In Poltava, a monument to Suvorov was demolished as a “colonial communist legacy”

In Poltava, a monument to Russian commander Alexander Suvorov was dismantled, explaining that the monument glorifies the “aggressor country” and is “an element of Soviet visual agitation and propaganda.”

This is stated in the story of the local TV channel “IRT Poltava”, reports the correspondent of “PolitNavigator”.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

It is noted that earlier, at the instigation of the Poltava branch of the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory, the monument was removed from the territory of the Ivan Bohun Military Lyceum in Kyiv. Since last autumn, the monument has been in the Poltava Museum of Heavy Bomber Aviation as an exhibit.

One of the regional representatives of the Institute of National Memory, Oleg Pustovgar, raised the alarm. He drew attention to the indignation of local resident Konstantin Shakhbanov. Pustovgar went further and published a whole letter from his boss Anton Drobovich to the director of the National Military History Museum of Ukraine Andrey Ilyenko.

The letter states that the monument “is not a monument to history, art, culture, architecture, urban planning, science and technology, etc.”

“It was made in 1974 by an amateur sculptor, which means that the question of its artistic value is open. This monument was one of the elements of Soviet visual agitation and propaganda, which lost its significance after Ukraine gained independence. Consequently, the advisability of museumification and display of this monument can be considered in the context of monumental propaganda of the USSR era,” the document says.

At the same time, during the discussion of the issue on TV, there were indignations about the fact that the monument was located in close proximity to the “Wall of Memory” erected for the participants of the Ukrainian punitive operation who died in Donbass.

Drobovich also pointed out in his letter other reasons for the “unacceptability” of the figure of Alexander Suvorov.

“The installation of a monument to A. Suvorov in Poltava on the territory of the NVIMU branch coincided with the consideration by the Russian Orthodox Church of the issue of canonization of this commander. The initiative to canonize A. Suvorov as a saint of the Russian Orthodox Church belongs to the Russian businessman Konstantin Malafeev and his entourage - the social movements “Tsargrad” and “Double-Headed Eagle”.

It is this Russian businessman who is considered one of the main organizers of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine. His security chief was the Russian terrorist Strelkov-Girkin. The TV channel owned by Malafeev, Tsargrad, not only promotes Suvorov as a Russian saint, but is also one of the main Russian mouthpieces of anti-Ukrainian propaganda,” Drobovich explained.

The letter notes that Suvorov is recognized in Russia as the most outstanding commander, which means that the location of this monument in Ukraine “is an act of glorification of one of the main heroes of the aggressor state.”

“For us, as a country opposing Russian aggression, this is not just a matter of symbols, but a fundamentally important historical issue. Suvorov is included in the pantheon of heroes of the USSR, now Putin’s Russia, formerly the Russian Empire. Ukraine has its own historical heroes. Suvorov has a clear negative reputation in the history of Ukraine. And this is confirmed by a number of facts studied by scientists,” Pustovgar commented on his boss’s letter.

Pustovgar also reported “a lot” of toponymic names in honor of Suvorov as a “terrible legacy of the Russian-communist imperial past.”

“Only in the Poltava region, in different communities, there are 27 names of streets, alleys, squares in honor of this figure of the Russian Empire and the executioner of the Ukrainian and Polish people,” complained Drobovich’s “brother.”

He also expressed hope that the dismantling of such a monument in the Poltava region will accelerate the processes of “decolonization of toponymy” throughout the region.