Threat of simplification

This year the media’s response to the Holodomor anniversary was markedly feebler than in the past several years, as though this topic can forfeit or gain urgency from year to year. This is clearly additional proof that, for many Ukrainian journalists, the Holodomor topic is just a formality. Subjects and reasons may change, but never the approach: Do as the National Security and Defense Council says; enough mulling over the Holodomor.

Of course, some have acted out of context: Channel 5, unlike others in Ukraine that played programs recorded previously, relied on the good old telethon format and kept this complicated subject debated for several hours. This channel deserves every credit, of course, except that the big question – whether or not this society is prepared to debate this issue on a higher level – remains unanswered. Over the past several years, scholars and separate journalists have combined efforts in working out tangible arguments concerning the Great Famine. This approach allows to reach further past the traditional hunger horror stories, shocking as they remain (with the eyewitness testimonies retaining their tragic historical value), offering a global view. I mean the political preconditions for the Holodomor, the responsibility of Ukrainian politicians for this tragedy, back in the 1920s, as well as the legal aspects of Holodomor being recognized as an act of genocide. Simplifying this debate, reducing it to a set of hair-raising eyewitness accounts produces the opposite effect: rejection.

It is also true that part of Ukrainian society responds to Holodomor commemorative projects without a trace of formality, as evidenced by those who came to pay homage to the victims at the National Memorial and Holodomor Memorial on St. Sophia Square in Kyiv. There were as many people as last or any previous year. Volodymyr Yatrovych, historian, ex-head of SBU’s branch archives, says over 77 percent Ukrainians recognize the Holodomor as an act of genocide.

Do all these people (77 percent stands for one-third of a given society) comprehend the whole range of problems in conjunction with the Holodomor? An emotional attitude to this tragedy is one thing while understanding the political, economic, and social reasons behind the 1932-33 famine is a different story (one would perhaps better understand what happened in Donetsk recently if one knew the reasons and consequences of the Holodomor). This is precisely what Dr. James Mace wrote about, although his name was scarcely mentioned by the Ukrainian media last Saturday, except for the Culture Channel that played a documentary about this distinguished scholar, and National Radio’s brief acknowledgement. Not a single program dedicated to this native American scholar and his selfless effort to reveal the truth about an act of genocide against the Ukrainian people; about how this truth and his scholarly endeavors were resisted by authorities. I might as well point out that the National Radio proved far more liberal and progressive in handling the topic than any “independent television channel.”

Likewise, Radio Liberty, UNIAN and http://www.telekritika.ua were the only ones to mention The Day’s initiative of establishing and awarding the James Mace Prize.

After all, those who remember the Holodomor should remember to acknowledge those who have done something to uphold this memory. Inna Dolzhenkova writes (http://www.telekritika.ua): “There is something which, regrettably, has united these and other Ukrainians [i.e., people who recognize or refuse to recognize the Holodomor as an act of genocide. – Ed.]. There is this [media/official] silence on James Mace, the American who was the staff director of the US Commission on the Ukraine Famine, who was the first to identify that famine as an act of genocide against the Ukrainian people, who eventually moved to Kyiv to further study this tragedy of the Ukrainian nation, who was buried in Ukraine, to join the dead who had chosen him [an allusion to Dr. Mace’s article “Your Dead Chose Me.” – Ed.]. Even Channel 5 forgot to acknowledge him as the author of the ‘Candle in the Window’ Holodomor commemorative project. Instead, they spoke about four heads of state commemorating the famine victims, saying this could be regarded as a step toward national unity and reconciliation. How can polarized memories be reconciled? Hangmen will give you lots of reasons justifying their acts. Victims remain in their graves, crying for justice, but no one can hear them.”

Isn’t this proof that there is superficial understanding of the Holodomor tragedy?

Says Natalia Dziubenko-Mace [the widow]: “Journalists should be prepared to cover such events. Last year I had to put aside everything else to meet with media people, answering their questions, helping them with data from my family archives. This year: silence, except for an Internet periodical and, of course, Den/The Day with their projects and serious publications. At the museum, I heard ranking bureaucrats say Ukrainians were to blame because they had organized that genocide. The Holodomor issue was also discussed but in hushed voices. The fact remains that James Mace was the one to identify an act of genocide; he was the first to challenge the international community to acknowledge this act. Apparently that’s why his name isn’t mentioned. There is war going on between the hangmen and victims’ children. There will be no truce. You don’t have to explain any of this to the adults because they know. The younger generation is a different story. Those ‘upstairs’ are struggling to win these young people over to their side. Properly brainwashed, they will forget all about the Holodomor. Venomous hissing on websites. The biggest problem is that authentic Holodomor data never reaches school, college, and university students. People denied historical memory can be manipulate whichever way. These people know nothing about their forefathers’ homeland. They will never walk out of their homes to struggle for any cause. There is silence on James Mace because he politically assessed the Holodomor. Needless to say, this silence is ordered from ‘upstairs.’ Should Yanukovych or anyone else mention James Mace in public, this would involve Jim’s views. Another important aspect. Hillary Clinton sent a message referring to the Holodomor as murder by hunger – precisely the meaning James had in mind, echoed by Shapoval, Kulchytsky, and emigre historians. This is very important because the very notion of Holodomor means just that: forcing people to starve to death.”

How would the Ukrainian government respond to the Holodomor anniversary remained anyone’s guess until the media displayed a photo of four presidents, along with comments on a long-awaited reunion in mourning.

I find nothing sentimental about this photo. Why four of them? What unites them? This takes figuring out.