Lithuania presents itself as a state that has learned from history. It hosts panels on inclusion, designates memorial days for Jewish and Roma victims, and speaks fluently about multicultural repair. The language is careful. The framing is polished. The substance is hollow.
The core device is euphemism.
Jews and Roma are described as Lithuania’s “lost” populations. The term is not benign. “Lost” implies disappearance without agency. It reclassifies intentional killing as an impersonal wartime outcome and removes legally attributable actors from the chain of causation.
This is not reconciliation. It is laundering.
Lithuania’s official memory regime isolates atrocity from agency. Jewish and Roma deaths are attributed to “the Germans,” to “the Nazi occupation,” or to abstract wartime forces. When that attribution proves inconvenient, responsibility is redirected—often reflexively—to the Soviets, regardless of chronology, control, or evidence. Lithuanian participation—local police, auxiliary units, administrators, municipal authorities—is minimized, deferred, or omitted altogether.
Attribution stops at Berlin when possible.
When it cannot, it is pushed eastward toward Moscow.
This maneuver is not historical analysis. It is narrative engineering.
The Jewish case exposes the structure most clearly. Mass murder in Lithuania began before German administrative saturation and required immediate local execution capacity. Identification, custody, transport, guarding, property seizure, and killing were performed using Lithuanian personnel embedded in Lithuanian institutions. Yet post-1990 discourse repeatedly frames these crimes as either exclusively German or retroactively Soviet, despite the Soviets not exercising control during the extermination phase.
The Roma case follows the same script. Lithuania now sponsors discussions on stigma, remembrance, and tolerance, presenting itself as a corrective society. Yet when Roma massacres are addressed, attribution again halts at Berlin or dissolves into generic wartime chaos. This is historically untenable. Roma killings, like Jewish mass murder, required local identification, enforcement, and execution. They did not occur without Lithuanian participation.
The state’s commemoration strategy depends on selective clarity: Germans are named where doing so carries no domestic cost; Soviets are invoked where Germans alone are insufficient; Lithuanians are obscured in both cases.
This asymmetry is policy, not oversight.
The same institutions that insist on forensic precision when cataloging Soviet repressions tolerate vagueness, euphemism, and deflection when addressing Nazi-era collaboration. Soviet crimes are litigated as legal history. Nazi-era crimes are treated as atmospheric tragedy. The result is a hierarchy of accountability calibrated to preserve national innocence.
Language performs the work. Jews were not murdered; they “perished.” Roma were not shot; they were “victims of the war.” Villages were not emptied by neighbors; they were “affected by events.” These formulations are engineered. They remove verbs, erase actors, and protect continuity.
Multicultural branding does not cure this defect. A memorial day does not substitute for attribution. Panels on tolerance do not repair archival suppression. A state does not become pluralistic by mourning consequences while denying causes.
Commemoration without accountability is not moral progress. It is reputation management.
Lithuania has perfected a model now visible across Europe: acknowledge that populations vanished, insist the crime belongs elsewhere, and claim ethical standing through performance. It is possible to build monuments, host conferences, and still refuse historical responsibility. Lithuania demonstrates how efficiently this can be done.
Until perpetrators are named with the same clarity as victims, until euphemism is abandoned, and until the Soviet deflection mechanism is dismantled rather than institutionalized, Lithuania’s multicultural posture remains what it is: a simulation.
The dead are remembered.
The crime is obscured.
The state is protected.
That is not justice. It is fraud.
Footnotes / Sources
Baltic Ways Podcast, Destigmatizing the Roma: The Most Forgotten Community in Lithuania (framing and attribution language). https://balticways.eu
Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780465031474/bloodlands/
Christoph Dieckmann, German Occupation Policy in Lithuania, 1941–1944. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110217324/html
Patrick Desbois, The Holocaust by Bullets. https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9780230618446
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Lithuania country studies (Jewish and Roma extermination; local collaboration). https://www.ushmm.org
Grant Arthur Gochin is a diplomat, journalist, and wealth advisor focused on historical accountability, Jewish continuity, and recognition doctrine. He serves as Honorary Consul for the Republic of Togo and is the Emeritus Special Envoy for Diaspora Affairs of the African Union, representing all fifty-five AU member states. He is also Emeritus Dean of the Los Angeles Consular Corps.
Gochin is Advisor on Recognition Doctrine and Sovereignty to the Mthwakazi Republic Party, Office of the President, providing advisory guidance on international recognition, sovereignty theory, and comparative precedent relating to remedial self-determination.
His philanthropic work in Togo led to his investiture as Chief of the Village of Babade. Over several decades, Gochin has documented and restored Jewish heritage in Lithuania, including leading the Maceva Project, which mapped and preserved dozens of abandoned and desecrated Jewish cemeteries. His work exposed state-sponsored Holocaust revisionism and contributed to international recognition of systematic manipulation of historical memory.
Gochin is the author of *Malice, Murder and Manipulation* (2013), which traces the destruction of his family in Lithuania and examines postwar historical distortion. A consistent advocate against antisemitism, antizionism, and other forms of bigotry, he writes and speaks internationally on the political uses of history and the necessity of historical integrity for Jewish survival. His journalism confronts governmental misinformation and disinformation campaigns and maintains a firm position on Israel’s legitimacy and security grounded in historical evidence and collective survival.
Professionally, Gochin is a Certified Financial Planner™ and wealth advisor based in California. He holds an MBA earned with academic distinction and leads Grant Arthur & Associates Wealth Services. He lives in Los Angeles with his husband, son, and dog, Kelev.
https://www.grantgochin.com