Autoritariniai režimai Lietuvoje ir Lenkijoje tarpukariu: skirtumai ir panašumai ; Authoritarian regimes in Lithuania and Poland during the inter-war period: similarities and differences

Abstract

Authoritarianism as a form of political regime became a widespread phenomenon in the inter-war Europe. It was also a part of Lithuanian and Polish history. The coup d'etat in Poland on May 12, 1926 claimed many more victims than the analogous event in Lit- huania. The 1926 coups in the two neighbouring countries put an end to the era of parlia- mentarianism, which had had its legal basis on the permanent constitutions (passed on March 17, 1921 in Poland and August 1, 1922 in Lithuania). The position of a Chief of State was established in Poland on November 14, 1918. It was legally consolidated by the Small Constitution of February 20, 1919. Both Jozef Pilsudski and Antanas Smetona had accumulated enough political experience to rule their respective countries after the coup. However, as politicians they were of different caliber. The authoritarian regime in Poland had its name – sanation. This term was supposed to mean the purification or a return to po- litical health. The main support of authoritarian regimes in both countries were the armed forces. This was more perceptible in Poland, especially after the death of Jozef Pilsudski. If Poland during the period of authoritarian rule retained the multi-party system, albeit re- stricted, then in Lithuania after the February 1, 1936 the one-party rule was established. The Polish parliament functioned without cessation all the way from 1926 to 1939, while in Lithuania the Seimas was absent from 1927 to 1936. In the Polish historiography the period of sanation is clearly divided into two periods: 1) the Pilsudski Era, which lasted from the May 1926 coup until the marshal's death on May 12, 1935; 2) the period of "the colonels' rule", which lasted from the May 12, 1935 to the Nazi occupation of Poland in September 1939. However, in Lithuania the whole period of authoritarian rule was presided by the sa- me personality – Antanas Smetona. Due to this reason it is difficult to discern any essential changes in the country's political system.