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
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry