Paul
Goble
Staunton, June 4 – Finally, Russia
has its own monument to the Holocaust, but while this is an important step and “better
than nothing,” Moscow commentator Anton Orekh says, the new memorial “is
devoted not to the victims of the Holocaust as such but in general to the
heroes of the resistance in the concentration camps and ghettos.”
The reason that is so, he argues, is
the same as the one why no such memorial had appeared before: longstanding
Russian anti-Semitism. While that is
fortunately no longer state policy and Vladimir Putin is not an anti-Semite,
many Russians are; and the powers that be don’t want to offend them (echo.msk.ru/blog/oreh/2438959-echo/).
One indication of continuing Russian
hostility to Jews, Orekh continues, is that the Museum of Tolerance where the
new monument has been erected is guarded almost as seriously as the Diamond
Fund in the Kremlin. “No one excludes provocations and even violence.” It is
even that the memorial was to be made of glass but then built of “stronger
materials.”
In dedicating the memorial, Putin stressed
this shift of focus and used the occasion to attack some of Moscow’s current
opponents. There can be no justification for the crimes of Nazism or for “those
who voluntarily became participants in these evil actions – Banderites, SS
legions, and nationalist bands who sowed death in the Baltics, in Ukraine and
in the countries of Europe (twitter.com/dimsmirnov175/status/1135892224208752640).
But perhaps the clearest sign of the
Kremlin view on this monument lay elsewhere: Alla Gerber, the president of the
Holocaust Foundation in Russia and a long-time advocate of erecting a memorial
to all the victims of that crime against humanity, was not invited to the
ceremony. “Apparently,” she says, “they
forgot us” (echo.msk.ru/news/2438947-echo.html).
The Russian powers that be “do allow us to work, but I
cannot say that they have helped us very actively. Unfortunately, for the
second year in a row, we haven’t received a presidential grant” to support our
work.
For
all these reasons, Orekh’s conclusion that the new monument is “better than
nothing” but that unfortunately it is not the turning point that many had hoped
for – and that some, unreflectively, are suggesting it already is.
No comments:
Post a Comment