The Russian Foreign Ministry released a report “On the situation regarding the glorification of Nazism, the spread of neo-Nazism, and other practices that contribute to the escalation of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance”. The chapter on Poland is controversial due to some of the cited examples. Predictably, it mentioned Poland’s view of World War II’s origins, demolition of Red Army monuments, and voting against Russia’s anti-Nazi UN resolutions.
The present piece will only remind readers that Poland has a different interpretation of history than Russia does and that the abovementioned resolutions condemn the aforesaid demolition of Red Army monuments that symbolize these differences, thus contextualizing why Poland always votes against it. The focus isn’t on relitigating those disputes, however, but on drawing attention to some of the other examples of Neo-Nazism, etc., that a wider audience would reasonably consider to be controversial.
The first is Poland’s annual Independence March. While a statistically insignificant minority that could be considered Neo-Nazis has participated before, the event as a whole is an expression of national pride that all people the world over have a right to express. The same goes for organizing anti-migrant rallies. The related slogan “Poland for Poles”, which is cited in the report, advocates preserving the post-World War II ethno-cultural homogeneity that Stalin was responsible for and he obviously wasn’t a Nazi.
Poland’s anti-migrant policies along the eastern frontier with Belarus veritably aren’t an example of Neo-Nazism either. It’s also ironic that the Foreign Ministry cited the “Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights’” criticism of Polish hostility to migrants when they themselves noted in their report that the organization is banned in Russia as “undesirable”. Likewise, one would think that the decrease in Polish support for Ukrainian refugees would be praised by Russia, but the report deems it an example of Neo-Nazism.
The same goes for Poland’s requirement that Ukrainian schoolchildren learn Polish even though Russia itself already has a policy in place mandating that migrant schoolchildren learn Russian. Most surreal of all, however, is the Foreign Ministry citing a poll showing that nearly three-quarters of Poles want Zelensky to apologize for glorifying the Volhynia Genocide’s OUN-UPA culprits at the state level. Those groups are designated as terrorists by Russia so opposing them veritably isn’t proof of Neo-Nazism.
The two examples above suggest that the diplomats who compiled the Polish portion of their ministry’s report aren’t even aware of Russia’s own policies. It accordingly looks like they were just searching for examples that could be presented as evidence of their arguably predetermined conclusion. If it’s the case that they innocently equated two Russian policies with Neo-Nazism, then it means that there are more serious problems since their superiors should have caught those faux pas before publication.
All in all, whatever one thinks about the well-known historical-political examples cited in the Foreign Ministry’s report about alleged proof of Neo-Nazism in Poland, the ones mentioned in this piece are reasonably controversial. That especially goes for the two examples that inadvertently equate Russia’s own policies with this ideology. Constructive critiques are some of the sincerest forms of support so hopefully the Foreign Ministry, if it comes across this piece, understands and takes remedial action.
