ECHO OF WAR

Belarus had the greatest specific losses during the Second World War in comparison with all other countries of the world. Up to now the memory of that war remains one of the strongest historical recollections and feelings of the Belarusians. Indirectly the policy of the present power which appeals to these feelings to a place and out of place reminds it: by carrying over Independence Day to the date of Minsk liberation from the Nazi occupation, the memorial construction "Stalin's Line", constant comparisons of the NATO with the military power of Nazi Germany, and the Belarusian opposition – with collaborators of war times – here is far not the full list of actions with the help of which the power wants to strengthen its legitimacy, tending towards national memory of that war. However, it is possible to exploit only really strong feelings and really actual memory.

But how strong are these feelings? In many countries of East and Central Europe opinions on the Second World War have essentially been changed for the last decades, also at the official level. In Belarus it has not happened. And what is the situation at the level of public consciousness, does it support the previous approaches unanimously?

In the public opinion poll of June, 2008 the respondents were offered some questions, allowing to find out the level of this unanimity in relation to some plots of the Nazi occupation times (Table 1).

It is important to mention, that the question set by sociologists, did not touch upon the participants of the armed organizations – police, minor military formations etc., created by the Germans or under their aegis in the days of occupation. Probably, if the question was set about collaboration as a whole answers would be a little bit other. But in that formulation in which it has been set answers have turned out to be significant enough.

In 1944-1945 the wave of national persecution of collaborators spread out all over the liberated countries. And the question is not only of Belarus. Ch. De Gaulle in his memoirs writes that about tens of thousands of people were killed in accordance with lynch-laws during the first months after the liberation of France.

Now, when more than 60 years passed, only every fifth Belarusian thinks, that everybody co-operating with the Nazi, was a traitor. At the same time nearly every tenth person interviewed shares the opposite opinion, regarding people having participated in non-military formations, created by Germans, almost as heroes. And the overwhelming majority of people share a neutral point of view, preferring to estimate the acts of each concrete person instead of condemning all for the very fact of collaboration.

The data in Table 1 can be interpreted in different ways. It is important to pay attention to the fact that only the fifth part of respondents share the adamant opinion favored by the power. But also it is possible to note, that the approach meaning full regarding of previous opinions about the war and about the role of collaboration, in particular, is shared by still smaller numbers of respondents.

Other two questions set to respondents, touched upon the guerrilla actions on the territory of Belarus in the days of occupation. 61.4% of respondents answered the question "Have you ever heard about cruelties applied by the Belarusian guerrillas to peaceful population during the war?" affirmatively and 38.2% - negatively. And to the question about their attitude to these excesses (if they took place), the following answers (Table 2) have been given.

First of all the following paradox is evident: the number of those saying, that he has never heard about such facts, is greater than the number of people who declare, that they do not believe in it. Out of this it is possible to draw the conclusion that the information that guerrillas were not angels is spread widely enough which follows from direct answers to the questionnaire question. However, in this case the question is not of knowing that war is severe business, but of attitude to it.

About a third (in relation to the majority) rejects the very formulation of the problem in general. It is possible to assume, that for them the very question is blasphemy; if something happened there is no need to speak about it, it is the insult of principles and beliefs of these people. Nearly every fourth respondent follows W. Churchill's formula: "In war you cannot be the righteous person, but your actions should be right". Everything happened passed, but unjust deeds are expiated by just of the Affair. And, at last, approximately the same number of respondents believes, that Deed (just or not) does not justify definite unjust affairs.

The data in Table 3 show, that age, in contradiction with our expectations, is not a strong differentiating factor in connection with cases in point. Though the youth also has no its own experience of that war, the transfer of experience, opinions about it goes effectively enough. Perhaps, at one point the answers of young and elderly respondents don’t meet – it is the question about guerrillas’ cruelties. Here the senior generation shows great awareness of these events as it, apparently, gets this knowledge from the personal experience. However, as a whole, there is no split of generations in attitudes to the specified plots of war times, after many years the opinions and estimations of all generations change.

Political preferences – the attitude to the president and the choice between the Russian Federation and EU differentiate answers much stronger, at some points they differ almost twice. In the question about collaborators the shares of those who consider them devotees of the Belarusian identity, are almost identical among adherents of different political positions, but there are more supporters of the opinion that collaborators are traitors among people trusting the president and approving of integration into Russia. However, in all these groups 50% is a dominating number.

The similar picture is observed in the answers to the question whether it is possible to justify guerrillas’ cruelty. Here the picture appears to be smooth: among people trusting A. Lukashenko and adherents to integration into Russia about 40% of people do not believe that such cruelties took place, and about 20% believe that such cruelties took place and there is no justification to them. Among people not trusting the president and approving of integration of Belarus into the EU the ratio of shares is opposite.

Summing up, it is necessary to tell, that the attitude of public consciousness at least to the problems of the disarmed collaboration and guerrillas’ cruelties in the times of the Nazi occupation is not unanimous. The growth of tendency to estimate people according to their definite deeds, instead of their belonging to one of the confrontation camps is being observed.

Back   Top