Zelensky is angry

From Peskov to Naryshkin, from Pushkov to Poklonskaya - who just did not attack the curses on Vladimir Zelensky for speaking in Poland, he laid part of the responsibility for the outbreak of the Second World War into the Soviet Union. Why did this become such a sensation for them? On the air, historian Nikita Petrov (Moscow), historian Anatoly Podolsky (Kiev), journalist Vaclav Radzivinovich (Warsaw).

Full video version of the program

Elena Rykovtseva: The Kremlin, Russian propaganda had a new old enemy - this is Vladimir Zelensky. With us, Nikita Petrov, historian. We will figure out why, why, what Vladimir Zelensky said so unexpected. He, in fact, did not stop being an enemy, they rotted him from the very beginning. But if earlier he was a "clown", now he is an enemy and a "traitor." Exactly in such words he is called for his performance in Warsaw. Let's see the plot about how the Russian-Polish conflict developed along the line of the beginning of the Second World War and what role Zelensky played here so that now everyone has attacked him.

Your browser does not support HTML5

The correspondence dispute of Zelensky and Putin about the role of the USSR in the Second World War

Elena Rykovtseva: We only gave two opinions, there from Pushkov to Poklonskaya, the whole Duma stands on the ears. I'm silent about Russian talk shows. Vaclav Radzivinovich with us in touch from Warsaw, a Polish journalist. I will show a fragment of today's show "60 minutes" in which the guests are expressed, in this case it is Vladimir Skachko. This is a person from Ukraine, but you know that there are pro -Ukrainian guests from Ukraine and anti -Ukrainian also from Ukraine, which come from a pro -Russian point of view.

Your browser does not support HTML5

Reaction to the words of Zelensky about the Holocaust in the studio of Russia 1

Elena Rykovtseva: Let's start with this statement, literally with this hysteria, which they fell into these current shows and in the Kremlin. What happened to them, what is the case in this phrase that he said so seditious, unexpected?

Nikita Petrov: I think if the President of Zelensky chose more neutral or careful expressions, the result would be the same, with the same hype, with the same hysteria, with the same rage. In principle, when we are talking about the beginning of World War II, I do not want to recognize one clear historical fact - this is a reluctance to recognize Soviet aggression against Poland, the reluctance to recognize that this aggression was carried out by prior conspiracy with Hitler. This is noted in secret protocols. We do not want to admit that this was carried out by the most criminal way, because those agreements that existed with Poland, including non -aggression, were violated. That is, in fact, the Soviet Union a little later than Germany, Germany, the attack enforced earlier, but on September 17, the Soviet Union on the other hand also committed an act of aggression against a sovereign independent state. No matter what they say that there was no government there, in fact, at that moment it was in Poland. But even that, we did not conclude an agreement with specific people, but with the country, the country remained a subject of international law. I do not want to admit it. Whatever the words those who say about this historical truth are picked up, they will still be unacceptable, because thereby we understand very well: the fault for the beginning of World War II lies partially and is partly on the Soviet Union - this is a historical fact. Everything that we heard regarding, insultingly violates, betrays, I am not talking about the language of hatred, fellow tribesmen and foreigners is the language of hatred. All this smells bad for the simple reason that this is not some kind of vision of history by Polish eyes that the President Zelensky seemed to be accepted, all historians of European countries know this story, this is a story that has long been known to everyone. Only we do not want to recognize not only the unseemly, but also the criminal role of the Soviet Union.

Elena Rykovtseva: That is, this phrase in itself “Conspiracy of totalitarian regimes” is already, apparently, offensive to the new Putin concept of understanding history, it cannot be said.

Nikita Petrov: Was there a conspiracy or was there no conspiracy? If we take secret protocols, it is clearly said here: "In the case of a territorial-political reconstruction of the regions that make up the Polish state, the border of the spheres of interests of Germany and the USSR will approximately pass along the line of the Narev, Vistula and San rivers." And then there was an adjustment on September 28, when the Soviet Union lost part of the territory of Poland, in return, receiving Lithuania into the sphere of interests.

Elena Rykovtseva: That is, there was a conspiracy, there were totalitarian regimes. Maybe he is infuriated by the continuation of this phrase, which most likely outraged the Kremlin public: "This led to the beginning of World War II and allowed the Nazis to launch the deadly flywheel of the Holocaust." That is, logically, he has a part of the fault for the launch of this flywheel of the Holocaust to the Soviet Union. Apparently, rabies is also present because of this.

Nikita Petrov: Of course, this moment is the most sensitive for the simple reason that if we analyze the German policy of the genocide, which, of course, did not immediately become steps, at first there were so -called racial laws, then there was a “crystal night” before the beginning of the Second World War. But when the Second World War began, in the territories where the Reich included and which were not part of the Reich territory, a ghetto was arranged. That is, in fact, it was a step -by -step approach to the so -called final solution to the Jewish issue. This happened a little later, but the war allowed Hitler to carry out these plans. That is, in fact, the President of Zelensky did not error against the truth. Of course, we can pull these words and say: what does the Soviet Union have to do with it? But after all, the Soviet Union from 1939 to 1941 who was Germany - a friend, brother, ally, ally? It is very important to determine if Molotov sends a telegram to Berlin through the ambassador of Shulenburg on congratulations to take Warsaw or the invasion of Denmark and Norway, says that he sympathizes: "Please pass on my congratulations and greetings to the German government, the German Empire. I received your message that the German troops entered Warsaw." Further, he says the same regarding the invasion of Norway and Denmark, where he says that he refers to this event with understanding: "We wish Germany a complete victory in its defensive events." This is April 9, 1940. Is this a fellow traveler, friend, ally? How are these relationships determined at all?

Elena Rykovtseva: It is a little surprising when he says something similar Zelensky, as they say, “blasphemously imposing the guilt of the Soviet Union for the untying of the Holocaust,” this causes rabies for some reason. But you know that Vladimir Putin spoke in Israel on the forum and said literally the following: “We will not forget that this crime also had accomplices and accomplices. They often exceeded their owners in cruelty. In the occupied territories of the Soviet Union, where these bandits were operated, the largest number of Jews were killed. So, 1.4 million Jews were killed in Ukraine, in Lithuania, in Lithuania 220 thousand people are destroyed - this is 95% of the pre -war Jewish population of the country. " That is, accomplices from the local population exceeded Hitler, is this not the laying of part of guilt in Ukrainians of the same, for example? He calls anyone as accomplices? Of course, Ukrainians. Why then can he do this, and this does not cause, as I understand it, such hysteria in Ukraine?

Nikita Petrov: It does not cause hysteria, because it, in the end, is simply called demagogy. For one simple reason. The Hitlerites were full of accomplices, the Nazis was full of representatives of each people who found himself under the German occupation. You might think that in Kaluga the ghetto was not in accordance with the German plans and without a complication of the local population.

Elena Rykovtseva: I'm not mistaken when I see this parallel? He says, Zelensky: there was a conspiracy of two regimes, because of which the war began, so in the second mode there are also part of the guilt. At the same time, Putin says: there was a combination of local villains to the Nazis, and, accordingly, part of the guilt lies on them, accordingly.

Nikita Petrov: Who argues that local collaborators and accomplices of the Nazis should answer before the law? They are criminals - this fact is absolutely clear. There is a criminal element in every absolutely country.

Elena Rykovtseva: Do you agree that he uses the same technique?

Nikita Petrov: No, this is not the same technique. Here we are talking about different things. For aggression against Poland, is, of course, the Soviet Union, Stalin and its environment. For those crimes that were committed in the territories captured by the Nazis, legal Germany is primarily liable for. This responsibility is recorded by the Nuremberg Tribunal.

Elena Rykovtseva: You are talking about yourself now. I interpret his words when he says: local ones were even more atrocious than the Nazis. He has a great guilt for the Holocaust to local collaborators.

Nikita Petrov: Collaborators are not a state. Collaborators are every individual person who is responsible for his actions. We perfectly understand that these people for various reasons collaborated with the Nazis, and we understand that these people are to blame. But not the country is legally responsible for this, the current Ukraine and not the present Poland, but those citizens who committed these crimes. At that moment, when the Nazis were there, there was neither Poland nor Ukraine.

Elena Rykovtseva: Vaclav, what do you think, when Vladimir Zelensky says, it would seem, well -known, obvious things that these two regimes are responsible for the outbreak of war, why is this causing such an incredible, just an explosion of indignation and indignation in Russia?

Vaclav Radzivinovich: I listen with great attention and interest what Nikita Petrov says, he is very smart, I respect him very much as a historian. But sorry, Nikita, you are not talking about that. Because what we hear from the Kremlin, what we hear from Netanyahu, from Zelensky to a lesser extent is not about history, this is about the myth. They create their own myth and will protect it as soon as they can. I remember Olga Skabeeva, who performed, chased and yelled that there was no doping in Russian sports. Now she is not engaged in history, the same as she did not go in for sports, she is engaged in the myth of the immaculate conception of the Second World War and immaculate Stalin. They want the whole world to learn only one thing that without Stalin there would be no great victory in the Second World War. We ask: Would there be a war without Stalin? Maybe without Stalin she would simply not be? Not only Russia creates its myth, myths are created that have nothing to do with history as a science, myths are created by the same Ukraine, myths in America are created, they are created everywhere. Everywhere they say: we were only a victim, all attacked us, we are the only honest people repelled the attack and so on. I remember 10 years ago, when 70 years of the beginning of the war were celebrated, Vladimir Putin came to us. He then performed and even in my newspaper was his article about history. Then he appreciated the Ribbentrop Pact - Molotov as an unforgivable mistake, the narrative was completely different. But then Russia was in a different position, not as it is now. It was not a fact that Russia lost Ukraine. The only thing that remains after the two decades of Putin’s extension is the only thing that remains a success about which you can build state ideology is a great victory myth. Of course, there was a great victory, huge victims of the Soviet people, including the Ukrainian then, this should also be admitted, although this is denied. But Putin has nothing more now. Because of this, there is such an intensity of passions that it is necessary to build this myth and protect it by hook or by crook.

Elena Rykovtseva: I wanted to understand at what point this exacerbation began. There was no such confrontation between Russia and Poland permanent along the Second World War. You really confirm this idea that Vladimir Putin just “just forever” once evaluated this pact unambiguously negatively, but these times have passed.

Vaclav Radzivinovich: These times have passed. Even your Supreme Council 30 years ago condemned Molotov’s Pact - Ribbentrop, this is also a medical fact. More than once in the world it was said that the war began on September 1, 1939, when the German army entered Poland, and then on September 17 the Soviet army entered Poland with the Nazis - this is a fact. This was not accepted with such emotions before. Now there is a huge anniversary of victory, we must protect, because this is our everything. Victory is our everything. What else is left of the victories, the success of this country? Countries - no, the country works. I see with great respect how Russian people cope with all these troubles that fell on them. But still, the authorities, the Kremlin now has nothing else.

Elena Rykovtseva: Anatoly Podolsky, a Ukrainian historian with us in touch. I would also like to listen to your version of why these bitterness caused these words of Vladimir Zelensky. I will remind you that not only the words that there was a conspiracy between two totalitarian regimes, and hence the partial responsibility and the Soviet Union for what happened next, even for the Holocaust. He said another thing that terribly insulted the Russian public, they are charged with that he did not utter the word “Red Army” when he said that Auschwitz was liberated by the fighters of the Ukrainian front and the Lviv division, he did not say that all these were fighters of the Red Army. As if someone does not know about it that these were fighters of the Red Army. Since he did not say this, it means that the world did not find out that this Red Army liberated Auschwitz. So, two things are charged with him: he did not utter the words "Red Army" at the mention of the Ukrainian Front and entrusted part of the responsibility to the Soviet Union for the unleashing of the Second World War. What do you associate fiercely such a reaction?

Anatoly Podolsky: As a historian, I am in a terrible mood after the speech of the President of the Russian Federation Putin in the poison of wa-shim. It is very unpleasant for me that the poison of wa-shim, a scientific and educational organization that has a huge authority in the world in the study of the fate of Jews during the Second World War, the history of the Holocaust, gave the rostrum to a man who should be convicted as a military criminal who today wages the war against my country, what was the aggression in Georgia, which is happening in Syria. It's horrible. Our colleague, a well -known American historian, who wrote a monograph about the Gulag, about the Holodomor in Ukraine, said last year, wrote it on her social network that "I remember that the Soviet Union was one of the winners in the Second World War. I also remember that the Soviet Union was one of those who unleashed the Second World War." This is very important, the conviction by the European community for many years Pact Molotov - Ribbentrop, which led to the loss of statehood of a number of countries, which led to deaths. The recognition of this does not cancel the heroism of people who were in the Red Army, as well as in the armies of the anti -Hitler coalition. Unfortunately, the modern Russian Federation, political regime, it is dangerous for the world. When this regime does not know how to apologize, does not know how to repent - this is a dangerous regime. The complexity and tragedy of World War II was terrible. If these lessons are falsified, then we are standing even more terrible before calling. I, as a citizen of Ukraine, have a lot of questions for the president who is now in my country, but the fact that he gained strength and did not sit, did not listen to Putin in the poison of wa-shim, that he said that these were places for those who survived-this is exactly what I support. Regarding the first Ukrainian front, the first Ukrainian front was not in the Aisenhower army or in the army of Charles de Gaulle, the first Ukrainian front was in the Red Army. Obviously, millions of Ukrainians were in the ranks of the Red Army, fought against Hitler. The fact that the President of the Russian Federation back in 2010 said that they would have won without Ukrainians in the ranks of the Red Army is Ukrainophobia, it just goes off scale. Not only Ukrainophobia, and hatred of Poland, and hatred of Lithuania, Latvia. This falsification of the historical context is obvious.

Elena Rykovtseva: with us Lukash Adam, historian from Krakow. You know that now Vladimir Zelensky was accused of sided with the European understanding of the war, the European concept of the outbreak of World War II, its results. That is, there are two concepts in the world: one, it turns out, is Russian, one European, to which the "traitor" of everything and the whole Vladimir Zelensky joined. It would seem that there is one story, but there are two concepts. What do you associate with the aggravation of the Russian-Polish conflict through the Second World War?

Lukash Adam: Of course, he worsened. But he was aggravated in view of the current politics, and not in view of the fact that there was some kind of dispute between different European peoples about what happened 75 years ago. You say that this is a European concept, I would not call it that. There are a lot of historians in Russia who directly said that the Molotov -Ribbentrop Pact contributed to the beginning of World War II. Of course, this was not the main factor, but he still contributed. Было много историков, которые признавали, что 17 сентября 1939 года Красная армия и Советский Союз совершил факт агрессии против Польши. Потом поменялся политический климат. Российские власти посчитали, что Вторая мировая война, Великая Отечественная война может исполнять роль светской религии, может быть чем-то, что консолидирует российское общество по отношению к Западу, почему Запад нас не любит, почему санкции против нас ввели и так далее. Это не европейцы, не украинцы, не поляки виноваты в том, что политика памяти в России повернулась в сторону, которая является оскорблением для очень многих русских жертв сталинизма. Сейчас Польша, в отличие от времен Польской Народной Республики, говорит прямо не только о немецких преступлениях, но и о советских. Большинство поляков, мне кажется, большинство историков, конечно, признает очевидное, что Красная армия прекратила ужасную немецкую оккупацию, которая привела к уничтожению дальнейших перспектив польской нации как таковой, из-за которой Польша потеряла фактически миллион своих граждан, эти заслуги признают. Но с другой стороны, говорят прямым языком, что не было это освобождение, как Владимир Путин, Сергей Нарышкин и другие российские деятели хотели бы представить, потому что Красная армия свободу не принесла. Она принесла новую неволю, которая поменяла положение стран Центральной и Восточной Европы в лучшую сторону, но тоже принесла много горя, жертв, преступлений. Это все длилось до 1989-го, даже до 1991 года. Это просто является живой памятью для абсолютного большинства поляков, прибалтов, украинцев, что способствует иногда излишне радикальным трактовкам, как то, что Сталин отвечает вместе с Гитлером за начало Второй мировой войны, путая ответственность Сталина за агрессию против Польши, ответственность за разжигание войны, даже еще более радикальные интерпретации. Но корнем всех проблем есть внутренняя ситуация в Российской Федерации.

ПРОДОЛЖЕНИЕ ПРОГРАММЫ СМОТРИТЕ НА ВИДЕО И СЛУШАЙТЕ В ЗВУКЕ

A survey of Moscow passers -by

Your browser does not support HTML5

Поляки воспринимают события Второй мировой иначе, чем россияне?