Acta Historica Universitatis Klaipedensis

The Grand Duchy of Finland was the first region to declare independence from the Russian Empire in the final stages of the First World War. However, the declaration of independence in December 1917 was insufficient, and Finland fought a war of independence until the country’s sovereignty and its democratic political system were finally secured. The fiercest phase of the war was in the spring of 1918. The main parties were, on one hand, the Finnish left, which received support from the Russian Bolsheviks, and on the other hand, the non-socialist groups supported by Germany. The German armed forces played a significant role in the fact that the war ended with the victory of the Finnish democratic government. Previous research has investigated thoroughly the details of the military operations by the German forces, but the role and importance of the German armed forces in the overall picture of the war has received relatively little attention. This article analyses in more detail what kind of contribution the German troops made. There are indications that their importance was greater than most scholars have estimated.

When the People’s Council of Latvia gathered in Riga on 18 November 1918 to proclaim Latvia’s independence, the Latvian Provisional Government did not yet have an army capable of defending it, and the entire territory claimed for the future Latvia was still under the control of German troops. In late 1918 and early 1919, the subsequent building up of the first army formations of the Republic of Latvia took place under extremely challenging circumstances. The government lacked financial resources, weapons, equipment and ammunition, while the Red Army advanced rapidly from the east. Initially, the armed forces were formed based on a compromise reached with Germany and according to the principle of ethnic division. After the loss of Rīga and the withdrawal to Liepāja in January 1919, a new line of division emerged: Latvian military units loyal to the Provisional Government were simultaneously formed in two distant regions, in the Liepāja area and in Estonia. The article aims to analyse the impact of both these factors on the development of the Latvian armed forces and the course of the Latvian War of Independence.

In early 1919, Courland, which had already been semi-abandoned during the First World War, turned into an area of the Baltic region where at least four political agendas, and, in many cases, the military forces that supported them, clashed. The Bolsheviks exported their world revolution and acted through the Army of Soviet Latvia. The German armed forces had withdrawn from parts of Estonia and Latvia, and were still under the command of Berlin. Volunteer units formed with the help of the German army, many of which included local Baltic Germans. The Latvian Provisional Government and the units loyal to it was under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Oskars Kalpaks. All these forces needed motivated soldiers and loyal civilians who might become engaged in military activities. The article discusses the political, economic and social backgrounds that contributed to the motivation of soldiers and the public support for the warring parties, with a particular focus on how important the sense of belonging and identity was in these circumstances.

Following the Bolshevik Red Army’s invasion of what it considered to be the ‘western fringes’ of the former Imperial Russia in November 1918, the Latvian Provisional Government, which claimed part of this territory, concluded an agreement with August Winnig, the plenipotentiary of the German government, on 29 December 1918, to provide aid in its defence. After being promised land, volunteers recruited in Germany headed eastwards to reinforce the units that had already begun to be formed there from the forces of the armed Baltic Germans or the remnants of the retreating German army. Major General Rüdiger von der Goltz, who arrived in Liepāja at the beginning of 1919, took command of all anti-Soviet forces in west Latvia and northwest Lithuania, which were merged into the 6th Reserve Corps. In March 1919, the 6th Reserve Corps launched the Tauwetter, Eisgang and Frühlingswind offensive operations. The offensive resulted in the defeat of the 1st Rifle Brigade and the 2nd Rifle Division of the Soviet Latvian Army, and the liberation of Kurzeme (Kurland) up to the River Lielupe. The article discusses the structure and battle strength of the opposing forces, and the plans drawn up by both sides, and describes in detail the course of the fighting. The aim of the research is to analyse the factors that enable one side or another to implement the principles of mission command while executing manoeuvre warfare.

This article examines the Baltic Regiment, a military unit of Baltic Germans that served under the Estonian army in the Estonian War of Independence, fighting against the Bolshevik Red Army. It focuses on issues of loyalty and the complex relationships between the Baltic Regiment, the Estonian military leadership and Estonian society. Before Estonia declared independence in 1918, the Baltic Germans were the ruling class in Estonian society, and centuries of tension between them and the Estonian population created challenges for cooperation during the war. These strained relations led the Estonian military leadership to assign the Baltic Regiment to the Russian White Army, keeping the unit at a distance from Estonia. Despite this, the Baltic Regiment fought courageously as part of the Estonian forces and earned recognition, both locally and internationally, as an elite and highly effective combat unit. After the war, the Estonian commander-in-chief General Laidoner highlighted the Baltic Regiment as an example of successful cooperation between Estonia’s diverse ethnic groups.

For many societies in East Central Europe and the Baltic region, the First World War did not truly end in 1918. The wartime conditions of that year set the stage for the Council of Lithuania to pass a resolution restoring Lithuania’s independence. Born amid conflict, and striving to establish its sovereignty, Lithuania began forming its own army in the autumn of 1918. However, building the Lithuanian armed forces required two years of intense engagement in regional conflicts. Initially, the army relied on voluntary enlistment, but this approach proved disappointing due to the low number of volunteers. As a result, the Lithuanian government implemented compulsory military service in early 1919. This article examines a widespread phenomenon that emerged during this period: the evasion of military service by Lithuanian men. On average, one in five men eligible for the draft failed to report to the draft office, and some conscripts who were enlisted subsequently deserted. The article analyses the causes of the evasion of military service, and explores specific instances of evasion in 1919 and 1920.

The war which covered the future territory of Lithuania in 1919 and 1920 after the end of the First World War has already been described several times by historians. The army loyal to the Lithuanian government in Kaunas took part in military action against three enemies: the Red Army, the Polish army and the West Russian Volunteer Army (a military formation of the Bermontians). When considering parallels, continuity and differences between the First World War and the three conflicts in Lithuania known as ‘the War of Independence’, historians have pointed out a crucial difference: the relatively small Lithuanian army was engaged in low-intensity military action. However, the question of the intensity of the combat has not specifically been addressed in research so far. This paper offers a new approach to analysing the intensity of the two-year war. For the first time, the authors have juxtaposed three data sets: analysing the number of days of combat, assessing the frequency and impact of the use of heavy weapons (artillery and/or aviation), and comparing it with data on the losses of the Lithuanian army’s manpower.

Correlates of War (COW), an ongoing project initiated in the United States to monitor all the wars around the globe, covers the Estonian and Latvian wars of independence, and the war between Poland and Russia, but does not represent the Lithuanian War of Independence in detail. It only includes one episode of the war, the Polish-Lithuanian war. The article points out that this is partly correlated with the lack of a single term for these events in Lithuania. The author assesses the names of the war or wars of independence circulating in Lithuania, asking to what extent their differences have had an impact on the external (non)recognition of the War of Independence. After reviewing the paradoxical situation with war names circulating in Lithuania, the essay concludes with a reflection on what caused the establishment of the plural name in Lithuania. Despite this, the author argues that, from the perspective of external recognition, a singular name would better represent the nature of the processes that occurred in 1919 and 1920, and would contribute more to the consolidation of the national identity.