It's hard not to start with the word outrage. The Augustowska Siege was the largest post-war crime on the Polish population, carried out by the Soviets and cooperating with them units of the Polish People's Army. The fact that present Polish (unfortunately only due to the fact that the institution operating in Poland) – the Institute of Solidarity and Fortitude named after Witold Pilecki – publishes tweets which seem to relativize this crime is unacceptable.
The authoritative profile of the Institute has late featured entries on the function of Lieutenant Maximilian Schnepf in the Augustowska Oblast. 1 of them says:
"Lieutenant Maximilian Schnepf commanded a WP folk unit of 110–160 soldiers who detained 22 people, any of whom never returned home. 45,000 soldiers were active in the Battle, the share of the Schnepf unit represents only 2 promes of these forces.”
This is an effort to shift responsibility. In colloquial language: blocking interest. They stopped “only” 22 people, any of whom “never returned home”? Even if it were 1 person, it would be criminal. And here we are talking about dozens of victims, people murdered and buried in unknown places. So it is not about statistics, but about the principle: can the Polish state institution justify any participation in the crime today, covering itself with numbers?
Who's the manager of the Institute? Biography of Krzysztof Ruchniewicz
Since 2024 prof. Krzysztof Henryk Ruchniewicz has been the manager of the Pilecki Institute. German scholar, winner of awards awarded by German institutions. Among them, the Cross of Merit on the Order of Merit ribbon of the German-Polish Federation for "involvement for Polish-German friendship". Should a individual whose technological career is powerfully linked to Germany be headed by an institution investigating russian and German crimes?
Prof. Ruchniewicz besides served as a typical of the Minister of abroad Affairs for Polish-German social cooperation. The professional focus is clearly moving towards abroad policy, not commemorating Polish victims. Shouldn't a individual with specified a profile be peculiarly careful erstwhile commenting on delicate matters specified as the Augustowska Siege? Shouldn't he be guarding the facts, not explaining the function of por. Schnepf?
Press spokesperson and his household ties
Things get more taste erstwhile we look at the press spokesperson (so the individual supervising the squad liable for social media, among others) of the Institute, Jan Gebert. He is the grandson of Bolesław Konstanty Gebert, a well-known Communist activist and russian intelligence agent in the United States. Jan Gebert's grandpa called for support from the USSR as early as 1939, agitated against Poland, worked for Moscow. Bolesław Gebert was not only a associate of the Communist organization of the United States, but besides a associate in the XII Komintern Plenum in Moscow, from which he returned with fresh instructions regarding intelligence and propaganda activities. After his deportation from the United States, he was in Poland, where he continued his political activity. He participated in the power structures of the Polish People's Republic, serving, among others, as ambassador to Turkey.
Jan's father, Konstanty Gebert, known by the nickname “David Warszawski”, besides made his mark in Polish public life. He was a writer of “Gazeta Wyborcza”, co-founder of the judaic Flying University, and editor of the monthly magazine “Midrasz”. His activity focused on the themes of the judaic minority, liberalism and human rights.
Do you know who is shaping the communication of the Pilecki Institute today? Modern household ties may not have a direct impact on professional decisions, but the political and historical context they carry is not meaningless. erstwhile the Pilecki Institute, led by a individual with strong German connections and represented by a spokesperson about specified household roots, begins publishing relativizing tweets about the Augustowska Ogław, it is hard not to ask: what precisely happens?
What was Augustowska's Siege?
For the record, let's recap the facts. In July 1945, in the Augustowska Forest, Sejneńszczyzna and surrounding settlements of Soviets, supported by the units of the People's Army of Poland and UB, they conducted a large raid on soldiers of the Home Army and another anti-communist independency formations. The intent of the operation was to destruct fresh outbreaks of opposition to the recently introduced communist system. It is estimated that more than 7,000 people have been detained, of which about 600 have been reported missing without notice. There are indications that they were shot and buried in unknown places. They were mostly young, socially active, underground soldiers, but besides completely unrelated to the conspiracy, which were in the incorrect place and time.
The operation was pacification. The civilian population was intimidated, full families were arrested, property plundered, as well as brutal interrogations and torture. The peculiar drama of the victims' families is the fact that most of the missing persons' graves have not yet been found. Russia refuses to release papers that could shed light on those events. Even so, any effort to minimize anyone's engagement in this crime seems not only inappropriate, but scandalous.
The case is clear.
When the Institute, which should be the guardian of the memory of the victims of communism, begins to talk about “just 2 promils of force” – it must be said loudly: this is not the way. At the Augustowska Oblast Memorial Museum We won't find any information about Lieutenant Schnepf today.. Why? due to the fact that the authoritative communicative seems to be moving towards the silence of uncomfortable facts.
If you add to this the above-mentioned persona of the manager and spokesperson of the Institute, the full starts to look not like a coincidence, but like a consistent communication policy. The past of the Augustów circular is not a subject for statistical games. This is not a substance of cutting off from the "current political struggle", as 1 of the Institute's tweets says. This is simply a Polish tragedy that should be investigated honestly, not relativised. In this case, silence means consent. That's why this text was made: so that there was no silence.
