OK, they fought for the Soviet motherland. Or did they?
Joseph Stalin, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of the USSR, knew better. In 1942, after gruesome
defeats at the beginning of the war, the commandments of international
communism mostly disappeared from official phraseology, while the images of
Russia’s imperial glory were resurrected along with the czarist insignia and
titles in the Soviet army. A new national anthem was played up.
Then ask who fought
for Ukraine’s independence during World War II. Let’s see. Isn’t a great
patriotic war the same as the fight for independence? In Latin language the
word “patria” means fatherland. Whose fatherland in this case? Whose patriotic
war? How much of it is educational hodge-podge and how much impudent lie?
The pitiful average level of Ukrainians’ national
consciousness is why they so quickly dissipated the gains of the Orange Revolution and enabled the Party of Regions to seize power and abuse it.
According to a recent poll, a majority of Ukrainians think
that the OUN (the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists) and UPA (the
Ukrainian Insurgent Army) did not fight for Ukraine’s independence. If it is an
expression of honest opinion, anything can be made believable.
For instance, is President Viktor Yanukovych defending Ukraine’s
independence? Look at his valiant effort
to secure the association agreement with the European Union, to the chagrin of
Moscow. Is he for real? If so, then why Ukrainophobia rages unchecked under
Yanukovych administration, writes Zenon Zawada in The Ukrainian Weekly.
In its Oct. 13 issue in New Jersey, we find, for
instance, how the memorial plaque in Kharkiv honoring the renowned linguist and
literary historian Yurii Shevelov was destroyed on September 25 with the tacit
approval of the administration of President Yanukovych and the ruling Party of
Regions.
Kharkiv State Oblast Administration Chair Mykhailo Dobkin,
who is Yanukovych’s representative in Kharkiv, slandered Shevelov and his
admirers as “fascists” a day after the plaque was put up. The accusation is of
the same variety as contending that the earth is flat, and is motivated by
physiological antagonism of the regional power structure towards Ukrainian
content in any public expression.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union and mainly because of
the industrial might of the southeast part of Ukraine the region became
virtually destined to be a key power base in the hands of whoever happens to be
in control of its politics. Mainly Russian in its language and demeanor, the
loyalties of the region, if any exist, are mostly to itself, in the tradition
of the Soviet era criminally tinged “Donskie boys”.
What was generally not expected, however, is that the
politicians and oligarchs of that region would take control of the whole
country. If this construct appears to be upside-down, the evidence is
overwhelming that it really is. For instance, the ministry of culture and
education is in the hands of a Ukrainophobic minister. This is perhaps a
defining explanation why the OUN and UPA are vilified with an aplomb of
cultivated dishonesty.
Perhaps, from time to time, people should be reminded that
without the OUN and UPA the World War II would be a blank page in Ukraine’s
history, except for records of population losses inflicted by invaders.
With fair play out of the window, dishonesty crosses
borders. A resolution was introduced in Polish parliament this month to declare
the OUN and UPA criminal organizations. It would be appropriate to include in a
debate of that resolution a review of Polish record in the occupied western
Ukraine between the two world wars. Such as the horrifically known
“pacification” in the Volyn region, conducted by the army and police. It
included organized destruction of Orthodox churches and public whippings
conducted by troopers — “to the eternal shame of the Polish state” as
stated in history books and protested publicly by Metropolitan Andrey
Sheptyckyi of the Ukrainian Catholic Church.
Enough said. No need to stress again the importance of
cooperation between Ukraine and Poland at this hour. Let’s welcome more
cooperation in practice, but not in the domain of Ukrainophobia.
Also at this hour it is impossible to avoid an impression
that Yanukovych is enjoying himself manipulating a continuing
prosecution of imprisoned former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, while toying
with the European Union negotiators about terms and conditions of her hypothetical
release and other “requirements” in Ukraine’s governance that have been identified as needed
to sign the association agreement.
It is obvious that the EU is by now exasperated by
sociopathic behavior of the Ukrainian side.
“We need to be in Europe, where our future lies,” deputy prime minister
Kostiantyn Hryshchenko is saying. It is a certainty, however, that Ukraine will
stay within the Donbas empire in the foreseeable future, regardless whether or
not the association agreement is signed.
And so, what has happened to Tymoshenko and what will
be her role in the future, if any, is by far a more meaningful indicator of
Ukraine’s direction than the flat earth phantasmagoria attached to the association agreement. This is not to say that this deal would not be
important. It actually may save Ukraine’s economy from collapse in the short run,
saving also the Yanukovych nest. But a historic solution for Ukraine’s
paramount weaknesses it is not.
Ukrainians themselves have pushed the country into its
present yoke. They will have to liberate it by using own resources. It has to
be a national liberation coupled with the commitment to a civil society not crippled
by mobsters outside and within the government.
This is a tall order, considering that the present regime will employ
all means to falsify the elections or prevent popular presidential candidates
from running.
Boris Danik is a retired Ukrainian-American living in North Caldwell, New Jersey.
