Between Memory and the Future: The Volyn Tragedy as a Stumbling Block on the Way to Ukraine’s European Integration
Ukraine and Poland reached a consensus on commemorating the victims of the Volyn tragedy. Already in April of this year, the exhumation of the remains of those killed in the former village of Puzhnyki in the Ternopil region will begin. We will remind you that it was the refusal of the Poles to perform search and exhumation work for a certain period of time that was a stumbling block in the relations between Poland and Ukraine. The lack of dialogue also stood in the way of the European integration movement of our country, especially during the phase of Poland’s presidency, which began on January 1, 2025. Donald Tusk is currently the head of the Polish government reportedthat “the declaration that there are no obstacles to the search and exhumation of the victims of the Volyn tragedy in Ukraine is the key to the complete reconciliation of both peoples”.
Memory is not shaped by institutions, but by people
European integration is not only about shared values, but also about collective memory, which projects them onto a retrospective vision of the historical past. It has long been known that in any supranational communities there is a need, if not to unify, then at least to harmonize the perception of events that once divided their members.
That is why the formation of the policy of national memory is one of the most important components of European integration. And that is why Ukraine is involved in various memorial projects of the EU, works to create conditions for the formation of European historical consciousness and the preservation of national cultural heritage.
Despite the developed legal framework and institutional support for national memory, EU countries face challenges and gaps in understanding the complex pages of their past. Why does this happen? Memory is formed not by institutions, but by people who are characterized by simplification, the so-called essentialization of history, when one important event, figure or myth replaces the complexity of historical vicissitudes. Often the traumatic experience not only contrasts with the present, but also serves as its justification. Since the European Union is a supranational entity, reaching an agreement on a historical consensus becomes an extremely difficult task.
As you know, for a long time the historical memory of the European Union focused on understanding the Holocaust. Until 2004, among the EU countries, only the former German Democratic Republic had the experience of double occupation – Nazi and communist. With the expansion of the European Union to the east, the crimes of Stalinism, which faced the countries of Eastern Europe, began to come into the spotlight. Since then, the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century — National Socialism and Stalinism — have become a key aspect of historical memory, embodying mass repressions, wars, and genocide that significantly affected European nations.
What appears to be a monolithic EU memory policy actually contains a number of internal contradictions. In particular, the narratives about the “uniqueness of the Holocaust” and “National Socialism and Stalinism as equivalent evils” partially contradict each other. Other important problems of the European past remain neglected: colonialism, internal conflicts, social inequalities. The simplistic interpretation of history by contrast causes resistance”dark past – bright future”, which in turn reduces the acuteness of the problems of the European present: right-wing populism, problems with migration, environmental challenges, etc.
Overcoming the differences of historical memory
In 2006, the EU launched the “Europe for Citizens” program, which integrated efforts to form a common understanding of these tragic pages of history among member states, despite their different historical experiences. Adopted in 2009, the resolution of the European Parliament “European Consciousness and Totalitarianism” recognized the divergence of historical memory in Europe (overcoming the Nazi past in the West, the communist past in Central and Eastern Europe) and emphasized the need to eliminate it. For this, an understanding of the “double heritage”, a comprehensive reassessment of the European history of the 20th century and the formation of common views on it were proposed. The goal of the chosen policy was to promote European integration through the creation of a special international organization that would unite memory institutions.
To implement these tasks, the international non-governmental organization “Platform of European Memory and Conscience” was founded in Prague in 2011. It unites more than 70 state and public institutions from 23 countries that investigate the crimes of totalitarian regimes, including the Soviet one. The organization holds conferences, seminars, exhibitions and educational events aimed at understanding the complex history of Europe.
Ukraine is represented in the Platform by six institutions, including the Liberation Movement Research Center, the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, the Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance, and the National Holodomor Genocide Museum. Their contribution is focused on overcoming the totalitarian past, condemning the crimes of the Soviet regime, popularizing the memory of the Holodomor, and opposing modern Russian aggression.
Despite significant progress in the formation of European collective memory, there are issues that remain a source of controversy between countries and make it difficult to reach a historical consensus. One of them is the problem of interpreting the events of the Volyn tragedy. It shows how difficult it is to achieve unity in the assessment of events that have a deep emotional and political impact on national identities. In Polish historiography, they write about the “Volyn Massacre”, in Ukrainian – about the “Volyn Tragedy”. There is still no agreement on the number of victims.
In the process of interpretations, a different historical background is revealed. The Polish narrative usually focuses on the ethnic cleansing carried out by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) against the Polish population and interprets it as genocide. For Ukraine, the Volyn tragedy is part of a wider struggle for independence in the context of World War II.
Volyn tragedy as a stumbling block
And although Poland remains one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine, the Volyn tragedy appears as a stumbling block on the way to European integration. Numerous statements by Polish politicians unequivocally testify to the non-admission of our country to the EU without a solution to the Volyn issue. “Without commemoration of the victims of Volyn, Ukraine will not join the EU”, – such a statement was made on Polish radio, in particular, by Polish Minister of Defense Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysh. For many Poles, the events in Volyn remain one of the greatest tragedies in the nationally marked history of the 20th century.
The problem is exacerbated even more by the events of today.
The moratorium on the exhumation of Polish victims of the Volyn tragedy, imposed by Ukraine in 2017, was a response to the destruction of Ukrainian monuments located on the territory of Poland. Then the right-wing radical groups dismantled the memorial monument to the soldiers of the Ukrainian insurgent army in the village of Hrushovychy. Later, already in 2020, another scandalous event took place, which had a negative impact on Ukrainian-Polish relations. Vandals destroyed part of the mass grave of UPA soldiers on Mount Monastyr.
These events added to the inconsistency in the historical interpretations of the Volyn tragedy, and further distanced the consensus regarding the proper commemoration of its victims. Due to the lack of international mechanisms for coordination of exhumations, this issue was partly resolved privately. The Ukrainian Institute of National Remembrance defined this as an “exception”, a “step towards meeting Polish citizens”.
A significant breakthrough in Polish-Ukrainian relations occurred recently in connection with the decision to allow exhumation. A joint statement was made by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and Poland, Andriy Sybiga and Radoslav Sikorskyi. At the same time, in the Ukrainian political community, this statement was perceived mostly negatively and criticized as one-sided. There is not a single word in the statement about honoring the burial places of Ukrainians on the territory of Poland.
Therefore, the Volyn tragedy as one of the most painful episodes of the common history of Ukraine and Poland remains a point of intersection of different narratives, where each side emphasizes its own losses and its vision of the causes and consequences of the events. This problem illustrates the difficulty of integrating national histories into a broader European narrative, where special attention is paid to themes of reconciliation, mutual understanding and avoiding the escalation of memory conflicts. Its solution is important not only for the relations between Ukraine and Poland, but also for the development of approaches to the complex historical heritage within the framework of European integration.
