My article limits itself to specific quotes from several sources concerning the time when Nazi Germany occupied Estonia. Where these are lengthy I have paraphrased them, hopefully in a “words in total context” manner. Since space in this paper is limited and the issues are both disturbing and complex, readers are strongly encouraged to visit sources where this material is to be found. These are: Estonian International Commission for Investigation of Crimes Against Humanity (http://www.historycommission.e..., the President of Estonia’s official website, and the consecutive four part article by the Estonian Central Council in Canada (EKN) which appeared in this paper last year and which can be found in the archives under the titles Estonians trapped in stereotypes: Collaborator or victim? (1)(11)(111)(1V). The last article in the series appeared in the December 16th edition (number 50) and most readers probably remember them well, given the large number of postings that were made on the comments area of the on-line edition.
The Commission in its report on the Nazi occupation singled out the Estonian self-government as sharing responsibility with the German authorities…for all criminal actions carried out in Estonia and beyond its borders by military units or police battalions raised in Estonia with their consent. Among the 8 individuals named are those of Hjalmar Mäe and Johannes Soodla. The criminal actions cited are too lengthy to list here.
The Commission stated that the people who left Estonia before the advancing Russians did so because they did not want to find themselves under Soviet occupation again. Some were members of the Estonian self- government or of the security police, or had as members of military units or police battalions guarded camps or towns in which crimes against humanity or genocide had been committed. These people were, with isolated exceptions, never required to account for their actions before a court of law. The outbreak of the Cold War provided a form of amnesty for those who could claim that their struggle had been against the Soviets, even if in alliance with or subordinated to Germany. Questions about the nature of their activity during the war, with a few exceptions were not asked. Accordingly, many refugees were able to emigrate freely to England, Australia, Canada, the United States and elsewhere.
The Commission also stated that it believed being a victim does not preclude acts of perpetration. A people which respects the rule of law should recognize crimes when they have been committed and condemn those who committed them. It is unjust that an entire nation should be criminalized because of the actions of some its citizens; but it is equally unjust that its criminals should be able to shelter behind a cloak of Victimhood.
Among other crimes cited the Commission noted that at the Nazi concentration camp near Klooga in Estonia, approximately 2,000 prisoners were shot and that the Estonian 287 Police Battalion was on duty.
On July 24, 2005, the president of Estonia spoke at Klooga. He said he felt hurt that among the citizens of his state there were those who participated in Nazi crimes. He also said that as long as there are those who wish to justify or even praise the crimes committed during both German as well as Soviet occupations there is a danger that such deeds could be repeated. That is why also future generations have to be aware of everything that happened.
For its part, the Estonian Central Council concluded their four part series stating that Estonian combat units were not directly involved in war crimes. The final paragraph reads “Ah, war - who is the enemy, who’s the friend? Is collaboration a crime? It depends on who wins the war.”