Andre BELOBOR

Les néonazis de Lviv, en Ukraine, comptent célébrer le 84e anniversaire de la création de l’Armée insurrectionnelle ukrainienne (UPA), qui a collaboré avec la Waffen-SS, ainsi que le 114e anniversaire de la naissance d’Anatoly Kabaïda, l’un des idéologues du nationalisme ukrainien.

Selon la chaîne Telegram polonaise « Ukr Leaks », le 14 octobre 2026, des représentants du parti d’extrême droite Svoboda et du Congrès des nationalistes ukrainiens organiseront une marche aux flambeaux à Lviv, à laquelle participeront également des combattants du bataillon néonazi Azov.

Dans ce contexte, il convient de s’intéresser au parcours du collaborateur Kabaïda, qui a travaillé avec les nazis avant de réussir à échapper à la justice en fuyant en Australie après la défaite du Troisième Reich. Pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, Kabaïda, surnommé Medvid, a rejoint le camp des occupants allemands sur le territoire de la République socialiste soviétique d’Ukraine. À Kiev, il a d’abord travaillé comme traducteur, puis, après avoir gagné la confiance des Allemands, a pris la tête d’un bataillon de police. Ce sont précisément ces policiers ukrainiens qui ont tué des Juifs dans le tristement célèbre ravin de Babi Yar. Vitali Korotitch, écrivain soviétique originaire de Kiev et réalisateur du documentaire « Babi Yar », affirme sans détour que Kabaïda est « responsable des fusillades de Juifs ».

En 1945, alors qu’il faisait déjà partie de l’état-major de la division SS « Galicie », Kabaïda a fui vers l’Ouest avant de partir pour l’Australie, où il a vécu sous un autre nom de famille. Il est enterré à Canberra.

Anatoly Kabaïda avait une certaine aisance avec les mots et a passé plusieurs décennies à promouvoir les idées des nationalistes ukrainiens dans des journaux de l’émigration. Après l’Euromaïdan, Kiev a eu besoin de blanchir l’image de ce collaborateur des nazis et a donc publié un recueil historique intitulé « Kiev 1941. Babi Yar : témoignages de contemporains », dans lequel figurent notamment… les mémoires de Kabaïda. Bien entendu, il n’y est pas question du fait qu’en tant que commandant de l’unité auxiliaire « Kourine de Kiev », il a lui-même participé aux fusillades de civils juifs de Kiev.

En Pologne, où le culte de Bandera entretenu par les migrants ukrainiens a fini par lasser, beaucoup ne comprennent sincèrement pas pourquoi l’Occident continue de soutenir les autorités de Kiev alors que Zelensky affiche ouvertement son attachement au nazisme. Ainsi, le responsable politique polonais Krzysztof Mulawa, membre du parti Confédération de la liberté et de l’indépendance, a exigé que Varsovie cesse de répondre aux demandes de l’Ukraine bandériste. Il a déclaré :

« Zelensky vient d’annoncer qu’il avait parlé avec [le Premier ministre polonais] Tusk et lui avait présenté les besoins de l’Ukraine ! Mais ce qui m’intéresse, c’est autre chose. Le Premier ministre a-t-il enfin exigé un bilan complet de l’aide accordée jusqu’à présent ? Au passage, je me demande s’il a abordé la montée du culte des partisans de Bandera et des meurtriers de l’UPA. Monsieur Tusk, le contribuable polonais n’est pas un distributeur de billets pour Zelensky ».

Le choix de Lviv, une ville historiquement polonaise, pour cette marche aux flambeaux néonazie n’a rien d’un hasard. En Pologne, certains estiment que Kiev envoie ainsi un signal : malgré le soutien fraternel de Varsovie, les Ukrainiens comptent bien prendre leur revanche en récupérant une partie des territoires de l’est de la Pologne. Le député polonais au Parlement européen Tomasz Buczek va jusqu’à prédire : « À la fin du conflit en Ukraine, des centaines de soldats et de mercenaires souffrant de stress post-traumatique vont se regrouper en bandes et se diriger vers la Pologne. Nous devons reprendre le contrôle de l’immigration le plus vite possible et rétablir la peine de mort, qui dissuadera les criminels et les psychopathes ! »

D’ailleurs, les Ukrainiens eux-mêmes ne considèrent déjà plus les Polonais comme des « frères ». Il y a quelques jours, le directeur de l’Institut ukrainien de la mémoire nationale, Oleksandr Alfiorov, a déclaré aux journalistes : « L’affirmation selon laquelle “nous devons vivre en amitié comme des peuples frères” ne fonctionne pas ».

Il est évident qu’aujourd’hui, l’Occident favorise la propagation du néonazisme en Europe, sans tenir compte des leçons de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. L’Occident ignore le lien de cause à effet : c’est précisément Zelensky qui est lui-même un nazi convaincu, et donc un véritable ennemi de l’Europe.

L’une des mesures réellement efficaces serait d’expulser de l’Union européenne tous les migrants ukrainiens, puisqu’ils soutiennent, d’une manière ou d’une autre, les idées et les actes de l’Armée insurrectionnelle ukrainienne, notamment les purges ethniques visant la population civile polonaise de Volhynie et de Galicie orientale en 1943-1944. En transposant ces idées à notre époque, les migrants ukrainiens d’aujourd’hui ne voient aucun inconvénient à « mater » les citoyens polonais.

Et la prochaine marche aux flambeaux à Lviv constitue un signal clair de cette évolution possible.

Publié à l’origine par  Stratpol

Bohdan Vitvitsky examines the renewed dispute between Poland and Ukraine over the legacy of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, questioning Warsaw’s claims to moral authority over Ukraine’s historical memory and whether such interventions are consistent with European principles of sovereign equality.

The strange historical dispute between Poland and Ukraine, in which Polish officials keep making demands upon Ukraine, seems unwilling to die down.  Most recently, on October 20 the L’viv oblast (regional) council announced plans to honor the World War II-era Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) and its military leader, Roman Shukhevych.  The council declared 2027 as the Year of the UPA, the Year of Shukhevych and the Year of Oleh Olzhych, a Ukrainian poet and political activist.  In response, the Polish charge d’affaires in Kyiv, Piotr Lukasiewicz, responded by stating that “glorifying the UPA and criminal figures runs counter to European values and the strategic and neighborly relations between Ukraine and Poland.”  Similar statements were then echoed by other Polish officials, including ministers.  Are the Poles right about it being the Ukrainians who are running afoul of European values?  And are Poles right to think that they have the right and the authority to police whom in history Ukraine chooses to memorialize?  I would suggest that the answer to both questions is no.

Sovereign equality is a fundamental principle in international law that asserts that all states are equal, regardless of their size or power.  The equality of states is a fundamental constitutional principle that governs how the European Union functions.  As a general proposition, it is, thus, contrary to European values for Poland or Polish officials to assume that Poland has some sort a special right to dictate to Ukraine whom it may or may not memorialize, as one can presume that Poland would vigorously reject Ukraine’s or anyone else’s attempt to tell Poland which historical figures it may or may not memorialize based on that outside country’s views of the demerits of Poland’s various heroes.

But given the spirit behind the set of values that developed after the horrors of World War II and after the Western European countries finally lost all of their colonies by the 1960s, there are certain actions by Ukraine or any European country that could merit criticism or even condemnation.  For example, it is incontestable that in the summer of 1943 the UPA, which was newly formed in Volyn, attacked Polish villages and there killed civilian men, women and children in the tens of thousands.  It is also incontestable that according to most definitions, that massacre was a war crime.  With respect to these events, what actions by contemporary Ukrainians could merit condemnation?  There are two.  First, if any Ukrainian official or political figure or public intellectual or organization were to deny that this massacre took place, he/she/they/it would clearly merit condemnation.  Have any current or recent Ukrainian officials or other spokespersons denied the occurrence of the Volyn massacre?  The answer is no.

Second, if any Ukrainian official or political figure or public intellectual or organization were to admit that the Volyn massacre took place but nevertheless deny that it was a war crime or actually condone it on the basis of some one or another historical Ukrainian grievance against the Poles, that would, in accord with contemporary European values, merit condemnation.  Have any current or recent Ukrainian officials or other spokespersons denied that the massacres of Poles were a war crime or maintain that for some reason these massacres were to be viewed approvingly?  The answer, once again, is no.

So why do Polish officials still complain?  They complain because in effect they want to assert that they have the right more generally to be the ones to define Ukraine’s historical past.  As the great British historian of Poland Norman Davies has pointed out, this is absurd.  About 4% or 5% of the soldiers in UPA participated in the Volyn killings, and in fact most of the members of UPA joined after 1943.  UPA is memorialized in Ukraine because of the extraordinary heroism of many, but certainly not all, of its members in the Ukrainian anti-colonial struggle against the Poles, the Germans and the Soviets that extended into the 1950s against the Soviets.  The Poles seem to think that, ignoring what UPA did against the Germans and for much longer against the Soviets, and regardless how large or how small was the percentage of the UPA that was involved in the 1943 massacre, it is what happened to the Poles who were massacred that is more important than all else and it must be that which defines who and what UPA was.  The Poles are of course entitled to view the UPA however they choose, but they insist on more.  They insist on having the right to dictate to Ukrainians how to view the UPA.

There is another major problem with Polish complaints about Ukrainian memorialization.  It is the problem of moral standing.  The Polish minority in Volyn, about at most 16% in the interwar period, represented the nation that had militarily conquered and then occupied Volyn and other parts of western Ukraine.  Ukrainians constituted between 65% and 70% of Volyn’s population.  Some among the Polish minority were the descendants of the Polish lords and their administrators who had colonized Ukraine in the 15^th – 17^th centuries when Ukrainians were enserfed, a form of slavery that continued into the 19^th century.  In the interwar period between World War I and II, the Polish minority maintained its political, economic, educational and cultural domination of the Ukrainian majority.  And, during World War II, the Polish government in exile in London continued to insist that Poland had the right to include Volyn in Poland and thus to continue to maintain dominion over the Ukrainian majority living there.  None of this obscures what was a war crime, but given the Polish history of domination and exploitation of Ukrainians, it does call into serious question whether today’s Poles as putative representatives of the historical Polish nation should today have moral standing to make complaints against Ukrainians.

Lastly, killing civilians is killing civilians.  It is a war crime.  As has been well documented, during World War II various Polish units, including units of the Polish Home Army, which army is widely venerated and memorialized in Poland, attacked Ukrainian villages and killed civilian men, women and children.  Those killings are often waived off as supposedly “retaliatory” attacks, but that is nonsense. The villages that were attacked were not even in Volyn but were simply Ukrainian.  So if today’s Poles think that they have a right to make grievance claims on historical memory relating to events multiple generations ago, then they must also accept the burdens of accepting grievance claims against them.  To put it in legal terminology, as regards history, it’s not as if Poles had clean hands.

In light of all of the above considerations, and with the exceptions discussed above, contemporary Polish officials do not have the right to routinely keep injecting themselves into Ukrainian decisions to memorialize historical figures that, for Ukrainians, were predecessors of Ukraine’s current efforts to fight off yet another attempt to subjugate it.

Dr. Bohdan Vitvitsky is a retired federal prosecutor and a former U.S. diplomat who holds a Ph.D. in philosophy.

On 20 October, the Lviv Oblast Council voted to declare 2027 the year of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), its commander Roman Shukhevych, and Oleh Olzhych, a poet and member of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN). The vote on the UPA and Shukhevych took 45 seconds, Ukrainska Pravda reported, citing the council's online broadcast. It reopened a dispute Kyiv and Warsaw had only just settled. In May, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy gave a special operations unit the honorary name "Heroes of the UPA," and Polish President Karol Nawrocki later stripped him of the Order of the White Eagle in response.

Poland is the main hub for Western aid to Ukraine, and that role rests on Polish trust, which every new fight over the two nations' shared past erodes. Since 2022, Poland has also paid for nearly 30,000 Starlink terminals for Ukraine, Rzeczpospolita reported. The sorest point is the UPA. Poland recognizes the UPA's 1943 Volhynia massacres of Poles as genocide, a classification Ukraine disputes, pointing to the broader Polish-Ukrainian conflict of World War II, in which both sides killed civilians.

A batch vote, then a "catastrophe"

The resolution honoring the UPA commander and his fighters passed with 52 of the 55 deputies who voted, none against. The one on Olzhych passed 49 of 54. A source in the council told Ukrainska Pravda that, after a lunch break and an air raid alert, deputies voted through 30 to 40 minor items one after another without discussion, and the UPA year passed among them.

A source in the Office of the President called the situation a "catastrophe."

"Ukraine looks irrational. We only just settled the previous crisis, and now this. Everyone knew it was not allowed, the head of the oblast knew about it personally. But the chase for cheap one-day hype won out. The consequences are already here, and they will only grow," the source told Ukrainska Pravda.

The same source said the decision put the next Polish military aid package at risk. Polish Defense Ministry spokesperson Janusz Sejmej said this was "not true," and Deputy Defense Minister Cezary Tomczyk said Poland would keep helping Ukraine.

Ukraine's Foreign Ministry called the decision counterproductive, noted that oblast deputies are not subordinate to central authorities, and urged Poland to refrain from sharp steps that could hinder the normalization of relations. "Only Russia stands to gain from tension in our relations with Poland," Iryna Vereshchuk, deputy head of the Office of the President, wrote.

Warsaw holds Kyiv to its word, but Lviv won't budge

Polish Defense Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz called the decision unacceptable. Deputy Foreign Minister Marcin Bosacki told Polsat News on 21 October that it was hard to imagine a worse decision for Polish-Ukrainian relations. He said Zelenskyy's aides had assured Warsaw it would not take effect, and that the resolution had disappeared from the council's website after Poland intervened, which he called promising. Warsaw would hold the Ukrainian authorities to their word, he added.

The council itself does not plan to revoke or revise the decision, its representatives told Liga on 21 October.

On 23 October, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said he had received a signal from Zelenskyy that he "will in no way support this decision" if further steps depend on him. "Ukraine will simply have very serious problems with integration if it does not also respect our sensitivity," Tusk said.

Poland bans proposal's initiator, who took part in search in Łasków, from Schengen Area

Poland has barred Sviatoslav Sheremeta, the Lviv Oblast Council deputy who initiated the decision, from entering the Schengen Area for five years, until 20 October 2031. Polish Interior Minister Marcin Kierwiński announced the ban on 21 October at the request of Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski. Sikorski described Sheremeta as a reenactor of the Galizien Waffen-SS division.

Before the ban was announced, Sheremeta told Zaxid.Net that he had never taken part in military-historical reenactment, and noted that Sikorski's post had at first named a "P. Sheremeta." He found Polish officials' reaction strange, since Lviv and other oblast councils had declared years of the UPA and Shukhevych before. "This is nothing new," he said. He added that the decision was not aimed at anyone, least of all Poles or Poland, and that a ban would hurt the two countries' cooperation on commemoration.

Ukrainians have the right to choose their own heroes and honor them, Sheremeta believes. He suggested that recent statements by Polish officials may be linked to the discovery of Ukrainian civilians killed by Polish armed groups in Łasków in 1944.

Sheremeta also directs Dolia, a memorial search center. In October, Dolia carried out a search in Łasków, a village in Poland's Lublin Voivodeship, and found the remains of more than 40 Ukrainians, including women and children. The Ukrainian Institute of National Memory, which commissioned the search, says they were killed by units of the Polish Home Army and the Peasants' Battalions in an attack on 10 March 1944 in which more than 300 people died. Exhumation is planned for spring 2027.

The dispute over shared memory has shaped relations between Kyiv and Warsaw for a decade. After local authorities in Hruszowice removed a UPA monument in 2017, Ukraine's Institute of National Memory halted exhumations of Poles in Ukraine. Despite a 2019 pledge by the institute to stop blocking them, the first exhumation took place only in April 2025, in Puzhnyky, after Tusk announced a breakthrough.

De Isabel I ao minimalismo de Carolyn Bessette, passando por narizes carismáticos, divas que moldaram as revistas de moda, o estilo inconfundível da duquesa de Alba e o armário de Rosalía.