Former Lithuanian President Valdas Adamkus: “Once you put your hand on the Constitution, your life changes forever”

Valdas Adamkus, the first president of a post-1990 independent Lithuania, is great to talk to. Attentive, friendly, insightful and open, Adamkus is a trove to any journalist willing to convey the messages the 92-year-old has for everyone: modernity cannot deny traditions but eyes cannot be closed to the societal developments of the world, and in Lithuania heroes do not sit in presidential palaces but are among the hard-working tenacious grassroots.  The Baltic Times Magazine spoke to Adamkus on a range of issues.

To Americans, Valdas Adamkus is known for cleaning up pollution in Lake Michigan and the other Great Lakes; to Lithuanians, he is known as the president who brought new western standards to the country, thus changing the face of Lithuania in perpetuity.

It would be possible to write an entire volume of Lithuanian history based on Valdas Adamkus’ biography. He grew up in Kaunas, the interwar capital of Lithuania. Growing up, his best friends included the son of the third Lithuanian president, Kazys Grinius, and the brother of Vytautas Landsbergis, the first Lithuanian leader after Soviet control. During the Nazi occupation, they began publishing an underground, anti-German newspaper titled, ‘Youth, be on duty!’ Adamkus fought alongside insurrectionists against Soviet rule, though later he was forced to leave the homeland. Nevertheless, he persistently continued his activities abroad. In 1948, Adamkus contributed significantly while competing at the Olympic Games of the Enslaved Nations. Winning two gold and two silver medals in track and field events, Adamkus is now regarded as the fastest president in the world, with a time of 10.8 seconds in the 100-metre dash. In the summer of 1949, Adamkus went to the United States with his family, and settled into a Lithuanian-American community in Chicago. His life journey, in many ways, mirrors that of the hopeful American Dream – Adamkus started off with just five dollars in his pocket before finding work in a car parts factory. Eventually, he earned a degree from the Illinois Institute of Technology and began working at the newly established US Environmental Protection Agency. Finally, after fifty years of Soviet occupation, Adamkus returned to his motherland and became the president of the Republic of Lithuania in 1998, serving for two terms (1998-2003 and 2004-2009). Even at the age of 92, Valdas Adamkus still continues to rank as one of the most influential political figures in Lithuania.

Chronologically, January, February and March include some of the most significant events for Lithuania – Freedom Defenders’ Day, Restoration of the State Day, Restoration of Independence Day. Mr. President, what do each of those dates mean to you, especially because you have been perceived as the person who has connected two epochas of independent Lithuania?

Both the 16th of February and the 11th of March in a moral and spiritual sense are very similar. February 16th marks the day when the Council of Lithuania unanimously adopted the Act of Independence in 1918, declaring Lithuania an independent state. The 11th of March was the day that Lithuania declared itself independent from the Soviet Union in 1990. There is only one difference; the 16th of February inspired and united people, who, despite very difficult circumstances, still cherished love and focused on creating their own state. Comparatively, the 11th of March commemorates the restoration of Lithuania after the long fight against occupation which lead to the crowning event - receiving independence. It showed that our nation, in the first phase of its independence (from 1918 till 1940, Ed.), was able to rear the strongly patriotic younger generation, who took strength from their parents and built the state of Lithuania on firm, moral legs. It held that there was a strong aspiration for independence during those 50 years of occupation, and it proved to the world that we are determined to live freely and autonomously. These celebrations keep us vital and break the routine, where we are faced with various concerns about people’s well-being and the problems of our system in general. The reminiscences of celebrations is something that strengthens us and induces us not to refuse such ideals. After a long time we – however, translated in a more realistic sense – are realizing and will continue to realize, as we move this path forward.

I am a granddaughter of a deportee myself and I grew up listening to my granny’s stories from her time in Siberia (during the period 1941-1953, approximately 130,000 Lithuanians were exiled to remote areas of the USSR, in Siberia, the Arctic Circle areas or Central Asia, Ed.). She always emphasized the symbolic importance of the 16th of February. Granny liked to tell how that day was observed by her family – although they were thousands of kilometers from the homeland, they were at least together in thoughts with Lithuania. And how did you – personally and collectively with other Lithuanians – commemorate this date in the so-called free world? 

In emigration we did not have such a problem because our whole generation were not economic emigrants of economics but purely political ones. The withdrawal from Lithuania was a protest directed against the occupation, which had an aim to get back our freedom and independence. The 16th of February became, to us, the source of spiritual strength, which maintained Lithuanianness, determination, and efficient fighting whilst seeking Lithuanian independence. I think that the ceremonies of commemorations themselves did not differ from the commemorations of the interwar Lithuania period. Everything was solemn. And not only in the ranks of one’s people’s, but also highlighting it in the foreign communities that we were living in.

 In one of your books I saw the picture of Marquette Park, where a crowd of Lithuanians with our countries’ attributes is depicted. The whole event was held alongside the square, nearby the home of the Chicago mayor. Was this also a particular tradition?

Yes, traditionally it was held in the very center of Chicago. Others often wondered how we managed to get the favour of the city government – because we almost stopped the traffic with our Lithuanian gatherings! Lithuanian flags, solemn speeches… Folk dance groups even used to make short performances! I would say that the celebration of Lithuanian independence was mentioned in astonishing circumstances, attracting the attention of Americans as well.

In the United States, the main center of Lithuanian culture is undoubtedly the city of Chicago. The first Lithuanian emigration wave settled in Bridgeport, but afterwards moved to Marquette Park, and finally to Lemont. How did Americans evaluate that kind of Lithuanian suburb? What about other foreigners? How did Lithuanians integrate into another state’s life? 

To my mind, the question of integration is not related to the founding of Lithuanian suburbs in one place or another as you have mentioned. It was self-contained, uniting itself with a goal to maintain the nationality and further develop Lithuanian culture. In my opinion, the concentration of Lithuanians in those separate suburbs led to more permanence – Americans also paid attention to this. They – various officers attending our concerts or celebrations, for instance – were surprised by our national group, which, despite being far away from the motherland, was not only able to save their identity, but also mature it over the years. It kept hope that matters in the issues of Lithuanian freedom would get better someday. I’m personally proud of our emigrees, who managed to achieve such significant results – Lithuania’s case for independence became famous worldwide.

I was amazed by your, Mr. Raimundas Mieželis’ and other active Lithuanians 1956 initiative of petition to President Dwight D. Eisenhower. You sought that the USA, either by using its direct influence on the Soviet Union or through organizations like the Red Cross, start caring about the destiny of Lithuanian deportees. How did you manage to collect the signatures of Lithuanians while having so little time? Bearing in mind, there was no Internet or other improvements of communication at the time.

Well, firstly, I succeeded in making a very effective, central organizational committee consisting of all organizations which involved Lithuanian youth. It was an unprecedented incident – to bring together representatives of all our active youth organisations’ managements, people who were united by one common purpose. It showed that organizations which existed in the United States had a sufficiently sturdy foundation to deal with tasks like the latter. The leaders of the organization, who formed the core of our committee, spread out the petition within their organizations, signing pages all throughout America. Later, we just simply needed to gather and bind them and present it to the President. We knew we had a certain goal, we knew we had a limited time and we got our job done.

In fact, at that time President Dwight D. Eisenhower had some serious health problems and he was replaced by Vice President Richard Nixon. How did the meeting go? Was it your first visit to the Capitol, the White House?

As far as it concerns me and the youth organizations, yes, it was the very first time. Because before that, privilege, or I can even say the monopoly, was in the hands of the Lithuanian American Council (LAC), which was the main American organization guiding the political life of emigrated Lithuanians. But this time it was a different, new, and I believe, for some people unexpected deed, demonstrating that Lithuanian youth can also do something individually and achieve it. Indeed, your observation was correct: it was truly the first time, when in a form of organizational youth, we appeared in the highest state strata.

And what was the impression when you – young people – got so much attention?

Of course, I can answer only for myself. I was happy knowing that our idea finally turned into reality. Our activities received a big resonance not only in our press but also were reflected widely in the American press. Our deed rang through the American Congress because the delegation was accredited there, as well as in the Senate. To conclude, it was not simply a one or two hour performance for American society. It actually echoed from one corner of the country to the other.

It’s also worth mentioning that you invited U.S. first ladies – in 1972 Patricia Nixon, in 1976 Betty Ford – to the Lithuanian Folk Dance Festival. How did you manage to do that?

It may be a bit uncomfortable to say but under existing, favourable conditions, using my official status in a relatively high American governmental service, I was able to gain access to the right people – members of government, Congressmen. I simply used those chances by exploiting my personal connections. Concerning the appearances of the first ladies, of course, it gained a huge amount of attention. We astounded all national groups in the United States. The announcement of Mrs. Nixon’s arrival at the opening ceremony of the Folk Dance Festival rang throughout the entire country. Later, many people called me and asked the question, ‘How?’ It was the first time a person of such a rank participated in an event of a national group. It was a big surprise for everyone, but for us it was more of the recognition.

You spent a big part of your life with „Santaros-Šviesos“ (Concord-Light, Ed.) federation and its activities – the periodicals, books, conferences and congresses. Without any doubt it had an enormous impact on Lithuanian political thought and development of a high culture. You also personally knew many bright-minded Lithuanian emigrants. Who among them, in your opinion, are undeservedly forgotten nowadays? What would you recommend for future generations to investigate in the field of emigrated Lithuanians’ intellectual heritage?

It’s a complicated question to answer. I don’t know if I could all that easily pick out who has been forgotten. Perhaps I see the lack of a general analysis of Lithuanian emigrants’ contributions covering their creative strengths or emphasizing their works. On the other hand, I think at least the main creators are known to the Lithuanian audience. I’d like more of them to be included in our educational system, so that’s why I guess it concerns the teaching aspect more. It’s important that our young generation be interested in this while studying and learning. Nevertheless, our emigrants, even in such difficult conditions, managed to keep the spirit of creativity alive and supplement the common Lithuanian cultural heritage.

When I visited the library named in your honor (President Valdas Adamkus Library, Ed.) in Kaunas, I saw with my own eyes how many new shipments were brought in – many boxes of books from the USA, including the personal collection of Aleksandras Štromas. I realized then there is still so much undiscovered about Lithuanian emigrants’ heritage. Because I finished high school relatively recently, I can comment that the topic of lives of emigrants is rarely spoken about in schools. It is mostly disclosed during the Lithuanian language and literature lessons, when pupils inspect novels by Marius Katiliškis or Antanas Škėma. Meanwhile, history lessons are quite silent on this subject.

I agree with you totally. And, as I have noticed, there should be more attention paid to analyses of emigrants’ ability to save their cultural identity. For instance, examination of results – what it gave to the common Lithuanian culture and the domain of the preservation of Lithuanianness.

In some previous interviews you have mentioned that the values of your promoted liberalism differ from the current Lithuanian liberalism. Could you please tell us what those essential distinctions include?

It’s hard to point a finger at it and name it. In my opinion, general striving or, in other words, I don’t see the proclamations that ‘we organize, conduct and move in a liberal way’ realization in Lithuania. Maybe it is caused by outside imperfections which emerge from social conditions. Liberalism had no appropriate foundations to form in Lithuania. In that field we feel that we lack guides and leaders, and that our liberal idea drowns. Sometimes it seems to me that the liberal thought itself – the promotion of the free word, free will and a free mindset – is distorted in Lithuania. Thinking that liberalism opens any liberties which deny the main moral values, deform the liberal ideal and converting it, in some cases, creates chaos. The only hope is that over time, a certain group of people will remain, they won’t turn away from set liberal ideals, and then liberalism itself will become valid as one of the essential idealogical domains. But, I’ll repeat myself, this will take a matter of time. 

I also hope that eventually Lithuanian society will become mature enough and we’ll have all indications needed for a full-grown democratic country.  

On the other hand, it would be naive to expect that we’d be capable of implanting that ideal, whereas the Western world has been pushing its way for several centuries. 

Since its formation, the United States has had a two-party system. Which political party was more common among Lithuanian emigrants? Why did you decide to become a Republican? 

The bigger part of ‘the new’ (1940’s, Ed.) emigration were Republicans. Why? In the years of the Democratic-controlled US government, the Yalta conference and other conferences were held. We felt, and I also felt, that we were sold to Russian communism. During emigration we were always involved in political discussions. It was very hard to work our way through the international society. At that time, Republicans felt, let’s say, a different rear and were closer to us. They clearly and fearlessly declared their position against the communist order. That’s why the new emigration went, with no question, for the Republicans. Meanwhile ‘the old’ emigration (1905’s, Ed.) consisted mostly of working class people who were from the agricultural sphere. And democrats always proclaimed to be those who represented and defended rights of that group exploited by capitalists. There was a collision between ‘the new’ and ‘the old’ emigration. Of course, I cannot one hundred percent affirm that the new emigration was only Republican and the old one was only Democratic, but the tendency was noticeable. 

For 27 years you worked in the United States Environmental Protection Agency. You were an administrator of the Fifth Region (Mid-West) and when you retired from the EPA in 1997, you had the longest tenure of any senior executive. Which skills that you gained came in handy while serving as the President of Lithuania?  

Generally speaking, those 27 years in a high administrative office allowed me to cooperate with different countries as the representative of the United States. I met many politicians and members of government. The experience of holding an office gave me much deeper understanding about international problems. So, I could say that I came to the presidential post not from the street but with experience of almost a quarter of a century.   

You became acquainted with different U.S. presidents. Are there any characteristics which would unify all of them?

I couldn’t say anything concrete. But I can mention that of the six U.S. presidents with whom I worked directly, I could single out President Ronald Reagan. I was impressed by his sincerity, warmth and humanness. Reagan was especially devoted to our Lithuanian ideas. He firmly spoke on the question of Lithuanians receiving national rights, and he more than once approved this attitude internationally – first during the fall of Berlin Wall and then in the context of further events. 

What kind of things should Lithuanian politicians learn from U.S. leaders?

The political culture in general. Though we had to endure a period when there weren’t any opportunities to grow in surroundings of Western views, we still had to suffer the resulting lack. Well, I hope that while living with today’s conditions, we’ll learn those lessons. I believe in the young generation of our politicians. They have opportunities to follow what is going on in the world and how other various, contemporary political leaders are reacting – there are plenty of great examples in the Western world. And from all of those experiences, we’ll develop a certain political level ourselves.  

How does it feel to put your hand on the Constitution and utter aloud the words of the presidential oath?

It’s hard to describe in words. During this minute you feel such tension that you don’t even realize the importance of that instant. Just later when you start  serving, do you take the responsibility and perceive how deep, meaningful and binding this oath is. The only thing which I’d like to say, especially, to the young generation, is that when you swear to the Constitution, you have to respect it, fight for the free man and his natural rights, and it will completely eliminate your private life. Since the moment you take that duty, you refuse your personal goals. Your aim from now on is to give your state and its people everything that you have with the best of your personality and your environment.