Interview of Russia's Ambassador to South Africa H.E. Ilya Rogachev to South African Media on the Occasion of the 75th Anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War

 

 

- This year Russia celebrates the 75th Anniversary of Victory in World War II. It is clear that your country attaches great importance to it. What is the role of World War II in history of Russia? Would it be adequate to call the Victory Day as the main celebration in modern Russia?

 

- General public in our, as you may learn from other media, “not free” country, doubts and discusses from political prospective everything, including the occasions for celebration. Only two of them are beyond any controversies – the New Year and…the Day of Victory. "This celebration through suffering made wise, such elation, with teardrops in our eyes." – it’s an extract of lyrics for a Soviet song, composed at the time when the veterans of WWII were not that aged. Yes, I believe that the Day of Victory is the main celebration in modern Russia.

For our country, the war became an era in its own right, the times of the severest trials. The Soviet Union bore the brunt of the armed conflict of World War II. It is at the Eastern Front, as the Western historiography dubs the theatre of war where the USSR and Nazi Germany confronted each other, where the Nazis’ main forces operated. Germany and its allies had to keep from 95% (Summer 1941) to 74% (late 1944) of their ground forces in the area from White to Black Sea. 85% of their military casualties the Nazis suffered while fighting the USSR and only 15% in the fight against Soviet Union’s allies in the anti-Hitler coalition.

During the war, the USSR suffered the loss of 26,6 million citizens. 8,6 million soldiers and officers of the Red Army died on the frontlines, but the major part of the casualties – the civilians – were killed by Nazi bombings, starved, as in Leningrad, or tortured to death due to Nazi atrocities on occupied territories. Besides that, our country has paid a considerable cost to liberate other countries. Over 1 million Soviet warriors were killed in battles in Eastern and Central Europe, in the Balkans and in Asia, with 600 000 of them – in Poland, 140 000 – in Czechoslovakia, another 140 000 in Hungary, over 100 000 – in Germany itself. Just imagine: out of every 100 men born between 1920 and 1924 who had gone to war, only 4 made it back.

Since the first days of war, the peoples of the USSR displayed heroism, unity & tenacity. Both military and home front workers exhibited total heroism.

The women pursued the Great Victory alongside men. According to various calculations, from 600’000 to 1’000’000 women served in the Red Army with over 90 of them being honoured with USSR’s highest decoration - the title of the Hero of the Soviet Union. We know of the heroic deeds of female snipers, to whom the Nazis had a particular hatred. For example, Lyudmila Pavlichenko with 309 confirmed kills of Nazi soldiers & officers. In 1942 she was sent to the United States with the mission to promote the soonest opening of the second - western - front against the Nazis, among wider American public. Female air squadrons, including the famous 46th Guards Night Bomber Regiment «Night Witches», stroke Wehrmacht’s soldiers’ hearts with terror.

It is hard to even imagine the earth-shattering efforts it took to evacuate some fifteen hundred factories to the East during the first days of the war. A few months later, those factories began to regularly supply the frontline with ammunition, tanks, aircraft and other equipment.

The war affected everyone. It is not mere chance that every Russian family has its own innermost chronicle of war - letters from the frontline, death notices, time-yellowed photos, veterans’ memoirs and parting words that are passed down through generations. As another famous Soviet song goes: "There is no such a household, where the stories are not retold, and the pictures not kept as gold, of the soldiers so young and so old".

 

 

- It seems there are two closely related definitions: “World War II” and “the Great Patriotic War”. Some even believe that the latter is invented by Russia to “monopolize” the victory over Nazism. What is your comment on that?

 

- The wars become Patriotic when not only the army, but the entire population rises to defend the Motherland. In Russia it happened in 1812 when a truly people’s war was waged against the «Great Army» of Napoleon, and so it was in 1941 when all the peoples of the Soviet Union - regardless of the origin, regardless of the age or profession -  took a stand against the enemy.

Everyone fought for the land of their fathers and bright future for their children. This was the only way to defeat an aggressor who had harnessed the economic potential of all the European countries which had been conquered by Summer 1941.

The lives of all people who lived in the Soviet Union depended on the outcome of that war. If the USSR had been defeated like many other European countries, we’d suffered a fate that differed from that of other Europeans. According to Nazi theory of racial superiority, those of the Slavonic or other peoples living to the east from Prussia which wouldn't be turned into slaves, were to be liquidated or violently uprooted and moved to remote areas without any infrastructure and thus doomed to gradual extinction. So, our very existence depended on the outcome of the Great Patriotic War.

Nonetheless, when we speak about the USSR’s decisive contribution to the victory over Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Militarist Japan, we do not forget about our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition: the UK, US, France, resistance movements in various countries. Russia is grateful to the peoples of those countries for their contribution to the Victory, for mutual trust and unity which became a true example of nations standing together for peace. This is why the Russian servicemen who take part in the Victory Parade at the Red Square are oftentimes joined by their counterparts from the Armed Forces of foreign countries. Thus we honour the memory of our grandfathers and great-grandfathers who fought the Nazism together. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, «We are not dividing Victory into ours and someone else’s. We appreciate the contribution of all states, peoples, and guerilla movements to our common Victory. We proceed from the assumption that it could not be otherwise.»

Thus, there is no point in looking for some sort of political dimension in the title «The Great Patriotic War». This is how the confrontation between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany with its European allies is called in Russia and ex-USSR countries. From a historic perspective, the Great Patriotic War is a part of World War II. We do not attach any other meanings to the name «Great Patriotic War». All other interpretations, given under the pretense of a search for «historical truth», are nothing but lies and attempts to manipulate. 

 

 

- In 2008 European Parliament adopted the declaration proclaiming the 23 of August as the Day of Remembrance for Victims of Stalinism and Nazism, also known as Black Ribbon Day in some countries. Though Russia is a part of Europe, Europe tends to fence itself from Russia by putting USSR, Russia as its successor, and Nazi Germany on the same side. Why the perception of the same historic events is so different? It seems that today, while speaking of WWII and USSR’s role in it, we cannot miss the topic of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. What is the Pact’s historical significance for Russia? Why was it signed?

 

- Indeed, today the voices of those who calls to virtually review the results of World War II are getting louder. In some European countries, the Nazi criminals are being rehabilitated, the marches of «Waffen-SS» and its affiliated groups veterans are being organized with authorities’ approval, Neo-Nazi organizations feel at ease. For political purposes, the role of the Red Army in liberating the European countries from the Nazis is being silenced or distorted.

These countries do not wish to recall the truth about World War II, especially when it comes to the Soviet Union’s primal role in defeating the Nazism or the facts of their leadership making a common cause with Hitler and its anti-Semitism and conspiring with the Nazis against the USSR with a view to direct Hitler’s war machine to the East.

When it comes to the treaties that the European powers signed with Hitler on the eve of WWII, Europeans’ memory becomes very selective. There are few of those who remember the Four-Power Pact concluded in 1933 by Italy, Germany, the UK and France, or Pilsudski-Hitler Pact, concluded between Poland and Germany in 1934. In 1938 Germany signed: Anglo-German Naval Agreement and Non-Aggression Agreement with the Great Britain, Non-Aggression Agreement with France. In terms of pacts and agreements, 1939 for Nazi Germany was just as fruitful as the previous one: an economic agreement with Romania, non-aggression pacts with Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia (at that moment, these Baltic States hadn’t joined the Soviet Union yet), Pact of Friendship and Alliance between Germany and Italy (a.k.a. the Pact of Steel), Non-Aggression Pact with Denmark. It is also «not customary» in modern Europe to recall the Anti-Comintern Pact concluded between Germany and Japan   in 1936 against the USSR with an aim to prevent the communist influence from spreading. Yet the only pact that the Europeans remember well is the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. In commemoration of this pact’s signature in August 1939, a European Remembrance Day was established. However it is not made clear, that the Soviet Union was the last European state to sign such an agreement with Nazi Germany and that it made such a step only after all other options had been exhausted and all Soviet proposals to create a European system of collective self-defense against Nazi Germany together with the UK and France had been rejected. In addition to its diplomatic initiatives, the USSR assisted the Spanish people in its struggle against Fascism and was ready to render military assistance to the attacked and torn Czechoslovakia but Poland refused to let the Soviet troops pass through its territory.

Europe is also reluctant to remember the Munich Betrayal of 1938 - the pinnacle of the European powers’ policy of appeasement with a view to channel his aggression towards USSR. In "civilized" Europe, it is not customary to speak about J.Pilsudski’s Poland’s and Horthy’s Hungary’s active involvement in dismembering of Czechoslovakia and also about the fact that it was the Munich Betrayal that became the turning point which made World War II inevitable.

There are specific reasons for all those various manifestations of the intent to make the USSR and Nazi Germany equally responsible for the outbreak of World War II. Firstly, they need some sort of basis to justify the current anti-Russian policy in Europe, historical grounds for culturing of Russophobia. Some "particularly civilized" Europeans feel disturbed that they actually should be thankful to someone for something. The monuments to the Soviet warriors remind them of that and thus, irritate them. Secondly, it’s the attempts to rewrite, or repaint their own history in brighter colours. There’s no concealing the fact that there was not only pandering to Hitler or collaboration with him - some European countries entered the World War II "on the wrong side of history". It is now beneficial to them to represent their collaborationism as a forced necessity to fight both Hitlerism and Stalin’s "dictatorship". Thirdly, Russophobia is paid for handsomely from certain capitals. Fourthly, some of our neighbours simply have nothing else to offer to the international community, nothing else to come up with in the global arena and make themselves somewhat remarkable, other than blatant Russophobia. These political and mercantile interests lead to rewriting of history. This is what Russia is opposed to. 

 

 

- World War II is indeed a common page of Russian and European history. What about Africa and, in particular, South Africa? It is true that USSR provided great assistance to South Africa in its anti-apartheid struggle, but can we call the victory over Nazism as something we share as well?

 

- Indeed, the victory over Nazism is something we can rightfully call our common heritage, our common historical achievement. The Soviet Union and the African states were "on the same side of history". In 1941-1942, while the Red Army was holding the onslaught of German forces on the Eastern Front of World War II, South African and Ethiopian troops took part in battles against Nazi Germany’s allies: against Fascist Italy in the North of the Africa and Militarist Japan during the course of the Madagascar operation. South African soldiers and officers were among those who prevented the "Brown Plague" from spreading in the African continent. Moreover, South African military participated in escorting the Arctic Convoys which delivered crucial war cargos to the Northern Soviet ports - Arkhangelsk and Murmansk. To this day, the Russians do remember the courage of the Soith Africans and are grateful for their contribution to the Victory. The heroic deed of those who stood up against the Nazism and fought it to the best of their abilities must be honorued and remembered. For us, there can be no exclusion.

 

 

- Since 2014 the celebrations of Victory in WWII or, Great Patriotic War, to be more precise, include another element – “Immortal Regiment” Marches. Nowadays it reached worldwide scale. Could you tell us more on “Immortal Regiment”? Is it an integral part of Victory Day celebrations now?

 

- This idea was first introduced in 2011 in Tomsk, a city in Western Siberia. It is important to point out, that "Immortal Regiment" is not a governmental or a political initiative - it is a civil movement aimed to preserve the memory of the generation of the Great Patriotic War-era in every family.

Every year, on the Day of Victory, the people march the streets of Russian cities carrying the photos of their relatives who took part in battles, partisans, members of resistance movements, home front workers, and prisoners of concentration camps, children of war and survivors of the Siege of Leningrad.

The first march of "Immortal Regiment" took place in 2012. In 2015 the movement reached the global level. 2019 saw the «Immortal Regiment» marches in over 110 countries, in over 500 cities and villages. Hundreds of thousands of people took part in the march overseas and tens of millions in Russia. Indeed, "Immortal Regiment" marches became an integral part of the Victory Day celebrations.

Lately, we often hear that public consciousness is getting militarized in Russia and that parades and marches on the Day of Victory are nothing but Government’s tools to spread militarist sentiments. In doing that, Russia allegedly rejects humanism and values of the «civilized world, whilst Europe seems to have forgotten the "bygones", reconciled, and "tolerantly" builds "forward-looking relations".

This is what we, in Russia, aim for and, although somebody might find it surprising, but we have no problem on World War II neither with Germany and Germans, nor with Italy and Italians, for example. 

Russia does not plant militarism, it preserves the memory of those who died at the war so as to not let that tragedy happen ever again. Somebody has to do it, while Europe erects monuments to Nazi collaborators while those dedicated to its liberators as well as war cemeteries get destroyed or vandalized. And this is far from being the only outrageous example, there are many others coming from Russia’s near abroad: torchlight processions in Riga (Latvia), Tallinn (Estonia) and Kiev (Ukraine), just like those in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. In some countries of Central and Eastern Europe the sites of Russian military-memorial heritage are constantly vandalized. Poland has also made its mark (and not once) in this field. Over the past years, in violation of bilateral agreements between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Poland, numerous monuments to Soviet liberators in its territory were removed.

A short while ago, in Prague, Czech Republic’s capital, upon the decision of municipal authorities, a monument to Soviet Marshal Ivan Konev, the man, who saved the prisoners of Auschwitz and liberated Prague from the Nazis, was dismantled.

 

 

- Marshal Ferdinand Jean Marie Foch, French military commander of World War I-era, once said that Treaty of Versailles was not a peace but an armistice for 20 years, yet in 1918 the idea of World War II ever happening was inconceivable. What about now? What are the chances that the results of WWII were also an “armistice” before World War III?

 

- To prevent such a dire scenario from unfolding, the international community has, first and foremost, the UN - a unique organization, which also celebrates the 75th anniversary of its creation this year. It’s establishment were made possible only due to the Victory in World War II. Secondly, Russia maintains its military potential on the level adequate to prevent, as President Putin said, «anyone from even thinking» of attacking Russia.

Yet a number of Western countries which strive to preserve their domination in global affairs are dissatisfied with the situation when all the countries of the world are equal and the international law is unfailingly respected. I would like to remind that World War I broke out because of the very same intention of the great powers to save their privileged positions in the international arena. World War II started,  because the participants of World War I failed to learn anything from it. There is a precise expression belonging to American philosopher George Santayana: «Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it». This is why Russia keeps urging its American and European partners to treat historical memory carefully and avoid politicizing the history. It’s hard to learn history’s lessons using a textbook with torn out or rewritten pages.