The Russians view their position as liberating Eastern Europe because it liberated the Slavic people from a race war waging Nazi regime that sought to liquidate and carry out genocide against the Slavic peoples to turn what survived into a race of "slaves" for Germans.
Well, while neutral at the beginning of WW2, these three countries were already ruled by autocratic regimes whose political models were Hitler and Mussolini. Their economies had been integrated to Germany's, first because of theese governments' decisions and then because economic integration has a gravitational attraction of its own.
Still, I wouldn't say these governments did not make a choice to side with Hitler. They had a choice, some of them (Rumania most notably) had had strong ties zith France and Great Britain after WW1, and they could have helped keeping Nazi Germany in check.
But they didn't. It's true they had territorial disputes with Russia - but even though Nazi Germany often forced them to accept Russian demands during the Nazi-Soviet honeymoon, they made a conscious choice. So, I wouldn't put them in the same lot as Vichy France, Rexist Belgium, or the Quisling government in Norway, where pro-Nazi governments only took root after a militray defeat and an German occupation.
But I think you're right to point out that their people were liberated, from the Nazis and from their own brand of fascists, and that it was right for these nations to keep their independence.