In this article the author reviews plans envisaged in the first Republic of Lithuania for creating Lithuanian colonies abroad. The purpose of such a planned colonization was to provide an alternative for ongoing emigration processes not controlled by the state. Colonization was understood to be the creation of a maximal number of ethnic settlements in as many foreign lands as possible. In this way it was sought to protect Lithuanians who chose to emigrate from the threat of losing their national identity and from sundry economic, social, and cultural problems. Plans by various authors for establishing such colonies, as well as the possibilities for their implementation, are analyzed; and the position of state officials on this question is presented. The locations that, according to the enthusiasts of the colonization idea, might be suitable for Lithuanian emigrants are enumerated, and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed. The first to broach the idea of establishing colonies was Professor Kazys Pakštas; later other intellectuals showed an interest in this idea. Most frequently mentioned as possible countries for planned colonization by Lithuanians were Canada, Alaska, South Africa, Angola, Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay. It was hoped that a colony, once formed, would actively cooperate with Lithuania in the fields of commerce and culture and that mutually beneficial exchanges would ensue.

This article analyzes editorials published in the U. S. Lithuanian daily Draugas during the period of perestroika and the Lithuanian Sąjūdis at the end of the 1980s. Political changes in the Soviet Union directly influenced events in Lithuania giving rise to a civic movement towards liberation from the U.S.S.R. and leading to the reestablishment of independence on March 11, 1990. At that time Draugas was the only Lithuanian daily outside Lithuania’s borders, with a large readership in many Lithuanian communities the world over. For these reasons we may consider it to have been one of the most influential opinionmakers in the Lithuanian diaspora. Lithuanians all over the world followed the developments from 1988 to 1990 very closely, and Draugas was an important source of information. We chose to analyze its editorials because they best reflect the periodical’s position on this or that issue. They show what the editors regarded as the most important news and what they thought was less significant. Our investigation seeks to disclose the way Draugas editorials described Lithuania’s road to freedom in the late 1980s; how they presented Mikhail Gorbachev and evaluated the politics of perestroika; how Draugas reacted to the political changes occurring in Lithuania; and how these changes tied in with one of the diaspora’s self-described missions—to assist the occupied country in its struggle for independence.

Per visą lietuvių diasporos istoriją, nuo pat XIX a. pabaigos, lietuviai išeiviai teikė įvairiapusę paramą besikuriančiai ar susikūrusiai moderniai Lietuvos valstybei. Nelygu politinė ir ekonominė padėtis, skyrėsi pagalbos Lietuvai mastai ir pobūdis. Paramos apimtys atskirose pasaulio lietuvių bendruomenėse skyrėsi priklausomai nuo bendruomenės narių skaičiaus, saviorganizacijos lygio ir gyvenamos šalies ekonominės padėties. Išskirtinis vaidmuo teko gausiai JAV lietuvių bendruomenei. Iki šaltojo karo pradžios, ypač kuriantis Lietuvos Respublikai, buvo labai svarbi ekonominė JAV lietuvių parama. Augant pasaulinei politinei JAV reikšmei, didėjo lobistinės šios šalies lietuvių veiklos svarba. Šaltajam karui užsitęsus, JAV lietuviai nuolat bendravo su įvairių lygių JAV politikais, neleisdami jiems pamiršti Lietuvos situacijos ir reikalaudami nepripažinti šalies okupacijos.[...]

2009 m. lapkričio 21 d. Lietuvos Respublikos Prezidentė Dalia Grybauskaitė padėkojo lietuvių bendruomenei Vašingtone, rengiančiai minėjimą ambasadoriui Stasiui Lozoraičiui atminti, už Lietuvos diplomatijos istorijos puoselėjimą. Prezidentė laiške pažymėjo, kad net trys Lozoraičių šeimos atstovai ilgus savo gyvenimo metus atidavė Lietuvos diplomatinei tarnybai: Stasys Lozoraitis (jaunesnysis) diplomatinę karjerą pradėjo 1943 m. Lietuvos pasiuntinybėje prie šv. Sosto, nuo 1983 m. dirbo Lietuvos pasiuntinybėje Vašingtone, o nuo 1987 m. iki atkuriant Lietuvos nepriklausomybę buvo jos vadovas. Valstybės vadovė atkreipė dėmesį, kad S. L ozoraitis buvo vienas iš tų, kurie paskyrė savo gyvenimą kovai dėl Lietuvos nepriklausomybės.[...]

When in 1987 the political atmosphere in Lithuania began to heat up with the appearance, in public, of the Lithuanian Freedom League and the Lithuanian Perestroika Movement (Sąjūdis), the Lithuanian diaspora community kept its eyes on events in Lithuania and responded accordingly. A number of community institutions either stepped up their activities or got ready to do so. In New York, Lithuanian Catholic Religious Aid, Inc., set up the Lithuanian Information Center (LIC ) and opened an office in Washington, D. C. The Lithuanian-American Community established a Public Affairs Council. After independence was regained the information flow increased; and in response to the growing demand for it, a Lithuanian Hotline was set up in Chicago for providing continuous and constantly updated information on developments in Lithuania. Belonging to separate institutions, the LIC and the Public Affairs Council pursued different objectives. The LIC in New York and Washington worked with U. S. and world media to disseminate information; the office of the Public Affairs Council worked directly with political institutions and politicians; but though they had distinct missions the activities of these different offices often reinforced each other and were part of a common endeavor. This paper analyzes the activities that Lithuanian-American community organizations engaged in from 1987 to 1992 as they presented and explained political events happening in Lithuania to media, politicians, and government organizations operating in the United States. How were these activities organized and how did the relevant organizations seek to implement their goals? To what extent did they coordinate among themselves their strategies of action and the decisions they took? These are some of the questions the paper tries to shed light on. [...]