Thirdly, when these were activities of the Latvian SS-Legion, it is held that this formation was perceived by the Western Allies as a formation which differed from other Waffen-SS units. Special emphasis is placed on the fact that in 1950 the Government of the United States of America considered Baltic Waffen-SS units a nonhostile movement, which did not pose a threat to U.S. interests, given that their goals, ideology and activities were different from those of German Waffen-SS units. So it is no wonder that after the end of World War II, some legionaries were used to maintain order and carry out protective functions during the Nuremberg Trials.
[…]
There is a point of view, according to which Latvians were compelled to cooperate with the [Axis] in order to gain real opportunities to fight against Bolshevism. The supporters of this opinion insist that the main idea, which guided Latvians, when they joined the Latvian Legion, was their desire to fight against the Soviet Army and communist ideology with the aim of getting freedom and independence for Latvia, although they forget the fact that, in actual truth, [Berlin] had never even considered any autonomy for Latvia.
In general, the defence of the position, which claims that, on the one hand, Latvians were forced to join the Legion and, on the other hand, stresses that participation of Latvian soldiers in military formations under the banner of the SS should be considered in the context of their wish to fight for freedom and independence from the Soviet power, seems contradictory. It is very difficult to understand how citizens can be forcedly compelled to fight for their freedom.
This is an important point to keep in mind given recent whitewashing of the Latvian fascists.
Latvian units […] took on the lead rôle in committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on the territory of Belarus from 1941 to 1944, where Latvian police battalions and other subdivisions of the Latvian SS-Legion carried out their punitive operations to fight against partisans.
(Emphasis added in all cases.)
(Criticisms)
And finally, it is observed that after the end of the war, the Soviet court system conducted only one trial in connection with war crimes committed by Latvian police battalions, and there was not a single trial conducted against the Latvian Legion as such.
I like how the author omitted the reason for this, probably in an attempt to troll gullible readers into thinking ‘horseshoe theory confirmed!!!’ Still, I am mildly disappointed that they didn’t say that the Soviets executed all of them without trial. (Almost certainly, some of them must have gone on to join the ‘Forest Brothers’.)
Many Latvians decided to cooperate with the [anticommie] régime in view of the negative consequences of the Soviet occupation in 1940–1941, when thousands of Latvian citizens fell victims to political repressions.
Which Latvian citizens, and why? Peaceful innocents simply minding their own business, maybe!