] These traits were most evident in the writings of Poles living in Lithuania. Among them, it was common to deny the Lithuanian movement the exclusive right to use names like "Lithuania," "Lithuanians," and "Grand Duchy of Lithuania," as they felt themselves to be, at the very least, equal heirs to this legacy.[28] Particularly in conservative and national circles, there was a dominant belief in the artificiality of Lithuanian national aspirations, which were seen as lacking any solid linguistic or historical foundations.[29] The entire matter was often reduced to temporary social tensions between the peasant class and the nobility. For a long time, Lithuanian activists, and later the Lithuanian nation, were regarded as "younger, misguided brothers" who would eventually realize the obvious mistake of rejecting Polish identity.[30] Despite the growing tension and new areas of conflict, a lasting anti-Lithuanian sentiment did not develop during this period. Lithuanians were still seen as a close and friendly group, with all negative traits attributed to a group of Lithuanian activists detached from reality.[30]
The conflict over the auxiliary language (in addition to Latin) in churches within parishes inhabited by both Polish- and Lithuanian-speaking populations, which took place between 1904 and 1914, had a significant impact on the formation of mutual stereotypes.[31] Many nationally-minded Lithuanian priests demanded a greater presence of the Lithuanian language, which often met with resistance from the broader clergy, who were attached to the role of the Polish language in the Catholic Church in Lithuania.[32]
On 23 June 1944, in response to theGlinciszki massacre, which was a Lithuanian revenge campaign for killing their auxiliary policemen, the Polish resistance movement Home Army killed up to 100 Lithuanian civilians[33] in theDubingiai massacre. The victims included newborns, children, women and the elderly. They also killed 273 Lithuanians inMolėtai from 1943 to 1945.[34]
In 2013, during a football match betweenLech Poznań andŽalgiris clubs inPoznań, Lech fans publicly hanged up a banner, saying “Lithuanian boor, kneel before the Polish master” (Polish:Litewski chamie, klęknij przed polskim panem).[35] Thousands of Poles signed a letter of apology onGazeta Wyborcza following the incident claiming that “in Poland, there’s no place for such primitive behaviour that insults the Lithuanian nation.”[36]
After the partitions of thePolish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, most ofLithuania proper fell under Russian rule. From the early 19th century, Russian ethnic policies concerning annexed land were different: unlike inPoland,Latvia,Estonia, orFinland, where Russians imposed more mild integration policies mainly seeking to turn them into loyal subjects of the state, Lithuanians, together with Belarusians andUkrainians, faced assimilation.[37] The unsuccessfulJanuary Uprising (1863–64) resulted inGovernor GeneralMikhail Muravyov initiating the Programme of Restoration of Russian Beginnings that claimed the Lithuanian land had been Russian since ancient times.[38] In 1863, Lithuanian publications in theLatin script were banned. From 1872, only theCyrillic script was allowed and Lithuanian was banned in schools.[37]
Following theoccupation of East Prussia, around 130,000Prussian Lithuanians suffered fromethnic cleansing as they were slaughtered by theRed Army. Eventually, thousands of local orphans, also known aswolf children (In Lithuanian:vilko vaikai), were left behind to fend for themselves, with many Prussian Lithuanian children escaping to Lithuania proper by crossing theNeman.[39][40] According to theResearch Centre of Lithuania, “In Lithuania Minor and all of East Prussia, there were almost no settlements where the Soviets wouldn’t have killed and tortured the civilian population, destroyed or pillaged their property. Men were killed and women wereraped.”[41]NKGB officer Kuzmyn in Klaipėda writes:
InKlaipėda andŠilutė, there are all-around rapes of women happening, regardless of their nationality, physical stance, or age. The beautiful city of Šilutė that was left by the Germans without a battle now looks repulsive.[42]
In 1947, the Council of Lithuania Minor inFulda,Germany, protested against the ethnic crimes and Russian colonisation of their homeland. Some historians deny accusations of genocide against Prussian Lithuanians, claiming it to be the result of soldier brutality.[40] In 2006, this massacre was officially recognised by Lithuania asgenocide against the Prussian Lithuanian people perpetrated by the Soviet regime.[43]
During the Soviet times, the famous slogan “Lithuania shall remain but without Lithuanians” by statesmanMikhail Suslov was coined.[44] Once Lithuania wasoccupied by the Soviet Union in 1940, immediateRussification followed: theCommunist Party of the Soviet Union would give administration positions in theLithuanian SSR to Russian representatives who often could not speak Lithuanian, while ethnic Russians were encouraged to resettle in Lithuania. In some governmental institutions of Soviet Lithuania, the Lithuanian language was banned. In 1948, 80% of all communists in Lithuania were Russians, whereas only 18.5% of them were Lithuanians, with the situation slightly improving afterStalin's death. In 1953, the leadership of the Lithuanian SSR indirectly admitted that there were attempts to Russify Lithuania and plans to eliminate the politics of national character. In the 1980s, Russification intensified in public life as well: it was mandatory for theLithuanian Communist Party to report on its progress regarding Russification. From 1972, Lithuanian names were started to be written in accordance withEastern Slavic naming customs aspatronyms were introduced.[45]
Similarly to the Soviet Union, modernRussia has also been accused of historical negationism, claimingKaliningrad to be “primordially Russian land” despite the region sharing much closer cultural ties with its neighbouring countries and being a historic Baltic land of Prussian Lithuanians and Old Prussians for centuries. Historical bookThe Western Part of the Lithuanian Ethnographic Territory, written by ProfessorPavel Kushner (Knyshev) [ru], exploring Baltic people’s ties to the region, has been removed from all Kaliningrad libraries and mainland Russia, with possibly only a few copies in archives remaining.[46]
Lithuanian authorities have received several reports about the unfounded removal of Lithuanian monuments. In 2003, a bust ofKristijonas Donelaitis inGusev was desecrated with oil paint before its unveiling ceremony — the periodicalKaliningradskaya Pravda did not investigate the incident. In 2022, a memorial plaque inSovetsk dedicated to philosopherWilhelm Storost-Vydūnas was removed. Kaliningrad authorities have also removed a stone sculpture commemorating the famousPrussian resistance leaderHerkus Monte.[47]
In the present-day political context, Lithuanians themselves have been regularly insulted by being labeled as "nazis" or "fascists" by the Russian state media and press due to the Lithuanian killing squadYpatingasis būrys carrying out atrocities against theJewish population during theHolocaust, and Lithuanian leadership defending partisans of questionable reputation.[48][49][50] Russian programmes have also come under scrutiny for using deceitful language when spreading false historical narratives about Lithuania: most notable examples includeinsinuating that Lithuanians served in a nationalWaffen-SS legion[51][note 1] or labellingAntanas Smetona's regime as "fascist", from which Lithuania was then liberated by the Soviets, even though Moscow originally supported its initiators and even funded press publications owned byNationalists.[52]
In 2015, Russian politicianVladimir Zhirinovsky threatened theterritorial integrity of Lithuania by urging Russia to “take back Klaipėda and Vilnius” on national television.[53] In 2022, theState Duma of Russia registered a bill that proposed repealing Russia's resolution recognisingLithuania's independence.[54][55] In 2023, as a reaction to thePresident of LithuaniaGitanas Nausėda's encouragement to send more military aid to Ukraine, Russian television hostVladimir Solovyov made claims suggesting that Lithuania is not worthy of its independence, threatened the future of its sovereignty, and asked: “Why do we put up with their existence?”[56]
In March 2025, theMoscow State Institute of International Relations’ publishing house published a 400-page monograph titled "History of Lithuania", which was a toll ofRussian propaganda intended to distort Lithuania's history and statehood by denying or questioningLithuanian people's history, culture, language, and state symbols, alongside explicitly denying Russia's aggression and occupation of Lithuania throughout history as well as atrocities perpetrated by Russians against Lithuanians.[57][58] The book was authored by nine individuals, with Maxim Grigoryev, head of the pro-Kremlin Foundation for the Study of Democracy Problems, as its lead author. Additionally, the book's foreword was written byRussian Foreign MinisterSergey Lavrov,[59] and one of its coauthors included Giedrius Grabauskas, a former associate of Lithuanian politicianAlgirdas Paleckis (former chairman of Lithuanian political partySocialist People's Front), who was convicted in July 2021 of spying for Russia.[60]
There have been instances of Russian ethnically motivated violence directed against the Lithuanians living in Lithuania. In 2020, a 24-year-old Russian man who receivedpolitical asylumphysically assaulted a Lithuanian teacher inVisaginas for teaching Russians Lithuanian in school and called Lithuanians "man-eaters."[61][62] Lithuanians have also been attacked for addressing Russian speakers in Lithuanian, either as pedestrians or clients.[63][64]
Lithuanians have reported facing double standards when seeking to come to theUnited Kingdom. There have been reports of Lithuanians having to pay £55 more for obtaining aUK visa than citizens from other EU countries. Despite Britain’s official explanation that the larger price is a result of Lithuania not ratifying the Social Charter of the European Commission of 1961,Embassy of Lithuania claimed this decision to be discriminatory and “not fully convincing” as the country did ratify the Social Charter of 1986, which “[f]rom a legal stance, is not a more inferior document.”Post-Brexit amendments affecting labour migration in Britain have also been considered discriminatory against Lithuanian migrant workers, as these amendments resulted in a significant increase in costs for employers to employLithuanian emigrants compared to other nationals.[65] In the words of the representative forIOM Audra Sipavičienė, additional taxes for employers “may contribute to Lithuanians being discriminated against in the labour market. This means there will be no interest in taking a more expensive Lithuanian instead of a cheaper Latvian.”[66] Additionally, several instances of hostility towards Lithuanian migrants, accompanied by property damage, have been recorded, although motives for such attacks may vary.[67][68][69] In 2016, a twelve-year-old Lithuanian boy was beaten up inManchester because of his nationality by his British peer, who was ordered to do so by his mother waiting for him in the car. Many Lithuanian families have claimed their children suffered abuse in public schools because of their nationality.[70]
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
