Mapping Different Models of Lithuanian Statehood in 1900–1910s

Based on theoretical insights into nationalism, this article concentrates on the political discourse of the 1910s which was focused on two questions. First, what kind of arguments were used in favour and against on mapping different models of Lithuanian state? And second, why most of the Lithuanian politicians supported the idea of an independent state in the context of theories of nationalism? The following conclusions have been made in this article: 1. Lithuanian politicians stated several arguments against the autonomy of Lithuania within the state of Russia (P. Klimas and A. Voldemaras), and against a common federal state of Lithuania and Belarus (J. Purickis). 2. They also presented pros and cons concerning a federal state of Poland and Lithuania. The arguments in favour were associated with the security, economic benefit and international recognition de jure of the state. The arguments against mainly concerned the disagreements between Lithuanians and Poles in the past, and national conflicts regarding the decision of Lithuanians to build a state of Lithuania in the ethnic territory (A. Voldemaras, P. Klimas). 3. When discussing a model of a state as a federation of Lithuania and Latvia, all the arguments were only in favour due to common historical and cultural experiences, possibilities to build a common and competitive economy, also considering security and geopolitical factors in pursuing recognition de jure (J. Šliūpas). 4. Comparison of various models of restoration of statehood of Lithuania reveals that the Lithuanian politicians were unanimously against Lithuania with a status of autonomy within the state of Russia, and against a common federal state with Poland or Belarus (P. Klimas, A. Voldemaras, J. Purickis, J. Šliūpas). However, their opinions diverged concerning a federal state of Lithuania and Latvia. J. Šliūpas was the only consistent and loyal proponent of this model of a state. 5. The nationalism in Lithuania in the early 20th century was defined in terms of “objective and ethnic” (P. Klimas) as well as “subjective and political” (A. Voldemaras) factors, i.e., based on them, every nation has the right to take a decision to build an independent state. 6. The majority of Lithuanian politicians unanimously agreed that neither autonomy nor a federation with another state could resolve national conflicts in the early 20th century. Consequently, the ultimate goal of the Lithuanian nation was to build its independent state of Lithuania.