Jacob Robinson, Autonomy in Estonia, and Minority Networks in Interwar Europe
By Timo Aava

In February 1925, the Estonian parliament passed the Law on Cultural Self-Government for Ethnic Minorities, enabling any ethnic minority with at least 3.000 citizens to establish institutions of self-governance. The powers of these bodies included administering the cultural and educational affairs of their respective national groups. Membership was voluntary, but members were expected to pay a “culture tax” to support the institution. Since the end of the First World War, there had been efforts in East and Central Europe to guarantee minority rights in new nation-states, with the help of Minority Treaties, and intense debates over how best to do so. The Estonian law thus  immediately caught the attention of the international community, and numerous politicians and minority rights activists in the region urged that the arrangement be adopted broadly.

The European Nationalities Congress, established in 1925, served as a platform for discussing minority issues in Europe and advocating for broader application of cultural autonomy beyond Estonia. (Baltic) German and Jewish groups played the leading role in the organisation. Jacob Robinson actively participated in the Congress, regularly representing the Jews of Lithuania. Through the Congress, Robinson developed closer ties with Werner Hasselblatt (1890-1958). Hasselblatt was a member of the Estonian parliament from 1923 until 1932 and had been one of the chief campaigners for the Law on Cultural Self-Government.

In an October 1926 letter, Hasselblatt forwarded Robinson a collection of relevant laws and regulations, including the Law on Cultural Self-Government of Minorities. Hasselblatt also discussed specific aspects of self-government, expressed his interest in meeting Robinson soon, and proposed that they visit each other, showing a close collegial connection between the two leaders of minority communities. Such contacts demonstrate the importance of expert and activist networks in advancing a mutual goal of minority autonomy. However, although Hasselblatt had been one of the chief architects of the liberal minority protection law in the 1920s, in 1932 he moved to Germany, joined the National-Socialist movement, and started to steer the Verband der deutschen Minderheiten in Europa—the umbrella organisation of German minorities in various European countries—in a völkisch direction. The European Nationalities Congress declined after Jewish representatives, including Robinson, refused to participate starting in 1933, since the Congress, increasingly dominated by the völksch Germans, failed to condemn Germany’s anti-Jewish policies.

No less revealing are Robinson’s contacts with the Estonian Jewish Cultural Self-Government. The self-government regularly held elections to the Jewish Cultural Council. As a part of the electoral campaign, the competing slates of candidates published materials explaining their positions and held rallies to win over voters. One such gathering was organised by the National Bloc on 1 June 1929 at the Jewish Gymnasium in Tallinn. Robinson gave a speech in support, and his presence was announced in event posters (Illustration 2) as well as in Estonian and Russian newspapers. Max Lazerson (1887-1951), one of Latvia’s leading Jewish politicians, also attended this and other gatherings. The National Bloc was the dominant force in the Estonian Jewish Cultural Self-Government. After the 1929 elections, it secured the largest share of seats in the Council. The Bloc was Zionist-oriented, stayed in close contact with various organisations, such as the World Jewish Congress, and promoted the Hebrew language in Estonian Jewish schools. Robinson’s active participation in the electoral campaign demonstrates how closely minority rights activists across the region collaborated to advance the common goal of cultural autonomy.

After the Second World War, Robinson did not lose interest in collective rights and the Estonian minority protection law of 1925. In 1971, he reminded the international community that there had already been a functioning solution to the coexistence of multiple nationalities within a single state: the Estonian law. He perceived the establishment of autonomous Flemish and Walloon communities in Belgium as a reemergence of the same principle, which could be traced back to the reform discourse in Habsburg Austria and the Estonian law. Robinson concluded: “Ideas do not die; they revive in the least expected places”.

.