Help in Kyiv, Odesa, Lviv - Moved to History

[Max_the_Highlander]

First of all I need to make caution: the reason why I talk about amateur historians “made with finger” is the wish of Poles to see the things taken out of historic context. Of course this has nothing to do with competent scientific research and it is tool of primitive propaganda (Soviets acted absolutely identically, btw)

Ukrainians however should not see things beyond the organic context. For examples, Volyn and Hrubeshuvsk massacres and lesser slaughters of Ukrainian and Polish civilians have to be considered in wider context of Ukraine-Poland guerrilla war and Ukraine-Poland have to be considered in wider context of strained and hostile relations between Poles and Ukrainians on Western Ukraine in 40th and German occupation.

We need to proceed from roots to branches and not vice versa so the real chain of subsequences is:

Historical settings (hostile relations between Ukrainian and Poles in 40th) => Ukraine-Poland guerilla war => Bigger and lesser murders of Ukrainian and Polish civilians.

I got to cite mentioned 16th pdf of monograph: “In middle-war period the wish of Ukrainians for territorial autonomy within frames of second Rech Pospolita knocked with official politics of “consolidation of Polish population” on the lands inhabited by Ukrainians. They destroyed orthodox churches and people on Holmshina and Volyn were violently converted to Catholicism. Politics of intense polonization caused the situation when in Volyn city Dubno where Ukrainians consisted over 40% of population, there were not any primary Ukrainian schools at all. <> In Eastern Halych Ukrainians were prohibited to buy lands while their lands were massively inhabited by colonists from central Poland (mazurs). Polish authorities tried ideologically derivate lemkos, boykos and hutsuls from the rest of Ukrainian nation. <> Shortly, the politics of Rech Pospolita governments were very far from democracy and respect to culture values, traditions, faith of Ukrainians. The power and public opinion treated Ukrainians as people of second kind”.

German occupation: “… So we should not be surprised German power gave known concessions in GG (General Governorship) exactly to Ukrainians, not to Poles. Occupants tried to use in own interests both nations but Ukrainian were perceived nation liberated from alien’s yoke (Polish yoke) and Poles were perceived as reduced nation. <>

From speech of general-governor T. Franco, 29 December 1940:

“Poles should not forget they are guilty themselves in what has happened here. They began this war alone. Poles spoiled this land and set the rule of tyranny, rubbish and rot. It was the proper time for Poland to finally disappear. If it would exist it would be eternal origin of anxiety in Europe. Poles need to submit new order… Ukrainians were very loyal to tasks of GG from the beginning. The creation of GG for them is hour of freedom. Polish hate during the years was directed against the Germans who lived here and against Ukrainians. This reduced nation has to be sure it will perform its peaceful mission under protection of German state.””

I hope it will help finally destroy all myths about peaceful co-existences of Poles and Ukrainians in Western Ukraine in prewar period.

Originally Posted by MichaelB_PL

Ok, so what does this working group say about the mass murders of Polish civilians?
<- and I claim that the threats presented in this ultimatum were put into practice.
Can you cite the order? (English translation of Ukrainian translation would be enough)

This comes altogether. I never saw any orders of Bur-Komorovsky. But I never saw any orders of UPA on Ukrainian for Volyn attacks. What I see are comments of “specialized outcomes”. Accordingly to them we have Volyn events vs Lugvigpolsky, Hrubeshuvsky regions events. You are free to refuse the whole thing so we will have 0:0 account and just. That stops further discussion because of lack of trustworthy documentation.

If you accept “specialized outcomes” we have 1:1 and this allows further talks.

I’d suggest following order of questions:

1. Do you recognize the possibility that the Ukrainian historians can be politically biased as much as historians of any other nationality?

2. So what about the Polish official instiution - the IPN (ipn.gov.pl)?

and

1. Specialists, like any other men, can be subjected to for example political pressure.

2. Ok, so Timothy Snyder is a professional and a non-Pole - will you believe him?

Well, I hope you spotted the comic shade. If seriously, 90% of information about OUN/UPA is contained in KGB/SBU archives. These are not only UPA orders but also German documents, reports of Soviet partisans, original NKVD documents, AK orders… complete salad. No one except the working groups ever had free access to this stuff, including Timothy Snyder and IPN. May be they got some access since January 2008, I don’t know.

So their outcomes are based on those paltry 10% of information which came from direct enemies of UPA or from interested third sides. The possibility of forgery and biased treatment is extremely high.

I'm not denying that civilians were killed on the both sides, no doubt about it.

This is rare of your statements I can agree. Killed on the both sides. Right.

[at least in 1943 and before] the OUN was not any kind of democratic freedom-fighters, there had more in common with the Nazis and Communists then with democratic political movements.

No, the ideology of OUN (B) wasn’t democratic. It was nationalistic. Scientist support it has common traits with Soviet totalitarism. However, it was neither Italian-like fascism nor German-like national-socialism.

The reason for which I'm mentioning this is to simply make you aware that the rosy image "democratic freedom-fighters" is very far from truth - and that UPA was a rather unsavioury place, with thousands of members who already took part in a genocide, even before 1943.

I can’t refuse natural flow of cadre. However the same flow of cadre was between AK, Polish auxiliary police and NSZ.

[MichaelB_PL]

Originally Posted by Max_the_Highlander

First of all I need to make caution: the reason why I talk about amateur historians “made with finger” is the wish of Poles to see the things taken out of historic context. Of course this has nothing to do with competent scientific research and it is tool of primitive propaganda (Soviets acted absolutely identically, btw)

1. "Historical context" is a rather subjective thing - you'll get a different view depending upon what kind of time frame you'd adopt - would you start at 1943? 1939? 1920?

Personally, I think that there is little use for placing any kind of events "in historical context", as long as the events themselves are being denied, often against the available evidence.

2. Soviets did not simply take things out of historical context, they lied directly, for example by claiming "the Katyn Massacre was done by the Germans".

In that context, while there might be a similiarity between Poles and Soviets, the same similiarity is far bigger between Soviets and Ukrainian Nationalists, who also lie directly, by claiming for example that "UPA murdered no Polish civilians" or "it was all done by the communists".

Ukrainians however should not see things beyond the organic context.(...)
Historical settings (hostile relations between Ukrainian and Poles in 40th) => Ukraine-Poland guerilla war => Bigger and lesser murders of Ukrainian and Polish civilians.

If I were to construct such a chain of cause&effect, then I'd do it differently:

Actions of Ukrainian Auxiliary Police vs Polish(and Jewish) civilians => actions of Polish Auxiliary Police vs Ukrainian civilians => UPA's actions vs Polish civilians => AK's [local units only?] actions vs toward Ukrainian civilians.

(...)Shortly, the politics of Rech Pospolita governments were very far from democracy and respect to culture values, traditions, faith of Ukrainians. The power and public opinion treated Ukrainians as people of second kind”.

That's correct, but here we have an axis with two extreme views opposed to each other:

View #1: "The OUN/UPA's violence against Polish civilians was in 100% a direct result of the bad treatment of Ukrainians by Polish goverment before 1939"

View #2: "The OUN/UPA's violence against Polish civilians was in 100% a direct result of OUN/UPA's ideological extremism"

Obviously, the answer would lie somewhere between these two extreme ends of the axis, but I think you are somewhat ignoring the second view and forgetting that the OUN was lat first a very extremist organisation, similiar to ETA or IRA, which did not represent a vast majority of Ukrainians, and which rose to power mainly due to German support.

From speech of general-governor T. Franco, 29 December 1940: (...)

T. Franco? Or Hans Frank?

I suppose you mean Hans Frank, the Nazi "Governor-General" who ruled a large part of current day Poland and a small part of current day Ukraine during WWII... I'm not sure what's your point in this case, as mr. Frank was, to put is simply, a Nazi war criminal who commited or participated in mass murder of Poles and Jews and who was later hanged for that by the Allies.

I hope it will help finally destroy all myths about peaceful co-existences of Poles and Ukrainians in Western Ukraine in prewar period.

There is little doubt that the Ukrainians very not treated well by Poles in the interwar period, but let's not abuse this fact - Ukrainians were generally treated the same by the Polish goverment, but later some were murdering Polish civilians, while others were risking their own lives to save Polish civilians from the first group.

This comes altogether. I never saw any orders of Bur-Komorovsky. But I never saw any orders of UPA on Ukrainian for Volyn attacks.

In my book "Trudne Sasiedztwo: Stosunki Polsko-Ukrainskie w X-XX wieku" (Karol Grunberg, Boleslaw Sprengel, 2005), it's written:

"In the June of 1943. OUN-SD ordered the UPA command to: without delay and as soon as possible complete the action of total cleansing of the Ukrainian territory from Polish population; continue destroying the internal enemy of Ukraine, that is all the democrats from the sign of URL and other political movements "

"The goal of such pogroms were clearly defined in the secret order of the territorial UPA command "Pivnich": We should conduct a great action of elimination of Polish element. After the departure of German troops we should utilise the moment to eliminate all male population aged from 16 to 60[...] Forest villages and villages laying near large forest groups should dissappear from the face of the Earth"

Of course, the second order would suggest that the original plan was only to murder males and to expell women, children and old men, instead of killing them.

Well, I hope you spotted the comic shade. If seriously, 90% of information about OUN/UPA is contained in KGB/SBU archives.
(....)So their outcomes are based on those paltry 10% of information which came from direct enemies of UPA or from interested third sides. The possibility of forgery and biased treatment is extremely high.

Ok, but the best information about Katyn was in Soviet archives and yet the Soviet Union lied about Katyn.
In the same way, the best information about the Armenian Genocide is propably in Turkish archives, but Turkey does't want to admit the truth.

Why comparing Ukraine to Soviet Union would be too much, comparing Ukraine to Turkey is a completely different issue - how can you know this is not happening a "Ukrainian version" of Turkish "Armenian Genocide denial"?

No, the ideology of OUN (B) wasn’t democratic. It was nationalistic. Scientist support it has common traits with Soviet totalitarism. However, it was neither Italian-like fascism nor German-like national-socialism.

I think there was one big similiarity between OUN and the German Nazis - the nationalistic idea of cleansing (and mass murder) based on ethnic criteria.

I can’t refuse natural flow of cadre. However the same flow of cadre was between AK, Polish auxiliary police and NSZ.

Yes, of course.

[Max_the_Highlander]

Originally Posted by MichaelB_PL

"Historical context" is a rather subjective thing - you'll get a different view depending upon what kind of time frame you'd adopt - would you start at 1943? 1939? 1920?

Quite the contrary, the historic context is absolutely objective thing… in out case the periods 1920-1941 and particularly 1939-1941 (German prewar occupation) are the most interesting sources of information about real ethnic, cultural and politic relations between Ukrainian and Poles on Western Ukraine, and hostility of that relations perfectly explains later guerilla conflicts and slaughters of civilians.

This approach is also applied to every certain case, for example to Volyn tragedy. The subsequence of events is following: Repressions of Polish auxiliary police => Ultimatum of Dmitro Klyachkivsky from 18 May 1943 => UPA attack on 7 colonies, May 1943 => Polish auxiliary police together with Germans murdered 1/4 of Ukrainian population of Ludvigpolsky region, May-June 1943 => UPA attack on 167 villages together with armed peasants, 11 July 1943 => Order of AK commandant T. Komorovsky (Bur) about “revenge actions”, 4 August 1943, till June 1944 there were burnt 150 Ukrainian villages, killed 15 000 of people.

Broader context (accordingly to Chapter 5 of monograph, “Military actions of OUN/UPA on anti-Polish front”, mentioned earlier as 16th pdf):

“We need to notice, due to some circumstances Volyn conflict appeared to be the bloodiest one and information about it took air, however withstanding of two national-liberation movements (Ukrainian and Polish) involved in all the area of common habitation of Ukrainians and Poles, not just Volyn but also Eastern Halych, Holmshina, Nadlyashya, Pidsannya, Lemkivshina. That’s why these events have to be considered in complex and in context of all previous history of Ukrainian-Polish relations.”

... as long as the events themselves are being denied, often against the available evidence.

If you mean Volyn events so they are not denied but they are put in right historic context so the things don’t look absurd but understandable.

And btw Poland officially never asked to declare the Volyn tragedy as “war crimes” as well as Ukraine never asked to declare the Hrubeshuvsk tragedy as “war crimes”. In spite of zealous pains of sensation-minded journalists and irresponsible amateurs, it’s unprofitable for our governments to have any “war crimes” in common history.

If I were to construct such a chain of cause&effect, then I'd do it differently: Actions of Ukrainian Auxiliary Police vs Polish(and Jewish) civilians => actions of Polish Auxiliary Police vs Ukrainian civilians => UPA's actions vs Polish civilians => AK's [local units only?] actions vs toward Ukrainian civilians.

It doesn’t suit as global pattern because it’s simplification and reminds the cheap horror movies when monsters eat people just because they are angry and hungry. So I can’t see here any primary settings or moving motives. And it doesn’t suit as local pattern because many certain incidents were begun by AK, UPA or Polish auxiliary police directly and the subsequence of events was absolutely different.

Obviously, the answer would lie somewhere between these two extreme ends of the axis,

That’s correct however the absence of ideological extremism didn’t prevent the AK from mass murders of Ukrainian civilians so we need to distinguish ideological extremism and practical extremism. However I have big doubts about non-extremist’s AK because finally they tried to occupy the Volyn lands among other things and UPA was just about preventing the various occupations.

I suppose you mean Hans Frank, the Nazi "Governor-General" who ruled a large part of current day Poland and a small part of current day Ukraine during WWII... I'm not sure what's your point in this case, as mr. Frank was, to put is simply, a Nazi war criminal who commited or participated in mass murder of Poles and Jews and who was later hanged for that by the Allies.

Yes, I guess the GG ruler’s surname was Frank. He really was German official and Nazi, however I think he was adequate about legacy he had got. I put the evidences about Polish humiliation of Ukrainians and his speech together for a reason – after German occupation Ukrainians were considered as liberated ones and suddenly became the people of first kind but Poles got to second kind. That was heavy emotional damage for Poles and tensioned the spring of ethnical relations very hard, however it shot just in 1943.

... but later some were murdering Polish civilians, while others were risking their own lives to save Polish civilians from the first group.

With no doubts, but particular cases don’t deny the global trend and there is saying “the exceptions support the rule”.

In my book "Trudne Sasiedztwo: Stosunki Polsko-Ukrainskie w X-XX wieku" (Karol Grunberg, Boleslaw Sprengel, 2005), it's written:

It’s very interesting and may be true in light of events however these are not documents, just quotes from them in historians’ comments. My information about T.Komorovsky (Bur) also comes from historians’ comments and in both cases we come from later comments, not from original documents.

As I said earlier, Volyn events are not denied but they have to be considered in proper context, including actions of Poles against Ukrainian civilians.

I think there was one big similiarity between OUN and the German Nazis - the nationalistic idea of cleansing (and mass murder) based on ethnic criteria.

In reality every fifth member of OUN/UPA wasn’t ethnic Ukrainian, there were Russian, Byelorussians, Georgians, Caucasians, Asians and… Jews. The main idea of OUN was about gaining the independence for Ukraine and creating the “united Ukrainian republic” where all the power would belong to OUN. The other nations were welcomed there, if they agreed with independence of Ukraine.

For example, when Nazi administration tried to engage OUN in Jewish massacres in Lviv, they decidedly refused because “Jewish and other massacres discredit the same idea of national liberation”.

[MichaelB_PL]

Originally Posted by Max_the_Highlander

Quite the contrary, the historic context is absolutely objective thing… in out case the periods 1920-1941 and particularly 1939-1941 (German prewar occupation) are the most interesting sources of information about real ethnic, cultural and politic relations between Ukrainian and Poles on Western Ukraine, and hostility of that relations perfectly explains later guerilla conflicts and slaughters of civilians.

I sort of disagree - because I think that the historical context may be both beneficial (revealing) and harmful (obscuring) when it comes to explaining the nature and causes of such events.

For example, we both know that there were men like Hitler or Stalin, who could be described as "madmen" or "psychopaths", and who murdered people or started wars for reasons which a average person would find insufficient.

Looking at Hitler or Stalin, and their crimes, imagine what would happen the "target groups" of their crimes would offer them more provocation than they actually did - for example, if some Jews in the interwar Germany would form some kind of anti-German terroristical organisation - what would happen then?

IMO, Hitler would murder Jews exactly the way he did, but the would that hypothethical Jewish terroristic organisation as an excuse - which might be misleading, because then people would be much more likely to blame the Holocaust on the historical context, perhaps not knowing that Hitler was a psychopath who would murder Jews anyway.

Taking another example - look at the shootings in US schools, done by some students who were either bullied or felt alienated or humilitated, etc etc - similiar events happened in Poland two times in the last years - college students attempted to murder their professors, one used a knife, second one used an axe, AFAR they were frustrated with failed exams or with their professors attitude toward them.

Students often experience bullying, humilitation or alienation, they often have problems with failed exams and harsh or even cruel professors - in Poland, US and propably every other country - but most of them never attempt murder - so the question is: were the bullyings, professor cruelty, etc really so big in the case of these "murderer students", or were those students mentally/emotionally unbalanced in the first place?

In the case of Polish-Ukrainian relations, there clearly were negative factors which might be the cause of the OUN/UPA's actions against civilians, but at the same time, there is much info suggesting that the OUN was simply a extremist, "over-reacting" kind of political movement, similiar to for example ETA.

Without doubt, Spain IS occupying Basque lands... but can one explain ETA's bombings and terrorism in the context of that occupation? Or should those bombing and terrorism be rather explained mostly in the context of ETA's "inherent", "over-reacting" extremism?

The subsequence of events is following: Repressions of Polish auxiliary police => Ultimatum of Dmitro Klyachkivsky from 18 May 1943 => UPA attack on 7 colonies, May 1943 => (...)

I think that the actions of Ukrainian auxiliary police and early WWII actions of Ukrainians could also be interesting - among other things, OUN (and possibly other Ukrainians) started attacking Polish civilians and (retreating) Polish soldiers in the september of 1939, killing few thousads of civilians and murdering the soldiers taken as prisoners.

Broader context (accordingly to Chapter 5 of monograph, “Military actions of OUN/UPA on anti-Polish front”, mentioned earlier as 16th pdf):

"That’s why these events have to be considered in complex and in context of all previous history of Ukrainian-Polish relations.”

Yes, but I think that another thing which should be considered is the question of (extremist) nature and outlooks of OUN...

If you mean Volyn events so they are not denied but they are put in right historic context so the things don’t look absurd but understandable.

Again, this might be revealing and it might be also obscuring the real causes. Some things simply are absurd from the average (normal) person's point of view - I mean, was't Holocaust absurd? Was't the Great Famine absurd?

And btw Poland officially never asked to declare the Volyn tragedy as “war crimes” as well as Ukraine never asked to declare the Hrubeshuvsk tragedy as “war crimes”. In spite of zealous pains of sensation-minded journalists and irresponsible amateurs, it’s unprofitable for our governments to have any “war crimes” in common history.

So what shall we do? Write a completely new, and completely fake history for both countries?

However I have big doubts about non-extremist’s AK because finally they tried to occupy the Volyn lands among other things and UPA was just about preventing the various occupations.

The AK considered themselves to be an armed formation loyal to the legal goverment of Poland, at the same time treating the German and Soviet occupation as illegal - AFAIK, their official doctrine was that they are defending the territory of pre-WWII Poland.

after German occupation Ukrainians were considered as liberated ones and suddenly became the people of first kind but Poles got to second kind. That was heavy emotional damage for Poles and tensioned the spring of ethnical relations very hard, however it shot just in 1943.

I do not think that was the primary cause, but yes, I think that is a very good thought from your side - such an emotion could lead to agression, especially taking in account the "post-feudal" elements in Polish culture.

With no doubts, but particular cases don’t deny the global trend and there is saying “the exceptions support the rule”.

I'm sure that the Ukrainians who risked their lives to save Poles were the minority - in every nation, the majority of people would't risk their life to save somebody who is not their close friend of family...

At the same time though, do you think that the majority of Ukrainians really did support mass murder, especially mass murder of their Polish neighbours they have usually known their entire lives?

Do you think that the majority of Ukrainians really did condone things like demanding that the Ukrainian husband/wife from a mixed marriage should accept the murder of his/her Polish spouse?

Polish historians and documents seem to claim that the vast majority of Ukrainians did't neither hate nor love Poles, that they'd prefer to be simply left alone, and that UPA used terror directed against other Ukrainians to assure their compliance with the actions vs Poles.

Basically, the Polish sources/historians claim that the OUN/UPA willingly took the role of "arsonist" in the Polish-Ukrainian relations.

In reality every fifth member of OUN/UPA wasn’t ethnic Ukrainian, there were Russian, Byelorussians, Georgians, Caucasians, Asians and… Jews. The main idea of OUN was about gaining the independence for Ukraine and creating the “united Ukrainian republic” where all the power would belong to OUN. The other nations were welcomed there, if they agreed with independence of Ukraine.

1. This does't really have to mean anything - for example, the Nazis planned to exterminate Slavs after the Jews, but they still used Ukrainian and Russian units, promising them "chance to fight against the Bolshevik evil".

2. AFAIK, the OUN/UPA changed their officially presented view to gather more support.

From wikipedia:

"At a party congress in 1943, the OUN rejected most of this fascistic ideology in favor of a social democratic model, while maintaining its hierarchical structure. This was done in light of the impending defeat of fascism in Europe and in order to gain support from Soviet deserters and the western Allies. It also formed, in 1943, an organization called the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (headed by Yaroslav Stetsko). The jettisoning of its fascist ideology broadened its membership somewhat. "

For example, when Nazi administration tried to engage OUN in Jewish massacres in Lviv, they decidedly refused because “Jewish and other massacres discredit the same idea of national liberation”.

I think this is a little bit more complicated...again from wikipedia:

"For example, a resolution of the Second General Congress of OUN-B (April, 1941, Krakow) called the "Jews of the USSR the most faithful supporters of the Bolshevik regime and the vanguard of the Muscovite imperialism in the Ukraine." A slogan put forth by the Bandera group and recorded in the July 16, 1941 Einsatzgruppen report stated: "Long live Ukraine without Jews, Poles and Germans; Poles behind the river San, Germans to Berlin, and Jews to the gallows". "

[Max_the_Highlander]

Originally Posted by MichaelB_PL

I sort of disagree - because I think that the historical context may be both beneficial (revealing) and harmful (obscuring) when it comes to explaining the nature and causes of such events.

I can’t get clues what you’re talking about here… yes, the historic context may be beneficial or harmful for things explained and so what? I have not any wish to see things hanging on thin air… I want to see the conditions, setting, motives, reasons and subsequences etc – everything which makes things understandable.

With no doubts attempts to take things out of context is propagandistic tool. This is obvious manipulation, let’s say there is 2 hour long detective movie with 5 minute episode of murder… what you try to do is to show us the murder without the rest of movie so this is thing “taken out from context”.

Obviously watching entire the 2 hours of detective movie will explain the viewers many things… whether the context is beneficial or harmful.

In the case of Polish-Ukrainian relations, there clearly were negative factors which might be the cause of the OUN/UPA's actions against civilians, but at the same time, there is much info suggesting that the OUN was simply a extremist, "over-reacting" kind of political movement, similiar to for example ETA.

In the case with Ukrainian-Polish relations there were rich settings of violence:

1. Ethnic hostility between the Ukrainians and Poles.
2. Peasants were eager for land and so they were ready to kill each other for it.
3. Occupation of Ukrainian lands by Poles.


For me the iron-clad fact is Ukrainian lands were occupied by Poland and so all Poles should be considered as occupants automatically. That’s why activity of OUN was directed not against innocent people but against conscious occupants. In this context the ideas as “over-reacting” are extremely subjective. For me, the same occupation of Ukrainian lands is very “over-reacting”, “criminal”, “illegal” etc… and OUN’s actions seem to be similar with heroic struggle of French partisans against the Germans. Everyone knows French acted very cruel, but the aim, the liberation of France, justifies them. And so about OUN/UPA.

OUN (and possibly other Ukrainians) started attacking Polish civilians and (retreating) Polish soldiers in the september of 1939, killing few thousads of civilians and murdering the soldiers taken as prisoners.

Would you give any evidences for not to be unfounded? Only caution: Wikipedia source are rejected automatically as not trustworthy ones. But even if so, I consider any conflicts of that time as another proof of hostility and as revenge for occupation. The fault is on Poles completely because they are first of all occupants and so they gave reasons for aggression.

Yes, but I think that another thing which should be considered is the question of (extremist) nature and outlooks of OUN...

I don’t think ideology of military struggle for independence of Ukraine is extremism. Polish ideology was about humiliation of Ukrainians and occupation of Ukrainian lands - much bigger extremism as for me. When someone kills the robber that is only self-defense and just. To kill the robber is absolutelly legal action.

So what shall we do? Write a completely new, and completely fake history for both countries?

I mean, any declarations about war crimes are your private opinion and subjective evaluation. Poland as state never directed to Ukraine any appeals about “war crimes” so likely officially discussed events aren’t considered as “war crimes”.

The AK considered themselves to be an armed formation loyal to the legal goverment of Poland, at the same time treating the German and Soviet occupation as illegal - AFAIK, their official doctrine was that they are defending the territory of pre-WWII Poland.

Well that’s automatically acknowledges they supported the idea of occupation of Ukrainian lands so they were criminals and extremists first of all. Besides, there are many evidences of cooperation between “legal government” and USSR, and on local level, between Polish and Bolshevik partisans.

Polish historians and documents seem to claim that the vast majority of Ukrainians did't neither hate nor love Poles, that they'd prefer to be simply left alone, and that UPA used terror directed against other Ukrainians to assure their compliance with the actions vs Poles.

It’s impossible, “no love, no hate”. Poles occupied their country, took their lands, prohibited Ukrainian language, culture and faith and as it was mentioned before, publicly and privately “treated Ukrainian as people of second kind”. I don’t think Ukrainians had such strong nerves, so the dominating emotion regarding Poles was hate… and desire to take the own lands back.

UPA position was only perfect reflection of people’s moods that’s why peasants actively participated in all anti-Polish actions… not because of political reasons but with aim to get lands back.

This does't really have to mean anything - for example, the Nazis planned to exterminate Slavs after the Jews, but they still used Ukrainian and Russian units, promising them "chance to fight against the Bolshevik evil".

This does mean that “ethnical factor” wasn’t essential part of OUN ideology same as any “massacres”. OUN was oriented on building the united independent Ukraine, friendly for all loyal nations. Poles on Western Ukraine were aggressive conscious occupants so they got to other category, ”enemies of Ukrainians”. That’s quite naturally, I said many about context.

Now about Jews inside the OUN. This is quote from SBU site which contains big report about the Jewish theme:

“On hearings Volodymyr Vyatrovich familiarized present ones with case of Leiba-Itsik Dovrovolsky who was working as politic consultant in political department of UPA-North headquarters and who acted in underground since 1941 to 1944. He is author of many known appeals of UPA to nations of Caucasus and Asia and also author of known publicist work “How Moskow Tsarism enslaved the nations”. He was arrested by the SMERSH in February 1944 and convicted to 10 years of imprisonment.”

From wikipedia:

Sorry, no wikipedia sources here, I will not discuss them. Or books of historians or quotes from documents.

[MichaelB_PL]

Originally Posted by Max_the_Highlander

I can’t get clues what you’re talking about here…

To put in another way:

1) For example, Hitler's or Stalin's actions (mass murders, etc) cannot be explained with historical context - they can be explained by the extremist/psychopathic nature of those two men.

2) In case of OUN/UPA, it's possible that analisying the historical context is following a dead end, because the real cause of these events is the extremist /psychopatic nature of OUN/UPA leaders.

In the case with Ukrainian-Polish relations there were rich settings of violence:

1. Ethnic hostility between the Ukrainians and Poles.
2. Peasants were eager for land and so they were ready to kill each other for it.
3. Occupation of Ukrainian lands by Poles.

Sure, but here comes something I wrote in the last post - in the same situation, one man will become a war ciminal, and another one will not.

For me the iron-clad fact is Ukrainian lands were occupied by Poland and so all Poles should be considered as occupants automatically. That’s why activity of OUN was directed not against innocent people but against conscious occupants.

Once again: those murdered Volynian peasants were no priviliged class, most of them lived there for centuries and intermarried with Ukrainians.

and OUN’s actions seem to be similar with heroic struggle of French partisans against the Germans. Everyone knows French acted very cruel, but the aim, the liberation of France, justifies them. And so about OUN/UPA.

Ok, so you think for example ETA's terror is also justified?

Also, if for example Crimean Tatars would start murdering Ukrainian civilian population, then would you also justify that? (obviously, Ukraine does occupy Crimea)

Would you give any evidences for not to be unfounded?

"Trudne Sasiedztwo - Stosunki polsko-ukrainskie w X-XX wieku" - Grunberg&Sprengel, Warsaw 2005:

"As German units closed to the territories they lived on, Ukrainians who were peaceful so far started to disarm Polish soldiers and policemen and even attack small units. They were also assaults on civilian population.
(....)
In Slawentyna and Szumlany 70 people were murdered. According to calculations, from Ukrainian hands, few thousands of Poles were killed. Only in the Tarnopol voivoideship about 750 Poles were murdered in the September of 1939."

I don’t think ideology of military struggle for independence of Ukraine is extremism.

???

Extremism does't have to have a deranged goal, extremism can have a sane goal, but deranged views on how that goal should be achived.

In case of OUN/UPA, they were not extremists because they wanted a independent Ukraine, they were extremists because they believed that violence against Polish civilians is acceptable and that it will help establish independent Ukraine.

Polish ideology was about humiliation of Ukrainians and occupation of Ukrainian lands - much bigger extremism as for me.

If you mean the 1920-1939, then I do not think that the word "extremism" is valid here at all - Poland did opress Ukrainians and oppose the Ukrainian independence movement, but Polish stance toward Ukrainians was actually quite moderate - Poland never implemented the violence it could implement, it never made use of all the capabilities it had.

Basically, if the Polish goverment would be extremist, if Polish goverment had views similiar to those of OUN-B, it would simply organise a mass murder of Ukrainians in the 30s - propably something similiar to the Armenian Genocide.

Back then (in the 30s), Poles had huge power advantage over Ukrainians and could do almost anything they want to them - but they did't.

When someone kills the robber that is only self-defense and just. To kill the robber is absolutelly legal action.

1. How was the typical Volynian Polish peasant a robber? Most of them lived there for generations and shared their fate with their Ukrainian neighbours.

2. Generally, the European (and not only European) legal and moral thought helds that murdering civilians is a war crime.

I mean, any declarations about war crimes are your private opinion and subjective evaluation. Poland as state never directed to Ukraine any appeals about “war crimes” so likely officially discussed events aren’t considered as “war crimes”.

According to international law, killing civilians is a war cime.

BTW why do you think the UPA veterans avoid speaking about the murder of Poles they have done? Because even today, they could be potentially put under trial.

Well that’s automatically acknowledges they supported the idea of occupation of Ukrainian lands so they were criminals and extremists first of all.

1. Do support the occupation of Crimean Tatar land? Do you think that people who support the integrity of present Ukrainian borders are criminals and extremists, because they support the occupation of Crimean Tatar lands?

2. According to international law, these territories were part of Rzeczpospolita Polska - so no one of them could be considered a criminal because of the fact they've supported it's borders.

Some of them were (war) criminals due to murder of Ukrainians civilians, but that was a different matter.

3. What is your criteria for calling something "Ukrainian land"? For example, I personally think that Lwow/Lviv is a city which was stolen from the Poles by Stalin, and that the Ukrainians there are in fact occupying a Polish city.

It’s impossible, “no love, no hate”. Poles occupied their country, took their lands, prohibited Ukrainian language, culture and faith and as it was mentioned before, publicly and privately “treated Ukrainian as people of second kind”. I don’t think Ukrainians had such strong nerves, so the dominating emotion regarding Poles was hate… and desire to take the own lands back.

You forget that Poles and Ukrainians were largely intermixed and that many Ukrainian peasants saw their Polish neighbours raise crops every day, just the way they did themselves - do you really think that Ukrainian peasants did't distinguish between Polish goverment and their own Polish neighbours?

This does mean that “ethnical factor” wasn’t essential part of OUN ideology same as any “massacres”. OUN was oriented on building the united independent Ukraine, friendly for all loyal nations. Poles on Western Ukraine were aggressive conscious occupants so they got to other category, ”enemies of Ukrainians”. That’s quite naturally, I said many about context.

Now you really took a very deep dive into delusions - sure, OUN *claimed* they had positive intentions, just like Hitler *claimed* he wanted to "build prosperous Europe, free from Jews and Bolshevism".

I'd like to repeat an order I've posted in this thread before:

(from OUN-SD, to the UPA command):

"immediately and as soon as possible finish the action of total cleansing of Ukrainian territory; contunue destroying the internal enemy of Ukraine, that is all the democrats from the sign of URL and other political groupings"

Notice the phrase "internal enemy of Ukraine, that is all the democrats".

[Max_the_Highlander]

Originally Posted by MichaelB_PL

To put in another way:

You didn’t explain why we need to consider events hanging on thin air, without historic settings and motives. The biggest reason for all anti-Polish actions is Polis occupation of Ukrainian lands. Every criminal should be ready to knock with resistance. So UPA resisted the occupation and just. This in natural right, it has nothing to do with war crimes. It’s heroism.

because the real cause of these events is the extremist /psychopatic nature of OUN/UPA leaders.

No the real reason was illegal criminal occupation of Ukrainian lands and extremist /psychopatic nature of Polish government and mere Poles. Also we know about AK slaughters of Ukrainian civilians - how about extremist /psychopatic nature of AK leaders?

Occupants come and make crimes. Nation rises against them and kills them. The moral superiority is on the side of OUN/UPA. For all crimes against Poles, the Poles are responsible alone - they began the occupation so that was initial crime which caused the rest of violence.

Once again: those murdered Volynian peasants were no priviliged class, most of them lived there for centuries and intermarried with Ukrainians.

It’s not proven. Bigger part of those Polish settlers came since 1920 from central Poland (so called mazurs) so it was direct result of occupation, artificial, not natural process. The lands were taken from Ukrainians and same Ukrainians were prohibited to buy lands. So we have here brutal robbery which was revenged and that was real people’s justice.

Only ones who lived there for centuries were Ukrainians killed by cranky AK occupants.

As about any comparisons of OUN with modern terrorists, it’s another nasty distortion. We have not to take the things out the context of 40th. In proper historic context, the OUN/UPA activity is similar with activities of French partisans. And even more… the bright heroes of Ukraine struggled against Polish, German and Soviet occupation so they are worth to be called something like “triple heroes”.

"As German units closed to the territories they lived on, Ukrainians who were peaceful so far started to disarm Polish soldiers and policemen and even attack small units. They were also assaults on civilian population”.

So what is strange here? German occupation finished the Polis occupation, people began natural revenge. As I said earlier to kill the robber (and Poles were robbers) is not crime. It’s natural manifestation of ethnic hostility (and another proof), and it is already explained. Ukrainian-Polish relations never were friendly so this is natural.

In case of OUN/UPA, they were not extremists because they wanted a independent Ukraine, they were extremists because they believed that violence against Polish civilians is acceptable and that it will help establish independent Ukraine.

Strange but I also believe the all forms of violence against the occupants are acceptable. Let’s say no one blames French partisans for murders of German settlers. Poles killed Ukrainian civilians as occupants. They also thought it is acceptable to maintain the occupation. So any actions of UPA on such background doesn’t look as any crime. It's just revenge violence.

Back then (in the 30s), Poles had huge power advantage over Ukrainians and could do almost anything they want to them - but they did't.

Every occupation is extremism a priory, without other additional conditions required.

BTW why do you think the UPA veterans avoid speaking about the murder of Poles they have done? Because even today, they could be potentially put under trial.

Let the Poland drive to Ukraine any appeal and so those events will be acknowledged officially as war crimes. But it is not so for now so they are free to say everything they want - same as AK veterans who killed thousands of innocent Ukrainians.

Btw, your lament about killed Poles doesn’t influence me – I feel not any drop of sympathy to any murdered occupants, if they are they military people or civilians.

What is your criteria for calling something "Ukrainian land"? For example, I personally think that Lwow/Lviv is a city which was stolen from the Poles by Stalin, and that the Ukrainians there are in fact occupying a Polish city.

This leads us to blind alley. Halych and Volyn are ETERNALLY Ukrainian lands as I effectively explained you earlier. You may refuse that but the about that discussion leads to no way.

Here we have some guys from Halych as Unbreakable and others and they already explained you what they think about ridiculous "Polish belonging" of their native land. You need to PM the Unbreakable and discuss this question with him directly.

"immediately and as soon as possible finish the action of total cleansing of Ukrainian territory; contunue destroying the internal enemy of Ukraine, that is all the democrats from the sign of URL and other political groupings"

What is date of this order, who gave that (person), where is the original of document contained now, whom it was acknowledged as real by?

Any notes about politic struggle and so what?