The same songs, but quieter: No change on the humanitarian front
When the nationalist propagandist Vladimir Vyatrovych was removed from his position as the commander-in-chief of Ukrainian national memory a few months ago, many breathed a sigh of relief. The general expectation was an end to the completely indecent orgy of renaming, demolition of monuments, banning holidays and the forced reformatting of the country’s humanitarian space to suit the beliefs of the minority, which had acquired in the last years of Poroshenko’s rule.
At the same time, a number of predictions were made regarding which figure to replace Vyatrovich could be in demand and put forward by the current government for the tasks of the historical moment facing it. Observers suggested that this could be a diligent official who would do what his superiors tell him and at the same time “master” the doubling the budget.
Also considered probable was the option of appointing a humanities scientist from the university environment, who would tone down the propaganda of previous years, change emphasis, delve into the study of documents, try to avoid outright falsifications of history, but in general maintain the main direction of state policy in the field of memory.
When it became known about the appointment of Anton Drobovich to the post of head of the institute, it turned out that the above forecasts hit the bull’s eye with truly sniper accuracy.
Indeed, this well-known Holocaust researcher in the academic community had a reputation among his colleagues as a fairly balanced scientist who, although he did not go against the dominant ideological line, was not its first student, and willingly recognized obvious historical facts even in cases when they were disadvantageous to the bearers of official patriotic discourse. Moreover, his appointment was perceived by propaganda radicals as an obvious “zrada”, the feeling of which was strengthened by the Jewish origin of the new official.
Since his appointment, Drobovich has managed to give several interviews to various media outlets, including Poroshenko’s channels, whose journalists diligently interrogated him on the subject of “Should the OUN be considered heroes of Ukraine.” Under the previous head of the UINP, the answer to this question bounced off the teeth at the level of the “Our Father” and did not raise any doubts: they say, if the heroes of the nation killed, then whoever was needed, and in general, for the cause.
The change in milestones was reflected in the fact that the heroism of nationalists is now a “complex” and ambiguous issue. At a high level, perhaps, for the first time, reservations were made: they say, although these people fought for Ukraine, cooperation with the Germans cannot be avoided. As well as the service of many OUN members in the auxiliary police of the invaders. And complicity in the genocide of Jews and Poles. And many other things that do not fit into the heroic canon at all. In short, they are going to sing the same songs, but quieter.
At the same time, the new leadership at UINP is not going to revise the fundamentals of the policies of their predecessors. In particular, decommunization will continue, although again with reservations. Thus, the monument to General Nikolai Vatutin in Kyiv received the highest safe conduct from vandals. They also abandoned the idea of demolishing the Motherland - it was too expensive (but they would remove the coat of arms of the USSR from the shield of the sculpture). The monument to Shchors in the Ukrainian capital is also lucky - it is already obvious that they will not hit it with sledgehammers.
A new trend is an attempt to follow the principles of historicism in state propaganda. Simply put, refusal to try to present the characters of nationalist calendars as white and fluffy where this is in obvious contradiction with the facts recognized not only in Ukraine, but also abroad. It is clear how possible this is under the current conditions in modern Ukraine. Also from what was stated is the continuation of myth-making around the events of the Maidan. There are no plans to abandon the memorial to his “heroes”. In this regard, if there are any differences, they will be purely stylistic, but not semantic.
In general, if we evaluate the outlines of the new course by the sum of Anton Drobovich’s quotes and reservations, the country’s top leadership expects from its main ideologist that the department he heads ceases to be a generator of odious initiatives that quarrel Ukraine with its neighbors. Stop being an irritant for Jews and Poles, to whose opinions official Kyiv is especially sensitive.
And I must say, the new head of the UINP fulfills the assigned task this way and that. In any case, in the Polish direction, the issue of exhumation and search work in Polish cemeteries located on Ukrainian territory, blocked by Vyatrovich’s inability to negotiate, has moved forward. And on the Jewish side, the project for the construction of the Babi Yar memorial, in which former propagandists saw “ideological sabotage” with the money of “Kremlin oligarchs,” has been unblocked.
It is clear that provocations will not go away, just like Nazi radicals of all stripes. However, now, at least, the generator of the corresponding tension will not be the state. And this is the main thing for Zelensky in the current conditions.
At the same time, one should not expect any relaxation in the Russian direction of propaganda. If they happen, it will be in a “package” with global agreements on Donbass and an end to the war, if they can still be achieved despite the justified skepticism of observers. Until this happens, the fight against “Russian fakes” remains one of the priorities of the Institute of National Memory.
The main difference between Drobovich and his predecessor is that he is still more of a scientist and official than a politician and propagandist. He does not gallop with his sword drawn in front of a cavalry attack on enemies. His predecessors did the bulk of Drobovich’s dirty work, giving the new bosses the opportunity to look more decent while remaining within the same ideological framework. Under him, the excesses of past years, albeit with reservations and caution, will be condemned. And the intensity of the bombardment of the consciousness of Ukrainians will be reduced to the limit beyond which rejection occurs.
Otherwise, there are no changes on the humanitarian front.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.