A controversial law enacted by Poland’s ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party has attracted a tremendous amount of attention around the world for its criminalization of expressions including “Polish death camps.” However, the law is intended to be much more than a means to get people to mind their language.
The law states that one could face a fine or up to three years imprisonment for “publicly and contrary to the facts” ascribing to the Polish people or government “responsibility or coresponsibility for Nazi crimes” or “other offenses” that constitute crimes against peace, crimes against humanity or war crimes.
True, “Nazi crimes” were committed by the Nazis and Poles should not be blamed for them. Likewise, while Nazi extermination camps were located in Poland, they were by no means Polish. Yet, it is the mention of “other offenses” that should concern us.
The truth is that, in many places in Eastern Europe, the arrival of German troops during World War II prompted an immediate outbreak of homicidal anti-Semitism. Many Jews were murdered by their neighbors or the local police force, only sometimes pursuant to German orders.
While Nazism was the catalyst for such murders — which include pogroms all across German-controlled Europe, particularly in the east — should Nazis alone be blamed for them?
The Polish PiS government is far from the first to introduce “memory laws” aimed at reshaping historical narratives by criminalizing certain statements about the past. Such laws exist in about 30 European countries, as well as in Israel, Russia, Rwanda and Turkey.
Laws criminalizing the denial of the Holocaust or other crimes against humanity — the most common type of memory law — were first introduced in the 1980s and 1990s in western European democracies that had been implicated in those crimes, including Austria, France and Germany.
Whether or not it is advisable to use criminal law in such a way, there is no doubt about the intentions of the people behind such efforts: to protect the memory of the victims, while acknowledging shared responsibility and regret for the misdeeds of the past.
Some eastern European countries have likewise prohibited Holocaust denial. However, they have also introduced memory laws with essentially the opposite aim: to whitewash national narratives by shifting the responsibility for historical atrocities entirely onto others, whether Adolf Hitler’s Germany or Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union. Poland introduced such a law in 1998. Similar norms exist in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Latvia and Lithuania.
By obscuring the role that local populations played in both Nazi and communist crimes, such laws help to advance nationalist narratives, which can prove very handy for politicians looking to win popular support. The PiS, for one, has accrued substantial electoral support thanks in part to its exploitation of past tragedies for political ends.
There are more extreme cases than that of Poland. In Russia, a 2014 law prohibits any criticism of Stalin’s policy during WWII. In Turkey, a 2005 law forbids calling the extermination of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire genocide. These laws differ fundamentally from memory laws in western Europe, because they actively protect the memory of the perpetrators, rather than the victims, of state-sponsored crimes.
Of course, Turkey and especially Russia can hardly be called democracies and neither is a member of the EU, but Poland is — and its government, too, is now actively protecting the memory of the perpetrators of crimes against humanity, although they were individual citizens, not state officials acting in their government’s name.
This is not even the first time the PiS has attempted to introduce such a law. In 2008, it proposed a law that penalized “slander against the Polish nation,” including accusations concerning Poles’ involvement in Nazi and communist crimes. The Polish Constitutional Tribunal invalidated that law on procedural grounds.
Memory laws emerged in western Europe’s old democracies as a means of promoting truth, peace and reconciliation. However, in attempting to avoid future tragedies, these countries might have set a dangerous precedent.
Now, memory laws have become one of the preferred instruments of nationalist populists attempting to consolidate their own power — and to incite the very xenophobic nationalism that once provided fertile soil for the Holocaust.
Nikolay Koposov is a visiting professor of Russian and Eastern European Studies at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, and the author of Memory Laws, Memory Wars: The Politics of the Past in Europe and Russia.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
An outrageous dismissal of the exemplary Taiwanese fight against COVID-19 has been perpetrated by the EU. There is no excuse. I presume that everyone who reads the Taipei Times knows that the EU has excluded Taiwan from its so-called “safe list,” which permits citizens unhindered travel to and from the countries of the EU. As the EU does not feel that it needs to explain the character of this exclusive list, perhaps we should examine it ourselves in some detail. There are 14 nations on the list that have been chosen as safe countries of origin and safe countries of destination for
Filmmakers in Taiwan used to struggle when it came to telling a story that could resonate internationally. Things started to change when the 2017 drama series The Teenage Psychic (通靈少女), a collaboration between HBO Asia and Taiwanese Public Television Service (PTS), became a huge hit not just locally, but also internationally. The coming-of-age story was adapted from the 2013 PTS-produced short film The Busy Young Psychic (神算). Entirely filmed in Taiwan, the Mandarin-language series even made it on HBO’s streaming platforms in the US. It is proof that a well-told Taiwanese story can absolutely win the hearts and minds of hard-to-please
Drugged with sedatives, handcuffed and wearing a bright orange prison tunic, British fraud investigator and former journalist Peter Humphrey was escorted by warders into an interrogation room filled with reporters, locked inside a steel cage and fastened to a metal “tiger chair.” Humphrey recalls: “I was completely surrounded by officers, dazed, manacled and with cameras pointing at me through the bars. I was fighting for my life like a caged animal. It was horrifying.” Footage from the interrogation was later artfully edited to give the appearance of a confession and broadcast on Chinese state media. While this might sound like an
The US House of Representatives on July 1 passed by unanimous consent a bipartisan bill that would penalize Chinese officials who implement Beijing’s new national security legislation in Hong Kong, as well as banks that do business with them. The following day, the US Senate unanimously passed the bill, which was later sent to the White House, where it awaits US President Donald Trump’s signature. The bill does not spell out what the sanctions would look like and Trump has yet to sign it into law, but Reuters on Thursday last week reported that five major Chinese state lenders are considering