Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

News & Supplemental  

Stunning: U.S. Votes AGAINST U.N. Resolution Condemning Nazis and Nazi Collaborators

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained here. The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by 10/02/2014. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more) con­tains FTR #812.  (The pre­vi­ous flash dri­ve was cur­rent through the end of May of 2012 and con­tained FTR #748.)

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE.

Azov bat­tal­ion’s insignia

COMMENT: A grotesque mile­stone, of sorts, was reached this past week. It is impos­si­ble in the present post to detail our cov­er­age of Ukraine and the events there. Inter­est­ed lis­ten­ers are referred to the pro­grams we have done on the sub­ject to fill them­selves in on devel­op­ments in Ukraine.

We have cov­ered the ascen­sion of the OUN/B heirs in the Ukraine in a num­ber of pro­grams: FTR #‘s 777778779780781782, 783784794800, 803, 804, 808, 811, 817, 818.

This past week, the U.S. was one of three coun­tries to vote against a U.N. res­o­lu­tion con­demn­ing the cel­e­bra­tion of Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors as “free­dom fighters”–something the U.S. has been pro­mot­ing since the end of World War II. Ger­many and the EU nations abstained.

Ukraine itself and Cana­da were the oth­er coun­tries that vot­ed against the res­o­lu­tion. The OUN/B dias­po­ra and its influ­ence in the GOP and intel­li­gence ser­vices of the U.S. is the pri­ma­ry con­sid­er­a­tion to be weighed in con­nec­tion with this dis­grace­ful episode.

The large OUN/B  dias­po­ra pop­u­la­tion in Cana­da undoubt­ed­ly has much to do with that nation’s behav­ior in this con­text.

“Hon­or­ing Col­lab­o­ra­tors;” german-foreign-policy.com; 11/26/2014.

The Fed­er­al Repub­lic of Ger­many has refused to vote in favor of a Unit­ed Nations res­o­lu­tion con­demn­ing the glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of Nation­al Social­ism and Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tion. Last week, the Third Com­mit­tee of the UN Gen­er­al Assem­bly passed a res­o­lu­tion strong­ly crit­i­ciz­ing the edi­fi­ca­tion of memo­ri­als to Nazi func­tionar­ies and the styl­iza­tion of Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors as “free­dom fight­ers.” Ger­many and the oth­er EU nations abstained, the USA, Cana­da, and Ukraine vot­ed against the doc­u­ment, with 115 nations vot­ing in favor. Berlin and Brus­sels use the excuse of not want­i­ng to sup­port a res­o­lu­tion ini­ti­at­ed by Rus­sia. In fact, a vote in favor of the doc­u­ment would have caused hefty dis­putes with­in the EU, and between the EU and impor­tant allies. With grow­ing fre­quen­cy, noto­ri­ous Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors are being pub­licly hon­ored in such EU coun­tries as Hun­gary or the Baltic coun­tries and in Ukraine, in some cas­es by offi­cials of the respec­tive gov­ern­ments.

Deep Con­cern

The UN res­o­lu­tion express­es its “deep con­cern about the glo­ri­fi­ca­tion, in any form, of the Nazi move­ment, neo-Nazism, and for­mer mem­bers of the Waf­fen SS orga­ni­za­tion.” As exam­ples the doc­u­ment names erect­ing mon­u­ments and memo­ri­als and hold­ing pub­lic demon­stra­tions in the name of the glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of the Nazi past but also by “attempt­ing to declare such mem­bers and those who fought against the anti-Hitler coali­tion and col­lab­o­rat­ed with the Nazi move­ment par­tic­i­pants in nation­al lib­er­a­tion move­ments.” The res­o­lu­tion explic­it­ly “empha­sizes that any com­mem­o­ra­tive cel­e­bra­tion of the Nazi regime, its allies and relat­ed orga­ni­za­tions, whether offi­cial or unof­fi­cial” should be pro­hib­it­ed by UN mem­ber states. The res­o­lu­tion espe­cial­ly express­es its con­dem­na­tion “of any denial or attempt to deny the Holo­caust.”[1]

Nazi Glo­ri­fi­ca­tion not reject­ed

Last Fri­day, when the Third Com­mit­tee of the UN Gen­er­al Assem­bly put the res­o­lu­tion to a vote, the Ger­man Ambas­sador to the UN found him­self unable to cast his vote in favor. All oth­er EU nations also abstained, along with coun­tries, depen­dent, in one way or the oth­er, on the EU, such as Andor­ra, Bosnia-Herze­gov­ina or Mali. Ukraine, the Unit­ed States, and Cana­da vot­ed point­blank against the res­o­lu­tion. The lat­ter two coun­tries are shel­ter­ing rather influ­en­tial Ukrain­ian exile com­mu­ni­ties, char­ac­ter­ized by for­mer Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors of the “Orga­ni­za­tion of Ukrain­ian Nation­al­ists” (OUN). The rea­son gen­er­al­ly giv­en last Fri­day was that they did not want to sup­port a res­o­lu­tion ini­ti­at­ed by Rus­sia. The Sovi­et Union — of which Rus­sia had been its core — was the coun­try account­ing for the most casu­al­ties from Nazi ter­ror — 27 mil­lion. How­ev­er, had Ger­many and the oth­er EU nations vot­ed in favor of the res­o­lu­tion, it would have nec­es­sar­i­ly caused hefty dis­putes. Today, col­lab­o­ra­tors, who had joined the Nazis in the war against Moscow, are com­mem­o­rat­ed in sev­er­al Euro­pean coun­tries.

In the Strug­gle against Rus­sia

This is par­tic­u­lar­ly true of Ukraine, where, since ear­ly 2012, Ger­man orga­ni­za­tions have been work­ing — and inten­sive­ly so, since 2013 — to incor­po­rate the Svo­bo­da Par­ty and its affil­i­at­ed forces into an anti-Russ­ian alliance of orga­ni­za­tions. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[2]) Svo­bo­da hon­ors the OUN and par­tic­u­lar­ly its com­man­der Stepan Ban­dera, who is very pop­u­lar through­out West Ukraine. In 1941, Ban­der­a’s mili­tias active­ly sup­port­ed Nazi Ger­many in its attack on the Sovi­et Union. Svo­bo­da also hon­ors the “Ukrain­ian Par­ti­san Army” (UPA), which, in the wake of the Ger­man war of exter­mi­na­tion, had par­tic­i­pat­ed in mass mur­ders of Euro­pean Jews.[3] In the course of the Maid­an protests, both this par­ty and oth­er fas­cist orga­ni­za­tions, receiv­ing vig­or­ous sup­port from Ger­many, were play­ing a grow­ing role. Con­se­quent­ly, since the end of Feb­ru­ary, Svo­bo­da has had sev­er­al min­is­ters in the Ukrain­ian putsch regime. Today, fas­cist bat­tal­ions are among the most res­olute com­bat­ants in East Ukraine’s civ­il war. Some of their com­man­ders have been elect­ed to par­lia­ment in the Ver­chov­na Rada on elec­toral tick­ets of the par­ties form­ing the future gov­ern­ment. At the begin­ning of the month, an activist of the fas­cist “Right Sec­tor” and deputy com­man­der of the fas­cist “Asov Bat­tal­ion,” had been named police chief of the Dis­trict of Kiev. In their strug­gle against Rus­sia, Ukraine is unin­hib­it­ed­ly devel­op­ing the tra­di­tions of its anti-Sovi­et Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tion — at the side of Ger­many.

Free­dom Fight­ers

Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors are also being hon­ored in EU mem­ber coun­tries, for exam­ple, in the Baltic nations. Reg­u­lar com­mem­o­ra­tion hon­or parades for the Waf­fen SS, spon­sored by their nation­al Waf­fen SS vet­er­ans are orga­nized in Esto­nia, Latvia, and Lithua­nia. In Latvia, one of the most recent march­es was held last spring, with approx. 2,000 par­tic­i­pants — which, in pro­por­tion to the size of the pop­u­la­tion, would cor­re­spond to a demon­stra­tion of 80,000 in Ger­many. Observers point out that in Riga’s state-run Lat­vian “Occu­pa­tion Muse­um” the Lat­vian Waf­fen SS mili­tias are referred to as “free­dom fight­ers” in the strug­gle against Moscow. Orga­niz­ers of the Waf­fen SS memo­r­i­al march are invit­ed to schools to teach cours­es in “patriotism.”[4] The “All for Latvia” nation­al alliance par­ty, which has con­sis­tent­ly been in the gov­ern­ment since 2011, sup­ports these memo­r­i­al parades. The par­ty recur­ring­ly rais­es the issue of the depor­ta­tion (“repa­tri­a­tion”) of the coun­try’s Russ­ian-speak­ing minor­i­ty. One of the par­ty’s lead­ers had once declared that the Russ­ian minor­i­ty — near­ly one quar­ter of the pop­u­la­tion — are “occu­piers” or “ille­gal colo­nial­ists.” A crit­i­cal appraisal of Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tion is not wel­come in this coun­try. As the his­to­ri­an Maris Ruks notes, Lat­vian schol­ars risk “set­backs in their careers, if they engage in too detailed research into the Holocaust.”[5] In the cur­rent con­fronta­tion with Rus­sia, the Baltic coun­tries are among the EU’s most aggres­sive forces.

Hitler’s Part­ner is being reha­bil­i­tat­ed

Also in Hun­gary fas­cist tra­di­tions are becom­ing more preva­lent. Show­case exam­ples are the new memo­ri­als to the “Reich’s Deputy” and Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tor Mik­lós Hor­thy, which have been inau­gu­rat­ed since 2012. After chang­ing the name “Free­dom Square” to “Hor­thy Square,” in April 2012, in Gyöm­rö, near Budapest, a Hor­thy stat­ue was erect­ed in the vil­lage of Kere­ki in south­ern Hungary.[6] A Hor­thy com­mem­o­ra­tive plaque was installed on its premis­es of the Calvin­ist Col­lege in Debre­cen in May 2012. Oth­er memo­ri­als have fol­lowed. For exam­ple, in June 2013 in the East Hun­gar­i­an vil­lage of Hen­ci­da [7] and in Novem­ber of the same year right in Budapest. “Hitler’s Hun­gar­i­an part­ner is being reha­bil­i­tat­ed,” wrote Ger­man press organs back in 2012, atten­tive­ly not­ing that, at Hitler’s side, Hor­thy had led Hun­gary “into war against the Sovi­et Union.”[8] How­ev­er, cur­rent­ly, Hun­gary is not one of those coun­tries tak­ing a par­tic­u­lar­ly aggres­sive stand toward Rus­sia. The reha­bil­i­ta­tion of Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors extends far beyond Hor­thy. Since the 1990s, there have been many com­mem­o­ra­tive plaques ded­i­cat­ed to the eth­nic, anti-Semit­ic writer, Albert Wass, who had been a loy­al fol­low­er of Hor­thy and the Nazi Reich. His writ­ings have been as accept­ed into the coun­try’s cur­ricu­lums as those of Jozsef Nyiro, who still in 1944 was active in the Nazi Arrow Cross Party.[9] Hun­gary’s “Job­bik” Par­ty — which polled 20.5 per­cent in the April 6, 2014 elec­tions, its great­est suc­cess ever — stands in the tra­di­tion of the Arrow Cross Par­ty.

“Counter Insur­gency”

This is hard­ly an exhaus­tive list of EU coun­tries pub­licly hon­or­ing Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors. In Croa­t­ia, for exam­ple, mon­u­ments to Nazi oppo­nents were destroyed, while, streets were being named after Mile Budak, the fas­cist Ustasha’s lead­ing pro­pa­gan­dist and, for awhile, Croa­t­i­a’s For­eign Min­is­ter dur­ing the peri­od of Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tion. In Italy’s Affile, to the east of Rome, a mau­soleum to the fas­cist war crim­i­nal, Rodol­fo Graziani was inau­gu­rat­ed in 2012. Graziani, who had ini­tial­ly been engaged in “counter insur­gency” in Libya, ordered hostages shot and used poi­soned gas in Ethiopia. Toward the end of the war, he was hav­ing Ital­ians exe­cut­ed for refus­ing to col­lab­o­rate with the Nazi pup­pet regime in Salò. Had Ger­many and the oth­er EU coun­tries not refused to vote in favor of last Fri­day’s UN res­o­lu­tion, they would — had they tak­en the doc­u­ment seri­ous­ly — be fac­ing seri­ous con­flicts with one anoth­er and with their close allies, e.g. their part­ners in Ukraine.

[1] Unit­ed Nations Gen­er­al Assem­bly: Six­ty-ninth ses­sion of the Third Com­mit­tee. Agen­da item 66 (a): Elim­i­na­tion of racism, racial dis­crim­i­na­tion, xeno­pho­bia and relat­ed intol­er­ance. A/C.3/69/L.56/Rev.1. 19.11.2014.
[2] See A Broad-Based Anti-Russ­ian AllianceTer­min beim Botschafter and Juschtschenkos Mythen.
[3] See Zwis­chen Moskau und Berlin (IV).
[4] See Tag der Kol­lab­o­ra­teure and “Lib­er­a­tion Fight­ers” and “Occu­pi­er”.
[5] Frank Bren­dle: Inter­na­tion­al gegen SS-Ver­her­rlichung. www.neues-deutschland.de 17.03.2014.
[6] Györ­gy Dalos: Hor­thy im Hoch. www.nzz.ch 03.07.2012.
[7] Job­bik und Neue Ungarische Garde wei­hen neues Hor­thy-Denkmal ein. pusztaranger.wordpress.com 23.06.2013.
[8] Paul Jan­dl: Hitlers ungarisch­er Part­ner wird reha­bil­i­tiert. www.welt.de 05.06.2012.
[9] See Ein pos­i­tives Ungarn-Bild.

Discussion

One comment for “Stunning: U.S. Votes AGAINST U.N. Resolution Condemning Nazis and Nazi Collaborators”

  1. The fol­low­ing arti­cle has a sim­i­lar theme and states:

    “By push­ing up the num­bers of vic­tims high­er than the known holo­caust Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists hoped to hide behind those num­bers to avoid the fig­ures shown direct­ly above. How can a vic­tim be a mur­der­er? How can a vic­tim of geno­cide be its per­pe­tra­tor? Instead the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists pro­pose that the vio­lent and angry, self loathing, mur­der­ous, and con­temptible Jews are behind this and their own woes”

    It also con­cludes:
    “The real rea­sons why the US, Cana­da, and Ukraine vot­ed against the con­dem­na­tion of Nazism are not that com­plex. A very large emi­gre pop­u­la­tion that votes with pock­et­books exists in North Amer­i­ca. To con­demn nazi thought means their mon­u­ments, books, and speech could be root­ed out of the demo­c­ra­t­ic con­ver­sa­tion.

    It could mean nazi era Ukrain­ian nation­al­ist pres­i­dents in exile could be exhumed and forced to be repa­tri­at­ed to Ukraine. For the rea­sons above we can only choose one holo­caust or the oth­er. Nation­al­ism and Democ­ra­cy can­not coex­ist. Which will it be?”

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-and-the-un-resolution-against-the-glorification-of-nazism-the-us-vote-at-the-un-is-holocaust-denial-heres-why/5416884

    Ukraine and the UN Res­o­lu­tion against “The Glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of Nazism”: The US Vote at the UN is “Holo­caust Denial” – Here’s Why

    By George Elia­son

    Glob­al Research, Novem­ber 28, 2014

    The UN vote against the glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of nazism and nazi fig­ures was a water­shed insight into under­stand­ing what is going on inside west­ern gov­ern­ments today. Eric Zuesse’s arti­cle label­ing the no vote by the US, Cana­da, and Ukraine at the UN as sup­port­ing the glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of Nazism and Holo­caust denial was under­state­ment at the very least. By this “no” vote these three coun­tries sup­port the rights of nation­al­ist chau­vin­ists to pro­mote nazis like Adolf Hitler or Stepan Ban­dera as heroes and the mur­der of their vic­tims as a hero­ic act.

    Two of the three coun­tries that vot­ed to sup­port the right to glo­ri­fy nazism are home to the largest open­ly nazi emi­gre groups in the world. In his life­time these groups were led by Stepan Ban­dera direct­ly. In the Unit­ed States alone the com­bined group­ing by their own reck­on­ing exceeds 20 mil­lion mem­bers with large polit­i­cal clout to match.

    How does this equate to Holo­caust denial?

    Look­ing back at WW2 there are two dif­fer­ent holo­caust nar­ra­tives told today. The first is one peo­ple are famil­iar with which is the his­to­ry of Nazi exter­mi­na­tion of Jews and every oth­er nation­al­i­ty or group they saw as less than them.

    The sec­ond holo­caust account from the peri­od which the three neg­a­tive vot­ing coun­tries sup­port denies this. Mon­sters can­not be vic­tims. Vic­tims can­not be mon­sters. Reprisals that are done in self defense or to even scores with your ene­mies are com­mon­place in his­to­ry. The sec­ond record pur­ports that Jews/ Sovi­ets killed 7–10 mil­lion Ukraini­ans.

    It pur­ports that Nazis (Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists) were the vic­tims and the Jew­ish pop­u­la­tions were either mur­der­ous or sui­ci­dal depend­ing on the year. It sup­pos­es that the Jew­ish, Pol­ish, and Ukrain­ian vic­tims dug the mass graves, shot them­selves, and each per­son took a shov­el of dirt with them in self loathing as they jumped in.

    The sec­ond nar­ra­tive is the basis to pro­pose that Jew­ish Nazi SS Bat­tal­ions killed the Jews, Ukraini­ans, and not the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists that did this.

    The sec­ond holo­caust which the US, Cana­da, and Ukraine sup­port with this vote in the name of free speech pro­pos­es Nazi forces were the heroes of WW2 as well as its vic­tims.

    Holo­modor

    The his­to­ry of the Holo­modor or Star­va­tion holo­caust until now has been left almost entire­ly in the hands of the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists. It is the his­tor­i­cal cen­ter­piece for their ide­o­log­i­cal hatred of Rus­sia today. It is the his­tor­i­cal basis of a nation­al­ist Ukraine today. If accept­ed at face val­ue it also white­wash­es Ukrain­ian Nation­al­ists out of his­to­ry as pro­lif­ic mass mur­der­ers and geno­ci­dal SS sol­diers. As vic­tims the Ukrain­ian Nation­al­ists can soft­en how the world sees them with­out chang­ing their posi­tions, acknowl­edg­ing their crimes, or chang­ing their meth­ods. Ukrain­ian nation­al­ism only has a base of legit­i­ma­cy if this tragedy hap­pened accord­ing to their ver­sion of it.

    The accep­tance of this as a holo­caust is also one of the main jus­ti­fi­ca­tions for the OUN/UPA becom­ing sol­diers for Hitler’s 3rd Reich. They were the “anti-com­mu­nists” that steered Amer­i­can his­to­ry. If their ver­sion of his­to­ry is accept­ed then there will be no prob­lem when they claim to have fought against Hitler after 1941. They can say they tried to save the Jews from the Nazis. In a nut­shell they can make some of WW2′s great­est mur­der­ers into heroes instead of leav­ing them in the waste can of his­to­ry where they belong. They can con­tin­ue what they are doing today.

    First-Per­spec­tive

    Accord­ing to the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ist per­spec­tive 7–10 mil­lion Ukraini­ans died as a result of forced star­va­tion under Stal­in­ism. Dur­ing the famine years 1932–33 Stal­in was forc­ing peo­ple onto col­lec­tive farms across the Sovi­et Union. Stal­in took advan­tage of the famine by con­fis­cat­ing what was left of the har­vest, reserves, and forced the peo­ple to starve to death.

    His­tor­i­cal­ly West Ukraine (Gali­cia) where the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists were locat­ed and Ukraine’s ide­ol­o­gy today was derived exist­ed only out­side the areas affect­ed by the famine. Accord­ing to Ukrain­ian nation­al­ist schol­ar Alexan­der Moy­tal “ Just as the ear­li­er debates in the West over the famine had been politi­cized, pit­ting “anti-Com­mu­nists” against their crit­ics, so too did the debate over the Holodomor-as-geno­cide the­sis in Ukraine become pro­found­ly polit­i­cal. First, it chal­lenged the nature of Sovi­et real­i­ty. Sec­ond, it became the cen­ter­piece of Yushchenko’s nation-build­ing project after the Orange Rev­o­lu­tion. And third, it under­mined Russia’s hege­mo­ny over Ukraine.

    … Since the debate also reflect­ed pop­u­lar­ly held attitudes–according to a 2009 Inter­Me­dia sur­vey, eighty-three per­cent of Ukraini­ans in the west, fifty-eight in the cen­ter, twen­ty-eight in the south, and fif­teen in the east accept the geno­cide the­sis –the Holodomor quick­ly became the main focus of efforts by both nation­al democ­rats and their oppo­nents to mobi­lize vot­ers in the recent elec­tions.”

    The “anti-com­mu­nists” and nation­al democ­rats that Pro­fes­sor Moytl men­tions are the ide­o­log­i­cal chil­dren of the Ban­dera years. What is very inter­est­ing about this espe­cial­ly in light of what is occur­ring in Ukraine today is that the areas that were most affect­ed by the “Holo­modor Holo­caust” don’t remem­ber it the way the sto­ry­line was devel­oped in the US, Cana­da, and most notably by the Gali­cian Ban­dera that were not a part of it and did not suf­fer through it.

    Cen­tral and South­east Ukraine which includes Don­bass and Odessa are the areas that years ago suf­fered through that famine. The famine also claimed over 1 mil­lion lives in Siberia. The suf­fer­ing extend­ed to Belarus and Kuban. There were star­va­tion deaths in Moscow.

    The Sovi­ets (Stal­in) were still keep­ing grain pro­duc­tion export quo­tas the same dur­ing this famine regard­less of what the har­vest actu­al­ly yield­ed. The SSR Ukrain­ian gov­ern­ment in Kiev was slow to report the famine and result­ing bad har­vests after pre­dict­ing record har­vests in their fore­casts.

    Dur­ing this peri­od col­lec­tiviza­tion and mech­a­nized farm­ing were forced on all the coun­tries that made up the Sovi­et Union. Forced mech­a­niza­tion made the prob­lems a lot more wide­spread. SSR Ukraine, com­prised of Cen­tral Ukraine and South­east (Don­bass to Odessa) real­ly suf­fered the most in the Sovi­et Union. The US and Chi­na faced sim­i­lar issues dur­ing this peri­od of tech­no­log­i­cal change (mech­a­nized agri­cul­ture) which cre­at­ed sim­i­lar con­di­tions in both coun­tries also. This result­ed in the Dust Bowl years hap­pen­ing in the US and China’s famine years result­ed.

    Com­pound­ing this was Stalin’s oper­a­tions to repress anti- Sovi­ets, anti-collectivists(farmers), and the “Kulaks.” Kulaks were local land barons that had hors­es to plow the fields. If you need­ed a horse to plow yours, you plowed his field and gave a per­cent­age of your har­vest to him. The Kulaks slaugh­tered their hors­es in an attempt to stop col­lec­tiviza­tion because it took their pow­er away. They revolt­ed against col­lec­tiviza­tion every way they could.

    “ In com­bi­na­tion with the bru­tal repres­sion of much of the intel­lec­tu­al elite inthe Ukrain­ian SSR in the years around 1930, the col­lec­tiviza­tion and famine left deep scars on cen­tral and east­ern Ukraine. Until the late 1980s, the famine was denied by the Sovi­et author­i­ties. Even in the dias­po­ra, which was dom­i­nat­ed by West­ern Ukraini­ans, there was lit­tle knowl­edge of the famine until the 1970s”.- Pers Anders Rudling- Mem­o­ries of “Holodomor” and Nation­al Social­ism in Ukrain­ian polit­i­cal cul­ture

    How this adds up to Holo­caust-Denial

    In the mid 1970′s the role of the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists in the Holo­caust was opened up pub­licly first with Lucy Dawidowcz’s book “The War Against the Jews, 1933–1945 that pre­sent­ed the Ukraini­ans as far more bru­tal than the Ger­mans ever were. In 1978 the minis­eries “Holo­caust” raised aware­ness of what hap­pened dur­ing this time frame and brought the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ist issues to the fore­front. Accord­ing to Rudling this infu­ri­at­ed the Ukrain­ian dias­po­ra. Both Cana­da and the US opened inves­ti­ga­tions on WW2 War Crim­i­nal­i­ty as a result of the rise in aware­ness dur­ing this time. The Simon Wiesen­thal Cen­ter start­ed giv­ing Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists and oth­er East­ern Euro­pean nation­al­ists increased atten­tion. The great fear was the only thing west­ern­ers would know about them was the part they played as pro­lif­ic col­lab­o­ra­tors in mankinds great­est mass mur­der.

    “ Thus, in 1982– 83, in time for the 50th anniver­sary of the famine dias­po­ra aca­d­e­mics, pub­li­cists, and Nation­al­ist activists launched a major effort to pro­duce a new nation­al mythol­o­gy, cen­tered on the 1932– 33 famine. Dias­po­ra aca­d­e­mics referred to the famine as a delib­er­ate geno­cide, in which the west­ern states were com­plic­it. Ref­er­ences to the Holo­caust were often explic­it : “The vic­tims of the famine in Ukraine were con­signed to their slow and ago­niz­ing deaths as sure­ly as the Jews of Europe were deliv­ered to the plan­ners of the Final solution…”-Rudling(ibid)

    Before 1991 this was in hope of secur­ing the state of Ukraine once it was inde­pen­dent from the Sovi­et Union. The dias­po­ra demand­ed the US gov­ern­ment let them set up a “Ukrain­ian” nation­al­ist gov­ern­ment. Second,Waffen SS offi­cers and fight­ers played such a large role in East­ern Euro­pean emi­gre life(especially Ukrain­ian) in the Unit­ed States and Cana­da, the same activist schol­ars start­ed try­ing to reha­bil­i­tate their image as well as repack­ag­ing their ide­olo­gies to make them look hero­ic and demo­c­ra­t­ic.

    In 1986, the pub­lish­ing house of the UPA vet­er­ans pub­lished a book, which explic­it­ly stat­ed that “Zion­ist Jews” launched the famine as the “real Holo­caust” in which Jew­ish Bol­she­viks killed Chris­tians, and in which an alleged­ly Jew­ish-con­trolled press cov­ered up the geno­cide.- For a dis­cus­sion of Chu­matskyj, Yurij : Why is One Holo­caust Worth More than Oth­ers?

    With­in the “schol­ar­ly” works came demands for a Nurem­berg 2 tri­al list­ing all the Sovi­et lead­ers includ­ing Stal­in (as the Geor­gian Jew) by their Aske­nazi names. Accord­ing to the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists Sovi­et Rus­sia was formed and led by Zion­ist Jew­ry. The Jews and Sovi­et Jew­ish lead­ers were respon­si­ble for all the atroc­i­ty.

    Andrii Ban­dera, son of the mass mur­der­er pub­lished an arti­cle stat­ing — “There were 15,000,000 Ukrain­ian geno­cide vic­tims next to the 6,000,000 Jew­ish vic­tims.”- ”Major instanced of geno­cide in the 20th cen­tu­ry”, Ukrain­ian Echo: A Month­ly Eng­lish- Lan­guage Sup­ple­ment to “Homin Ukrainy”, 7 (1983) 3, p. 2.-(ibid) Rudling

    Cana­di­an Prime Min­is­ter Steven Harp­er used the fig­ure of “up to 10 mil­lion peo­ple” to back the asser­tions of Ban­dera and the OUN emi­gre pop­u­la­tion in Edmon­ton. Cana­da hosts the World Ukrain­ian Emi­gre gov­ern­ment (UWC). It must be com­fort­ing to Harp­er to have the direct sup­port of the Ban­dera fam­i­ly.

    They inflat­ed the num­bers delib­er­ate­ly to make them as high and much high­er than the Jew­ish Holo­caust. This was in the hope of get­ting recog­ni­tion. This was also in hope of bury­ing the OUN geno­cides.

    Today the grow­ing con­sen­sus among schol­ars is that between 2.5 and 3.5 mil­lion died of famine in SSR Ukraine dur­ing 1932–33. The total num­ber of deaths in Ukraine, Belarus, Kaza­khstan, Siberia, Cau­ca­sus, and through­out Rus­sia are esti­mat­ed at 5.5–6.5 mil­lion peo­ple.

    “ A 2004 study lists the total Ukrain­ian war deaths (WW2) at 6,850,000 peo­ple, or 16.3 % of the pop­u­la­tion. Of these, a full 5,200,000 were civil­ians , where­as mil­i­tary vic­tims “only” con­sti­tut­ed 1,650,000. Of these civil­ian deaths,at least 1,4 mil­lion, but per­haps as many as 2,1 mil­lion Jews were mur­dered in Ukraine .” — Rudling(ibid)

    Why This is Holo­caust Denial

    By push­ing up the num­bers of vic­tims high­er than the known holo­caust Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists hoped to hide behind those num­bers to avoid the fig­ures shown direct­ly above. How can a vic­tim be a mur­der­er? How can a vic­tim of geno­cide be its per­pe­tra­tor? Instead the Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists pro­pose that the vio­lent and angry, self loathing, mur­der­ous, and con­temptible Jews are behind this and their own woes.

    The trou­ble is real his­to­ry is not on their side. Dur­ing the famine the “Ukraini­ans” were part of anoth­er coun­try and cul­ture. They were Pol­ish. They were Gali­cian. Ukraine/Ukrainians/Ukrainian lan­guage was a devel­op­ment of the Aus­tro-Hun­gar­i­an empire less than 50 years before. In the Catholic Ency­clo­pe­dia “Ukraini­ans” are defined cor­rect­ly as a polit­i­cal par­ty and not a peo­ple. They were from Gali­cia.

    It was not until Sovi­et homog­e­niza­tion that Ukraine became one land and one peo­ple. The very thing they say they hat­ed the Sovi­ets for is what they are try­ing to accom­plish- Ukrainiza­tion.

    After 1990 the sto­ry of the Holo­modor was export­ed back to Ukraine by the emi­gre pop­u­la­tion. Vic­tor Yushenko (nation­al­ist) used it as his cen­ter­piece to build the new Ukraine. Valen­tyn Naly­vaichenko, head of the SBU, friend and for­mer lieu­tenant of Dim­itri Yarosh (Pravy Sek­tor) was key to devel­op­ing this new truth in nation­al­ist Ukraine.

    The crimes of the Stal­in regime – the 1932–1933 famine-geno­cide is Ukraine, the major ter­ror of the 1930s – should be ful­ly con­demned by the inter­na­tion­al com­mu­ni­ty. It is the duty of all coun­tries, polit­i­cal and pub­lic forces that accept the val­ues of democ­ra­cy,’ Yuschenko said.

    Accept­ing the New Denial

    After the 1917 Rev­o­lu­tion Lenin gave Novorussia/Southeast/Donbass to Ukraine because Don­bass was the home of the Don Cos­sacks. The Cos­sacks were anti-com­mu­nist monar­chists or “White Rus­sians.” The Don Cos­sacks were the per­son­al guards to the Tzars for cen­turies. They were not wel­come in the new Sovi­et Union and def­i­nite­ly not Rus­sia. South­east includ­ing Don­bass and Cen­tral Ukraine lived through the famine of 1932–33. Those fam­i­lies are the peo­ple that make up the pop­u­la­tion here.

    For Gali­cians to hijack this his­to­ry and call it their own makes as much sense as David Duke gain­ing the abil­i­ty to sue for slav­ery repa­ra­tions. Why is that sur­pris­ing?

    Almost every law­mak­er left in Kiev had David Duke as a uni­ver­si­ty pro­fes­sor. That is exact­ly how much sense all of this makes.

    It is now ille­gal to ques­tion the Holo­modor in Ukraine. The his­tor­i­cal record needs to be set straight per­ma­nent­ly about this tragedy. Sup­port the nation­al­ist ver­sion and deny the real Holo­caust at your own per­il. The schol­ar­ship needs to be set straight. Democ­ra­cy is built on his­to­ry. Nation­al­ism is built on myth.

    Today the per­pe­tra­tors of geno­cide from that time peri­od are caus­ing famine con­di­tions in Don­bass. Most of the fields were burned or mined. Most of the har­vests were lost and stolen. The Nazis are back and just as mur­der­ous. If Poroshenko and Nazi Kiev were remote­ly seri­ous about a famine geno­cide that they want the world to rec­og­nize; how could they try to set up the same kinds of con­di­tions right now?

    The real rea­sons why the US, Cana­da, and Ukraine vot­ed against the con­dem­na­tion of Nazism are not that com­plex. A very large emi­gre pop­u­la­tion that votes with pock­et­books exists in North Amer­i­ca. To con­demn nazi thought means their mon­u­ments, books, and speech could be root­ed out of the demo­c­ra­t­ic con­ver­sa­tion.

    It could mean nazi era Ukrain­ian nation­al­ist pres­i­dents in exile could be exhumed and forced to be repa­tri­at­ed to Ukraine. For the rea­sons above we can only choose one holo­caust or the oth­er. Nation­al­ism and Democ­ra­cy can­not coex­ist. Which will it be?

    Posted by OUN/B | December 2, 2014, 6:38 pm

Post a comment