When quasi-liberalism turns into total Soviet-style mentality

The topics that society has poorly learned tend to come back – which in fact happened on September 30, the anniversary of the Babyn Yar tragedy, at the Shuster Live TV studio. Such delicate issues as the Holocaust should be discussed and conceptualized in a way different to the one offered in the program. Our newspaper has in fact broached this question in a few follow-up articles, including “Aggressive Tactlessness” by The Day’s columnist Ihor Losiev. We doubted whether Savik Shuster was competent enough to take up such a very sensitive matter as Ukrainians, Jews, Babyn Yar, guilt, penitence, and forgiveness. At the same time, we felt uneasy about our colleagues from the zaxid.net website, who had posted, a few weeks later, historian Andrii Portnov’s article “On the Moral and Political Meanings of Apologizing for Historical Guilt,” in which the author used the well-known technique of twisting facts and accused The Day and Ihor Losiev of “xenophobia.” As our contributor, historian Kyrylo Halushko, noted, “the word ‘xenophobia,’ let us admit it, sounds foul and the use of it requires certain responsibility.” It is the latter that our zaxid.net colleagues seem to have lacked. If our colleagues had been seeking the truth in a professional-style debate, they would have obviously used a different vocabulary and tonality. Attaching the label “xenophobia” to The Day, these people said nothing about us – instead, they exposed so many facts about themselves. As it is not about professionalism and willingness to come to terms, we could have ignored this incident. But the point is this issue is of paramount importance for society and, after all, this country’s reputation. So we have to get back to this subject. The Day asked Ukraine’s first president Leonid KRAVCHUK to put the record straight.

“The subject of the Holocaust and apology to the Jewish people has again come up in the mass media in connection with a tragic date: September 29-30, 1941, saw the beginning of mass-scale executions of the Jews in Babyn Yar,” Leonid Kravchuk comments. “Naturally, this theme could not possibly remain unnoticed by the media. And, as this issue has not yet been amply researched in Ukraine, both politicians and non-politicians are taking different attitudes to that event. There have been about 60 genocides throughout the history of civilization. Among them, the Holocaust is very specific – this is perhaps why this subject always looks so acute. We know that a lot of countries have not recognized the Ukrainian Holodomor as genocide in order, let us say, not to spread this problem beyond a certain historical line. So, in my view, there is no problem in the fact that this subject was broached again. The problem is in the way it was broached. Obviously, those who planned the debate should have made inquiries about historical facts, about how this matter was tackled in Ukraine and what steps the Ukrainian authorities have taken.

“It is not an exaggeration to say that we are among the first newlyindependent countries in Europe to have adopted very many laws that stressed the humanitarian mission of Ukraine. In 1991, on the anniversary of the Babyn Yar tragedy, I, as Chairman of the Ukrainian SSR’s Supreme Soviet, visited the commemorative events that had gathered very many people, including, incidentally, the Israeli ambassador and CPSU Central Committee Secretary Aleksandr Yakovlev, who came from Moscow. I must say that the Soviet Union (although Ukraine had passed the Declaration on Independence, the USSR still existed formally) attached great importance to this event and Moscow accepted my proposals about apologizing for the actions of those Ukrainians who were implicated in exterminating the Jews as a nation. Killing a human being not for a crime, not in a war, but on ethnic grounds is unacceptable for any civilization, any nation, and any individual. Aware of this, I considered it necessary to offer apologies for the fact that there had been people in our land, who adhered to fascism, collaborated with the Nazis, and eliminated the Jews just for being Jewish. I nevertheless emphasized that among those killed in Babyn Yar were also Ukrainians, Russians, Poles, and people of other ethnicities. But we are talking about the Holocaust. This is the way I interpreted my vision at the time. Many events of all kinds have occurred since then. For some reason, this fact was forgotten.

“The history of peoples is very complicated, and you can find hundreds of examples of historical events that do not fit in with the idea of humaneness. This in no way means that we must apologize to one another. We must only do so if there is an inner requirement based on some fundamental principles. We did do it because, although the history of Ukrainian-Jewish relations is very far from simple, we have a lot of common inspiring pages. Ukrainian culture is unthinkable without Jewish traditions and contribution from Jewish classics. A lot of Ukrainian cities would not be the way they are if they did not have a Jewish streak and if the Jews had not made a contribution in the development of the infrastructure and entrepreneurship.

“Today we should no longer accentuate what there once was. The question of the Ukrainian people’s repentance to the Jewish people has been exhausted. Nobody can accuse Ukraine of pursuing an anti-Jewish policy.”

Actually, we focused on this again in order to emphasize that the journalists and historians who show superficial knowledge of the situation should have facts etched on their memory. If this is not done, somebody will venture to say in a few years’ time that the Ukrainians have not yet repented to the Poles. Somebody’s ignorance of modern history may become a new attempt to tarnish the reputation of Ukraine.

“Presidents Kwasniewski and Kuchma offered apologies on behalf of their nations. This problem has also been solved. But, you see, this Ukrainian-Polish apology is not of an all-embracing historical importance. The feud between the Poles and the Ukrainians was sown in the whirlwind of World War II. Those were interethnic misunderstandings that resulted from deliberate incitement. We should know this in order not to demand mutual apologies 10 years later. Those events have been duly assessed. Yes, somebody – a journalist or a historian – may well initiate this some time later. It is their right to do so. But here is a question to us. We, Ukrainian society, must learn to keep historical facts in mind. We must know how to set priorities and, therefore, say: it is not the key topic today – what really matters today is how to develop partnership between Ukraine and Poland, how to overcome the civilization differences that have emerged due to certain historical circumstances, and how to properly assess Polish support for Ukraine to integrate into Europe. History should not hang over us like the sword of Damocles all the time. We should appraise historical facts, make conclusions, and try not to repeat our mistakes.”

The impression is that this kind of the touchy issues of yesterday are deliberately thrown from time to time into the informational space.

“Somebody is out to emphasize that Ukraine is incapable of addressing its problems on its own. My Moscow friends have read me a fragment from a Russian history textbook for senior school and university students. It is written in the chapter on Kyivan Rus’ that Ukraine is an unnatural state-like formation. If people have been taught on these principles, they will be taking the corresponding practical steps when they come to politics. They want to make the Ukrainians think of themselves as inferior. This is outside pressure. But even inside Ukraine there are quite a few people who are ready to give in to these attempts. We must not forget this. We must always look for the men of letters, professional historians, and intellectuals who will not allow distorting reality. For example, when Ukraine was marking the 1,000th anniversary of Kyiv’s St. Sophia Cathedral, not all the media covered this event from the angle of historical importance. The next year marks the 1,160th anniversary of the establishment of our statehood and the 1,100th anniversary of our first diplomatic relations. These dates are extremely important so that nobody begins to think that Ukraine is only 20 years old. Ukraine has restored its statehood. Its great history is instructive for not only the Slavs and Eastern Europe but also for the rest of the world. We must speak of this. And to be able to speak of this, one must at least know this.”