Ukrainian MFA: “Polish historians politicize historical discourse”

The Ministry of abroad Affairs of Ukraine presented the gathering of the head of the Andrija Sibiga ministry with a group of historians and experts on Ukrainian-Polish relations (the most celebrated negativeist of Volynsk, b. the head of the Ukrainian IPN Volodymyr Wojatrowycz) as evidence of "responsible and constructive dialogue".

Meanwhile, the message published on Facebook turns out to be primarily a relay rhetorical procedure, which alternatively of fostering open debate, fuels common suspicions and tries to narrow the discussion field to an official, homogeneous narrative. Although it is impossible to disagree with the thesis about the importance of Polish support for Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression, the one-dimensional bringing the full bilateral relation to the war relation and accusing of "politicisation" of the past of all critical voice in Poland is more hard than solving it.

Minister Sibiha stressed the function of Poland as a solid partner:

"Our relations with neighbouring Poland are highly crucial both for common interests and taking into account current challenges and threats in the face of ongoing Russian aggression."

This message does not in itself request to be corrected: Poland does indeed supply comprehensive support to Ukraine – from military equipment and humanitarian aid to active diplomacy in Europe. However, the specified selection of this rhetorical vulnerability suggests that any another level of discussion – especially regarding the hard past – could be a threat to a "strategic partnership". As a result, all Polish question about work for events from the 1940s and 1950s is immediately seen as the last hotel of the Kremlin.

The Communication warns against “unilateral treatment” of past by any Polish politicians and groups:

"In fresh times, attempts by any Polish politicians and political forces to unilaterally treat and politicise historical discourse in relations with Ukraine are becoming increasingly apparent, which in turn negatively affects the improvement of the partnership between Ukraine and Poland and actually serves the interests of the Russian aggressor."

However, let us remember that in Poland they are scientists and independent investigation centres – not politicians – usually fill the space of substantive discussions about complex, painful events: the Volyn massacre, the displacement of Poles from Galicia or common crimes. Putting a sign of equality between specified a investigation head and a provocative "politicization" is manipulation which not only undermines the authority of historians, but besides tries to shout the dilemmas of collective memory.

The authors of the Communication besides praised the achievements of the Joint Working Group on History:

"In this context, the parties noted the affirmative dynamics of the Ukrainian-Polish Working Group on Historical Affairs under the aegis of the Ministry of Culture and the continuation of exploration and exhumation work in the territory of both countries."

Yes, exhumations and search works performed by Polish and Ukrainian archaeologists and researchers deserve recognition. These are hard actions, requiring delicate balance of respect for victims and technological rigors, while building real bridges of agreement. But praise limited to a general “notice of affirmative dynamics” without specifics about methodology, results or timetables of subsequent stages means, in practice, to reject further commitment – it is an incentive to hide your head in the sand.

The next part of the Communication calls for the renewal of 2 existing dialog platforms:

"Participants of the discussion considered it advisable to propose to Polish partners the renewal of the activities of the Ukrainian-Polish historians' Forum and the Partnership Forum as platforms for the improvement of constructive dialogue, the transfer of delicate issues to the area of expert discussion, strengthening the objectivity of assessments of events of common history, searching for ways to prevent provocations, and combating disinformation and public incitement between the Ukrainian and Polish people."

Sounds solemn, but... nothing new. The Forum of historians and the Partnership Forum has already functioned, but has repeatedly been criticised for its deficiency of real effectiveness. Their deliberations were erstwhile held in the shadow of political pressures, without clear entry rules for independent researchers and without working schedules or measurable targets. A re-invitation to meetings without format improvement risks repeating the same errors: divasive over slogans alternatively of circumstantial recommendations and investigation plans.

The appellates for "objectivity" and "reciprocal understanding" are repeatedly:

"Participants of the circular Table supported the importance of regulating delicate issues based on the objectivity of historical facts, common knowing and respect for the historical memory of Ukrainian and Polish peoples."

Unfortunately, in practice, objectivity can be selective. erstwhile it comes to criticism of Ukrainian OUN-UPA troops or the politics of the Second Republic towards minorities, Polish stories are abruptly referred to as “unilateral agitation” and presented as Russian provocations. Worse still, the independency of historians in Ukraine has late been threatened by legal proposals penalizing critical investigation into any national symbols or planet War II formations. In this context, the announcement of fresh forums may as well want to control messages better than to advance free reflection. Without clear guarantees of technological autonomy, it is hard to believe that the Ukrainian authorities are actually prepared to accept uncomfortable conclusions.

The Ukrainian message is so little an appeal to work together on a hard past and more moralist instruction: on the 1 hand, we unite against Russia, but on the another hand, all critical voice in Poland is immediately demolished. specified an approach is simply a terrible way, due to the fact that actual relationship between nations is based on the ability to ask hard questions, not on the spells of strategical partnership.

Polish historians and investigation institutions are not the caretakers of anyone's business. Their command is faithfulness to the sources and methodological care. alternatively of blaming them for politicizing, it is worth openly admitting that the boundaries between technological investigation and political force are highly thin present – in both countries. Proposals for future forums must so include: full transparency of procedures, the composition of expert groups selected through public competitions, reliable reports and an action plan with deadlines and independent moderation of debates. Without this, further meetings of historians will duplicate the pattern of telephone calls, ending in common courtesy.

The abroad Ministry of Ukraine should remind itself that the authentic dialog is not afraid of differences of opinion, and that the repair of trust requires concrete alternatively than general truisms. As long as the communicative towards Polish researchers is built on the effort to discredit them as the "Kreml tool", it will not be possible to break the relation from the trap of common pretension. Ukraine, as a partner of Poland, should so leave the rhetorical ellipse and propose real cooperation based on equality, freedom of discipline and respect for the hard past of both nations.

Photo: FB/Міністерство закордонних справ / MFA of Ukraine