crimes committed by totalitarian regimes - Ministrstvo za pravosodje

Crimes committed by totalitarian regimes
Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union fought as allies for almost two years – this critical fact usually
is sweep away.
In most popular historiography, aggression by the Soviet Union against four Baltic countries is
usually presented a as separate issue, unrelated to the Second World War and the secret agreement between
two aggressors. Soviet aggression against Finland is known as Finnish campaign (Finskaja kampanija),
but occupation and annexation of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia even today are treated by some “experts”
as their voluntary joining the Soviet Union, or at least a separate issue from World War Two.
Now let’s talk about another part of the myth – “liberation of Europe” by Soviets. Yes, Europe was
liberated from the Nazi regime, but very differently in its West and East. The western part of Europe
was really liberated by Western Allies and was able to enjoy free development. But in the eastern part –
one totalitarian regime was replaced by another, one occupation by another, one type of concentration
camps by another. “Liberation” was followed by plundering, violence, rape and massacre. Half of
Europe, millions of people, found themselves behind the Iron Curtain and were destined to long decades
of repression. In its “Resolution on the sixtieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War on 8
May 1945” (adopted on 12 May 2005), the European Parliament stressed “that for some nations the
end of World War II meant renewed tyranny inflicted by the Stalinist Soviet Union” and that this was
followed by “suffering, injustice and long-term social, political and economic degradation endured by
the captive nations located on the eastern side”. But the myth that the Soviet army liberated Europe is
still very popular and by all means is strengthened by Russia – the successor of USSR. To say more:
today Russia is more and more affiliated with its Soviet past: the idea of “a glorious Soviet past” has
become a consolidation factor for the Russian nation. That became a fundamental ideological ground of
a new Kremlin political platform, and all attempts to at least open a dialog and discussion are obstructed
by Russia.
Well, we can understand that for political reasons this is useful to Russia and its autocratic leaders.
But why does this doctrine seem to be acceptable to the Western democracies also? Why do Western
leaders toady up to Vladimir Putin? Do they not see and not understand that the present master of the
Kremlin (the former employee of state security – KGB) chose an autocratic way of governing, and
identification with the “glorious and victorious” Soviet past has turned into an identity that focuses
all of Russia? It is much more difficult to give an answer to these questions. But I think it is worth
considering why the doctrine of single evil is also acceptable to the democratic Western world.
4. Double standards regarding two totalitarian regimes
Western democracy and Western civilization rests on fundamental principals of liberty, democracy,
respect for human rights and fundament freedoms – on moral grounds and a system of values. But
in regard to Nazi and Soviet totalitarian regimes, we clearly see double standards. In relations with
Russia and crimes of the Soviet regime, these fundamental grounds are not so strong. The so-called
real politique dominates relations with Moscow and we often hear about “necessary” concessions. The
typical example is 60 th anniversary celebration of the end of World War Two in Moscow (where this
war actually started in 1939). By participating in Putin’s propaganda show, respectful leaders of the
world show their agreement to the Kremlin position, which humiliates victims of the Soviet totalitarian
regime.
Perhaps Western States feel somewhat embarrassed admitting that first in Teheran, Yalta and then
in Potsdam, they gave half of Europe into Stalin’s hands, and millions of people into the butchery of
the Soviet-Communist regime. In the case of the Baltic countries, those agreements just enforced and
legalized the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact legacy. It is true that by that time, Europe was tired of war and
it needed peace at any price, and Stalin would have never given back the occupied territories of his own
free will. But why today are we still afraid to admit this? This is a fundamental question of historical
truth and a test for the grounds of Western democracy.
Critical thinking and self-evaluation are some of milestones of a democratic system. It has been
proven many times by public recognition of mistakes in the past or rejection of principles not acceptable
for democracy (like slavery, segregation of black people or brutal behaviour towards Native Americans –
Indians, or colonialist politics) which had been norms for many years earlier.
15