A recent commentary by Estonian political scientist Tonis Saarts has stirred discussion about regional rivalries, after suggesting that Lithuania has overtaken Estonia in areas where Tallinn once set the pace.
In a column for Estonia’s public broadcaster ERR, Saarts reviewed 150 years of Baltic economic development. He noted that before World War One, Latvia was the region’s most advanced economy, while Estonia lagged and Lithuania trailed even further behind. At the end of the 19th century, literacy in Lithuania stood at just 50 percent compared with 95 percent in Estonia and Latvia, he wrote.
By the late 1930s, Latvia and Estonia had largely equalised in terms of prosperity, Saarts argued, while Lithuania remained “hopelessly behind”. Paradoxically, he added, Soviet rule transformed Lithuania into an industrial economy, narrowing the gap with its neighbours by the late 1980s.
In the post-independence period, Saarts said, Estonia benefited from rapid free-market reforms and foreign investment, particularly from Scandinavia, while Lithuania and Latvia were held back by corruption and oligarchic structures. In recent years, however, Lithuania has pressed ahead with industrial policy, earlier investments in the energy sector, a more diverse export base, and more effective industrial policy and use of European Union funds.
The piece, which was intended primarily for Estonian readers, touched a nerve in Lithuania, where excerpts circulated widely on social media. Critics argued that the framing leaned too heavily on stereotypes of Lithuania as historically “backward” and suggested the comparison was more about Estonia’s own insecurities.
“This text is less about Lithuania than about the Estonian need for a reference point in self-reflection and self-criticism,” said Andres Kasekamp, a history professor at the University of Toronto.
Vaidas Matulaitis, a member of the Estonian Lithuanian community, said the 150-year span was chosen to emphasise contrasts. “If you present the bare fact of Lithuanian illiteracy in the late 19th century, you should also mention the causes,” he said, pointing to restrictions on the Lithuanian language under Tsarist rule.
Other scholars urged perspective. “Political scientists often simplify history to make a point,” said Dovilė Budrytė, a Lithuanian-born professor of political science in the United States. “Saarts is clearly critical of Estonian arrogance, not Lithuania. He is warning Estonians about complacency.”
At Vilnius University’s Institute of International Relations and Political Science, lecturer Valentinas Beržiūnas said some claims, such as Lithuania being 20 to 30 years behind its neighbours a century ago, lacked supporting data. But he described the commentary as “provocative in a productive way”, highlighting valid points such as Lithuania’s agricultural character in the interwar years compared with Latvia’s more industrial base.
Karsten Bruggemann, a historian at Tallinn University, said the text reflected Estonian self-perceptions more than Lithuanian realities. “The task was not to explain Lithuania’s relative backwardness but to show how it shaped Estonian historical perceptions of Lithuania,” he said.
The debate reflects a deeper undercurrent of competition among the Baltic states, which regained independence in the early 1990s and often measure progress against one another. During the 1990s and 2000s, Estonia was widely viewed as the region’s success story, pioneering digital governance and gaining early entry to EU accession talks. Lithuania and Latvia at times envied Estonia’s head start.
“Competition intensified when the Baltic states began their path into transatlantic structures,” Budrytė said. “Lithuanians were disappointed in 1997 when Estonia entered fast-track EU negotiations, while Lithuania and Latvia did not.”
In recent years, however, Estonia’s economy has slowed while Lithuania’s performance has improved, particularly in exports, energy diversification, and industrial policy. That shift has prompted Estonians to look south, Kasekamp said, but mainly as a mirror for their own shortcomings.
Regional rivalries extend beyond Lithuania and Estonia. Experts note that Estonia often compares itself most closely to Latvia, traditionally seeing itself as more efficient and innovative. During the Covid-19 pandemic, Estonian media expressed surprise when Latvia, not Estonia, rolled out the first coronavirus tracking app.
Meanwhile, Lithuania and Latvia have their own friendly competitions, whether in politics, economics, or sports. “Watching a Lithuania-Latvia basketball game, even a friendly one, you sometimes feel like it’s the European Championship final,” Beržiūnas said.
While competition can be a source of national pride, scholars stressed that cooperation is more important in the current geopolitical climate. Russia’s war against Ukraine has underscored the need for unity among the Baltic states, which share common security concerns.
“External actors tend to see the Baltics as a single unit,” Kasekamp said. “Economic competition is inevitable, but political cooperation is vital and even existential.”
Budrytė agreed, arguing that rivalry over status is less useful at a time when democratic backsliding and weakened transatlantic ties demand stronger Baltic cohesion. “Energy should be focused on preserving statehood and resisting Russian imperialism,” she said.
Still, Beržiūnas noted, competition can serve as a positive motivator. He recalled how Lithuania accelerated improvements to its Via Baltica highway after Poland completed a four-lane expressway to the border. “We didn’t want to look worse,” he said. “Sometimes neighbours inspire us to do better. Competition is one of the main drivers of human progress.”
Newsletter
Every Friday morning.
