Lithuania’s Genocide Centre defends claims it knows to be false, answers evidence by designating the people who carry it, and has adopted the technique it condemns in Moscow.

Lithuania is right about Russia. The Kremlin chooses its conclusion first and disciplines the evidence afterward. It repeats claims after they are disproved and treats a document producing the wrong national meaning as an attack rather than a correction. The question is not whether something is true. It is whom the answer serves.

Lithuania knows that method intimately because it is one of Russia’s targets. That makes the Genocide and Resistance Research Centre of Lithuania worth examining. In the field where honesty was not optional, the Lithuanian state built the same machine and pointed it at its own archives.

Russia is an authoritarian aggressor. Lithuania is a democracy inside NATO facing a real enemy. Nothing here equates the regimes. This is about method, and Lithuania has documented the method itself.

The information-war designation is Lithuania’s

The Centre’s official competition for Director General required a permit to access information classified visiškai slaptai: top secret.  A clearance may be legitimate where classified archives are held. It becomes revealing beside the language Lithuania uses to describe the institution.[1]

Council chairman Arūnas Streikus said the Centre was failing to exploit its opportunities in the contemporary geopolitical and information-war environment. Parliamentary committees questioned Donata Kabelkė about the Centre’s response to information-war threats. From the floor of the Seimas, the chairman of the Commission for Freedom Fights and State Historical Memory asked whether she was truly a person capable of working with secret information. [2]

Not whether she would withdraw false claims. Not whether disputed findings would survive independent review. Not whether evidence would prevail when it injured a national hero.

The question was whether she was reliable inside the security perimeter.

Historians ask what happened, what the documents prove, and what conclusion remains defensible. Combatants ask who is friendly, who is hostile, what strengthens the state, and what information must be contained. Lithuania calls the Centre a research institution but speaks about it as a combatant.

The standard I accept

Fraud is a serious word. Historical disagreement is not fraud. Interpretive error is not fraud. A wrong conclusion honestly drawn from thin evidence is not fraud.

Institutional historical fraud requires four things: a materially false representation of fact; decisive documentary correction delivered to the institution; the power to amend the record; and a continuing decision to distribute the representation as fact anyway.

That is the burden. Here are the counts.

The Centre represented that Juozas Ambrazevičius-Brazaitis had been completely exonerated by the United States Congress. He was not. Congressman Brad Sherman told Lithuania so in writing in 2019, again in 2021, and a third time in March 2026. [3]

The Centre publishes its own findings and has never lacked the power to withdraw one. The claim stands.

A member of the United States Congress has informed Lithuania three times across seven years that its account of congressional action is false, and Lithuania carries the claim into American offices anyway. This is no lingering misunderstanding. It is a decision renewed whenever the correction arrives.

The Centre extended that imaginary American exoneration to Kazys Škirpa, founder of the Lithuanian Activist Front. His organization’s March 1941 instructions declared that it was important to get rid of the Jews and set as the objective that Lithuania free itself from them. [4]

The exoneration never existed for Brazaitis, so there was nothing for Škirpa to inherit. The Centre extended an invention to a man whose movement put its intention in writing before the German invasion. The extension stands.

Jonas Noreika signed Šiauliai County Order No. 3687. It is not a Russian forgery. It sits in the Lithuanian Central State Archive at fonds R-1099, in Lithuanian, over his signature. [5]

Lithuania’s own international historical commission rejected the Centre’s exoneration in April 2019. The Centre did not correct the record. It returned to the file repeatedly, issuing seven affirmative rulings, and in December 2019 portrayed Noreika as a........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)