However, interpreters may still associate the edifice with the justification of war crimes, since it commemorates the fallen in World War Two who had served in the 20th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Estonian), also known as the Estonian Legion.

The monument is a replica of an earlier installation removed over 20 years ago by government order, from the town of Lihula, Pärnu County. The original is located at a museum in Harju County.

In an expert analysis commissioned by the PPA, semiotician Martin Oja of the University of Tartu's applied semiotics center stated that when evaluating the Lihula monument, as it is known, from the perspective of incitement to hatred, it is crucial to bear in mind that the creator of the image deliberately avoided the harshest symbols that call for violence—in other words the notorious double lightning flash SS helmet insignia is absent, while the Iron Cross which is present in the installation does not feature a swastika at its center.

These details were consciously omitted in much the same way that in some countries, swastikas are omitted from the details of otherwise accurate World War Two-era model airplanes.

Oja said: "With this, associating the symbols depicted on the Lihula monument with an act of aggression, genocide, a crime against humanity, or a war crime is only possible from an external perspective—ie. by people who are unfamiliar with Estonian history."

"The intentional omission of the SS insignia and the swastika telegraphs the creators' intention to avoid any association with aggression or incitement to violence," Oja stressed.

According to Oja, the Lihula monument could therefore be displayed in public space in a way that avoids violent interpretations, if it were accompanied by an explanatory text. The text should concisely explain, in a tri-lingual set up, ie. in Estonian, English, and Russian, that those Estonians who fought in Waffen-SS uniforms did not do so based on Nazi Germany's ideology but rather in the hope of restoring the independence of the Republic of Estonia, and protecting Estonia from communist terror.

"A text of this kind must also be perceived as an integral part of the monument, be placed in close proximity to it, and maintain stylistic harmony with the monument itself, indicating a common source for the messages," Oja wrote.

"In order to avoid interpretations that contradict Estonia's national historical perspective, the inscription on the monument should be changed: 'To all Estonian warriors who fell for their homeland and free Europe in the Second War of Independence, 1940-1945.' The reference to the 'Second War of Independence' is misleading, as this concept does not exist in Estonian historiography," Oja wrote.

"In this case, the 'Second War of Independence' is a poetic figure of speech and, as such, is ambiguous, making the monument as a whole more vulnerable to hostile interpretations," the semiotician wrote. Oja also considered the phrase "for free Europe" to be vague, as the primary motivation of those who fought in the Estonian Legion was to fight for a free Estonia.

"Therefore, the use of this phrase is not advised, and for the same reasons," Oja added.

Historian: Someone wanting to make the Nazi associations will do so anyway

Meelis Maripuu, who prepared an expert opinion on behalf of the Estonian Institute of Historical Memory, arrived at similar conclusions, via semiotic analysis.

However, Maripuu also noted that the combination of text mentioning a war of independence (not the 1918-1920 Estonian War of Independence, but in casting as a "second war of independence" Estonia's struggle against occupying forces in World War Two, including in Nazi German uniforms and against the invading Soviets – ed.) juxtaposed against a depiction of a soldier wearing a Waffen-SS uniform could quite conceivably be used for propaganda attacks against Estonia, by linking the country to Nazism.

In response to the PPA's inquiry about whether the existing inscription on the monument—"To all Estonian warriors who fell for their homeland and free Europe in the Second War of Independence, 1940-1945" (""Kõigile Eesti sõjameestele, kes II vabadussõjas langesid kodumaa ja vaba Euroopa eest 1940-1945" )—aligns with the generally accepted historical narrative inside Estonia and in the West and other friendly nations more generally, Maripuu stated that Estonia does not have an official historical interpretation as such, including for the "second" War of Independence.

"Nevertheless, associating the term 'war of independence' with a stylized depiction of a soldier in a German Waffen-SS uniform is a questionable approach," Maripuu went on. "It raises the question of what message is intended to be conveyed. Some of those men who participated in these events may have indeed thought in the way the inscription suggests, while others certainly did not. This particular combination of text and imagery is easy to utilize in propaganda attacks against Estonia as a so-called 'Nazi state,'" Maripuu added.

In response to the PPA's query about whether the symbols depicted on the monument—such as the German national emblem, the Estonian insignia, and a stylized depiction of the Iron Cross, First Class—could be associated with an act of aggression, genocide, a crime against humanity, or a war crime in a way that justifies these acts, Maripuu said that it comes down to a matter of intent.

Drawing a parallel like that would not arise from the symbol qua symbol, but rather from the possible intent of the exhibitor on the one hand, and the interpretation placed on it by the viewer, on the other.

"That being said, if someone wants to make that connection, they could do so even if a hypothetical exhibitor never even considered doing so," Maripuu went on. Maripuu also noted that international crimes can be retroactively associated with almost any form of symbolism.

"However, since the Estonian Legion's sleeve insignia was only introduced in the winter of 1944, associating it with international crimes is, at best, indirect," Maripuu added.

Semiotician: Estonian and European interpretations of Nazi Germany must be reconciled

While the response from the Estonian Institute of Historical Memory (Eesti Mälu Instituut) to the PPA was relatively concise, the expert analysis from the Applied Semiotics Center is an 11-page-long, detailed document, replete with numerous references.

Providing a broader context to the PPA, Oja outlined that the issue is a complex one, since Estonia's historical perspectives on Nazi Germany and its forces do not always align well with those of Europe more broadly, which naturally includes those in Germany and Austria.

"In Estonia, a range of perspectives and attitudes coexist, which can be viewed as different contexts when interpreting the Lihula monument replica. However, two are particularly pertinent in analyzing the current case: First, the EU's dominant historical perspective, which unequivocally condemns Nazi Germany's aggression while at the same time paying less attention to the devastating impact of communist crimes on the peoples and cultures of many Central and Eastern European states. Second, Estonia's national historical perspective, which holds that Estonian soldiers who took part in World War II were not aggressors themselves but rather the victims of two aggressor states—the Stalinist Soviet Union and Nazi Germany—and, as far as possible, fighters for the restoration of an independent Estonia," Oja wrote in his analysis.

Explaining those factors and attitudes that shaped Estonia's national historical awareness, both experts pointed out that, in the context of the June 1941 deportations (by the brief Soviet occupiers of around 10,000 Estonian people – ed.), Nazi Germany was perceived as the "lesser of two evils."

"On June 14, 1941, the Soviet Union carried out the June deportation, which destroyed the lives of nearly 10,000 Estonians."

"This event was one of several defining moments which led many Estonians to view the Soviet Union as the enemy, rather than Germany. However, Estonian fighters did not necessarily sympathize with Nazi Germany either; fighting within its ranks was seen as 'the lesser of two evils.' It is also important to note that the vast majority of Estonian men fought on either side against their will, in other words they were conscripted," Oja continued.

Oja acknowledged that these two perspectives partly contradict each other, and that this contradiction is the root cause of the controversy surrounding the Lihula monument replica. "Due to conflicting contexts, this object simultaneously carries two meanings—it is double-coded. The issue here is not to invalidate one of these meanings while favoring the other, but rather to reconcile both," explained Oja.

Monument depicts a soldier of a national military unit

In addition to providing background context, Oja also addressed the PPA's direct questions, such as what symbolism is present in the soldier's uniform depicted on the monument, and which individuals or organizations used it.

In response, Oja cited literary scholar and semiotician Peeter Torop, who analyzed the same controversial image over 20 years ago, in 2004, again at the PPA's request. Oja believed that Torop's findings are still applicable.

"The monument depicts a soldier belonging to the national military unit within the Waffen-SS. However, it is a stylized depiction, with the dominant feature being affiliation to the national unit, rather than to the SS. This is evidenced by the explicit absence of SS insignia on the helmet /.../ and the identifiable symbols of the national unit: The collar insignia features the motif of the Cross of Liberty (Vabadusrist) at its center, which belonged to the Estonian Legion (Waffen-SS 20th Estonian Division), and the left sleeve bears the insignia of Estonian military units /.../. The Iron Cross on the chest is also stylized, and lacks a swastika at its center," wrote Torop at the time.

Additionally, Oja clarified that the collar insignia of the Estonian SS Division, the 20th Division, was in use only from 1944 to 1945. The emblem featuring an armored hand holding a sword along with the letter "E" originates from the core design of the First and Second Class Cross of Liberty, created by artist Nikolai Triik much earlier, in 1919.

Oja also pointed out that the Iron Cross is a military decoration whose origins date back to the early 19th century, long before the Nazi movement existed. The Iron Cross was established as an award for military merit by Frederick William III, King of Prussia, on March 17, 1813, during the Napoleonic Wars.

According to Oja, the sleeve emblem depicted on the monument is also stylized. "Unlike the original, the three lions are absent, but the engraving on the stone, as a monochrome material, stylizes the blue-black-white color combination. The referenced sleeve emblem was used in both the Estonian Legion and the Estonian SS Division. As a symbol, it signifies a national military unit," Oja wrote.

"The MP-40 weapon and the helmet depicted can also be considered indirect symbols. On one hand, they broadly reference a German soldier, but it should be noted that this weapon was also used as a captured firearm by the opposing side. Additionally, the helmet was used by the military of several countries that were not affiliated with the Nazis," Oja wrote.

Blue-black-white colors were an inconceivable display in the Red Army

The semiotician distinguished between the use of symbols in their original context—i.e., in the context of the Estonian Legion itself—and their representation on the Lihula monument.

In the first case, Oja emphasized the importance of insignia used to distinguish national military units, stating that the collar insignia and sleeve emblems identified a national unit, in so doing fostering a special sense of unity among its fighters.

"The use of symbols derived from the Cross of Liberty and the blue-black-white colors refer to the precedent set by the War of Independence and indicate that fighting in the Estonian Legion or SS Division was primarily seen as fighting for Estonia's freedom. For comparison, in the Red Army, wearing blue-black-white insignia was unthinkable. Considering this semiotic fact, it can be deduced that fighting in the Estonian Legion was associated with the fight for an independent Republic of Estonia, whereas fighting in the [Soviet] Rifle Corps was not," wrote Oja.

Last week, the PPA returned the replica of the Lihula monument to the individual who it had been confiscated from.

That confiscation was carried out on August 31 of last year, when the monument was being transported in the back of a truck to an event in Lihula commemorating the 20th anniversary of the removal of the original monument on which it is based.

The PPA stated that they took the edifice into custody, under the Law Enforcement Act, to head off any possible conflicts and legal violations.

During the subsequent investigation, the PPA commissioned two expert opinions, which have not yet been fully disclosed to the public.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!