JAV lietuvių antrosios misijos parengimas ir įgyvendinimas Vašingtone 1945 m. lapkričio 16-17 d.

LTAntrojo pasaulinio karo pabaigoje, po Potsdamo konferencijos 1945 m. JAV lietuviams nebuvo aiški Vašingtono administracijos pozicija sovietų okupuotos Lietuvos atžvilgiu: ar ji pasisakė už Lietuvos nepriklausomybę, ar už Lietuvos atidavimą sovietų valdžiai? Į tai jautriau sureagavo JAV lietuviai tautininkai, kurie laikėsi nuomonės, jog reikia nuolat tiesiogiai spausti JAV valdžios sluoksnius, kad valdžia aiškiai deklaruotų savo pozicijas ir paremtų Lietuvos laisvę. Taip iškilo naujos – antrosios misijos į Vašingtoną 1945 m. idėja. Jos tikslas buvo suaktyvinti senatorius ir kongresmenus, kad šie pritartų Edwardo A. Kelly’o ir R. E. Williso rezoliucijoms, pateiktoms Senatui ir Kongresui. Rezoliucijose pasisakyta už Lietuvos nepriklausomybę. Nors antroji misija Vašingtone pavyko, rezoliucijos nebuvo patvirtintos. Nežiūrint į tai, JAV politikai ir visuomenė eilinį kartą sužinojo apie kylančius pavojus Lietuvai ir jos nepriklausomybei. Su tautininkais konkuruojanti Amerikos lietuvių taryba savo ruožtu nepalaikė misijos idėjos, nes rengė Amerikos lietuvių kongresą Čikagoje ir planavo savo rezoliucijomis paveikti JAV valdžios sluoksnius, kurie rengėsi pokarinei Taikos konferencijai. Straipsnio tikslas – nušviesti dar netyrinėtą JAV lietuvių tautininkų antrosios misijos į Vašingtoną 1945 m. pabaigoje idėjos atsiradimą, tikslus, parengimą ir rezultatus kaip vieną iš išeivijos Lietuvos laisvinimo reiškinių. Raktažodžiai: antroji misija, tautininkai, Vašingtonas, Amerikos lietuvių taryba, Lietuvai vaduoti sąjunga, 1945, Antanas Olis, Aleksandras Kumskis, Pijus J. Žiūris, Povilas Žadeikis, Leonardas Šimutis, Pijus Grigaitis, „Dirva“, „Vienybė“. [Iš leidinio]

ENIn Lithuanian historiography this event is hardly touched upon, although the Lithuanian-American press of that period, especially the Nationalist newspapers, covered it quite extensively. The issue is directly related to diaspora attempts to defend the rights of Lithuania after World War II. Initially it was quite unclear to the Lithuanian-American community what position the U. S. government would take with respect to Lithuania and the other Baltic States: did it support their quest for reestablishing their independent statehood, or were they consigned to legitimate occupation by the Soviet Union. The Second Mission to Washington illustrates the patriotic attitudes of Lithuanian-American Nationalists during the second half of 1945 in continuation of their political activities along the line Washington––San Francisco––Washington in striving to win back Lithuanian independence. The Second Mission also represented Lithuanian-American preparations in expectation of another and final Peace Conference which in fact never materialized. The leaders of the Lithuanian-American tautininkai (Nationalist) movement (including Anthony Olis, Pijus J. Žiūris, Kazys Karpius, Alexander Kumskis) were convinced that constant pressure on the U.S. government with respect to Lithuania had to be exerted directly on Washington, where representatives of the victorious Allies were continuously engaged in meetings. This was an idea suggested to the Lithuanians by none other than the American representatives to the San Francisco Conference themselves.Accordingly, the Lithuanian-American Nationalists sought to organize mass meetings and to undertake visits to the U. S. State Department and to Congressional offices reminding Senators and Representatives of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s promise given in 1940 that Lithuanian independence would be restored after the war. Through active political manifestations Lithuanian-American Nationalists sought to influence U. S. preparations for the final Peace Conference in the hope that Lithuania’s interests would be respected. Meanwhile the leadership of the Lithuanian-American Council (especially Leonardas Šimutis, Pijus Grigaitis, and Mikas Vaidyla) opposing the Nationalists also prepared for the upcoming Peace Conference but in a different way: they disagreed with the choice of Washington as the focus of Lithuanian efforts and instead began organizing a Lithuanian-American Congress in Chicago. They believed that the U.S. government steadfastly observed the policy of not recognizing the Soviet occupation of Lithuania and that it was sufficient just to adopt resolutions reminding Washington officials of their own proclamations. Such a policy drove these two Lithuanian-American political camps even further apart. Efforts by Lithuanian diplomats to recommend that each of the two competing camps send observers to each other’s functions did not meet with approval. Personal ambitions and an unwillingness to compromise gained the upper hand. As a result, Lithuanian-American political activities remained divided and redundant. And while both sides continued to talk about unity, each side insisted on conditions that were unacceptable to the other side. Lithuanian-American Nationalists did not think that they represented only a small segment of the diaspora, as the leaders of the Lithuanian-American Council claimed.This disagreement just provided the Nationalists with an additional reason to organize separate political actions in the name of the Lithuanian diaspora. That a second Mission to Washington was necessary became obvious to the Nationalists on September 20 after their delegation visited the U.S. State Department and talked with Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson. On September 23, the delegation visited New York, after which it was decided to proceed with organizing the Mission to Washington. Preparations for this went rather quickly: the organizers sent out more than 500 letters to Lithuanian- American community activists urging them to come to Washington; there were appropriate discussions with Senators and Congressmen as well as with representatives of the media; arrangements were made with hotels and a banquet hall was reserved; and fliers for the Lithuanian-American public at large were printed and distributed. The Lithuanian-American Nationalist press called attention to Congressional Resolutions supporting Lithuanian freedom and introduced on November 1 by Democratic Representative Edward A. Kelly of Illinois and concurrently on November 6 by Republican Senator Raymond E. Willis of Indiana. The introduction of these resolutions was presented as a genuine achievement of Lithuanian-American Nationalists which could only be amplified by the Mission in Washington. In any case the Mission’s Banquet was attended by 104 Congressmen and Senators, approximately 50 journalists and several hundred representatives of the Lithuanian-American community. [...]. [From the publication]

• Amerikos lietuvių misijos genezė 1944 m. pab. - 1945 m. pr / Juozas Skirius. Oikos: lietuvių migracijos ir diasporos studijos 2021, 32, p. 33-47.
• Antano Smetonos veikla JAV: Amerikos lietuvių misija ir siekiai atkurti Lietuvos valstybę / Juozas Banionis. Genocidas ir rezistencija. 2020, 1 (47), p. 7-37.
• Bendrojo Amerikos lietuvių šalpos fondo kūrimo 1943–1944 metais peripetijos / Juozas Skirius. Oikos: lietuvių migracijos ir diasporos studijos 2021, 31, p. 73-90.
• JAV lietuvių darbai Lietuvai 1918-2018 metais / Juozas Skirius. Vilnius : Savas takas ir Ko ; 2018. 558 p.
• JAV lietuvių tautininkų 1944 m. vasario 5-6 d. Seimo sušaukimas ir reikšmė / Juozas Skirius. Parlamento studijos 2021, Nr. 30, p. 78-108.
• JAV lietuvių tautininkų "Lietuvai vaduoti sąjungos" įkūrimas 1941 metais / Juozas Skirius. Lietuvos istorijos metraštis 2021, 2021/2, p. 137-155.