Year after year Ukrainians face the same problems. Often they pertain to the realm of history, sometimes heated by yet another election campaign, but the fact remains: Ukraine cannot escape the vicious circle. We still cannot decide if Hetman Mazepa made the right choice, or what language our forefathers spoke. But above all, we cannot sort out the tragic 20th century which destroyed the lives of our grandparents. Even now, it will not leave us in peace. Meanwhile, in the historical paradigm Europe teaches us quite a different lesson: the West has adopted a definite view on history, which is not to be changed by any elections or twists and turns of political life.
Germany has set a fine example for Ukraine of how one should understand and accept one’s history. At the Ukrainian Home in Kyiv, Germany presented an unusual exhibit titled “The enemy is he who thinks differently.”
Why is it unusual? The theme of the exhibit is the history and functioning of the Ministry for State Security, aka Stasi (from the German Staatssicherheit), back from the times of the German Democratic Republic (GDR). Against the background of the recent events concerning the problems of our historians and archives, this exhibit is a vivid illustration of how important understanding and interpreting the past is.
The exhibit is set up in one of the cosy rooms of the Ukrainian Home. At first glance, everything seems to be too simple — but that is where the main attraction is. There is no pomposity, on the contrary, it is as accessible as possible. Besides the archive photographs, documents, and espionage paraphernalia, one can also see short documentaries and hear audio recordings.
The very “German” approach to history is amazing. When the GDR was living its last days, Stasi staff got orders to destroy their archives. They dared not burn them: it was very likely that the crowds in the streets of Berlin or other East German cities would see the smoke and break into the Stasi buildings. Then the documents, fatal for many politicians, would be made public.
The problem was not that simple: in the Stasi archive there were not only documents proving the persecution of dissidents, but also operative files. Although the exhibit does not suggest this, it is highly unlikely that they were all declassified indiscriminately. This was also mentioned by the former head of the SBU Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, who answered The Day’s questions.
Thus, they decided to shred all the documents. However, even in this the Germans were unique: each of the 45 million documents was torn into 16 pieces. The documents and files from the same shelf were packed in one bag. Order is order, and the Stasi officers would keep it even in such complicated times.
After the overthrow of the ruling Socialist Unity Party of Germany, not only weren’t the bags destroyed, they were preserved. Using modern computer technology, putting together hundreds of millions of tiny fragments, the documents were restored.
The exhibit shows documents dating back to the times of the rise of Stasi, which was direct heir to the Soviet occupation administration bodies in Germany and which built up its apparatus of control over the citizens of the first German state of workers and peasants.
It shows how the representatives of these two classes became the victims of political terror, what sort of people worked there, including those who worked as unofficial staff, i.e., informers. The files on those who were persecuted (i.e., the portraits and biographies of dissidents) are also illustrative.
As for the title of the exhibit, according to professor Yurii Shapoval who examined the stands with curiosity, it can be interpreted as the “key to the philosophy of this secret service’s operation.” Stasi was the most powerful KGB branch in the so-called socialist camp, and it had indeed developed effective methods allowing it to effectively control the situation in the former GDR.
Even before the founding of the GDR the Soviet occupation administration, together with the Socialist Unity Party of Germany, created the structure of the political secret police, which in 1950 gave birth to the Ministry of State Security. The state security service in the GDR totally conformed with the traditions of the Soviet secret police, the Cheka-OGPU-NKVD-MGB-KGB.
Fighting against “the enemies of the socialist order” became their “class mission.” From the outside, the security service appeared to defend socialist rule and be “a body of justice,” preoccupied with the safety of the citizens. The reality, however, was different: any criticism of the system or deviation from the norms imposed by the ruling party was taken by the Stasi as the result of hostile influence from the West and qualified as an act of “political and ideological subversion.” Thus, the secret police legalized its actions and the interference with people’s lives.
Looking at the biographies of Stasi staff and leaders, one cannot but remember George Orwell’s 1984. The MGB acted like a sort of Big Brother: from the early 1950s and up to 1989, the main body of this organization grew from 2.7 thousand to nearly 91 thousand officers. Only the grave economic and financial problems in the GDR in the early 1980s slowed down the further growth of the Ministry of State Security.
The so-called “unofficial staff” were the organization’s main weapon. Their main job was to spy on people. Roughly one in 50 citizens cooperated with the Ministry. However, they did not have much of a choice — a great part of the German population was liberated from Hitler’s totalitarian regime only to find itself under just the same rule, only differently coloured.
There is a curious entry in the guest book made by a student: “I envy the consciousness of Germans. I know something about the Stasi, but nothing about the KGB. A great exhibit.” And we would like to see the documents concerning our past at last, unedited and unrestricted.
COMMENTARIES
Hans Jurgen HEIMSOETH, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Federal Republic of Germany to Ukraine:
“In my opinion, this is an important exhibit because it shows very convincingly what life was like in the totalitarian system. This is what unites us in the history of Europe: East Germany, Poland, and Ukraine.
“The disclosure of documents like these can hurt at times, but it is important for the future as it will promote the consolidation of society and strengthen its democratic foundations. Only transparency and truthfulness can help us discuss such matters. We may never have the same views, but the most important thing in a discussion is the dialog. In Germany we know from our own experience how important it is to make archives open to the public. In the long run, it is transparency and truth that matters.”
Valentyn NALYVAICHENKO, ex-head of SBU:
“When I was appointed head of the SBU by the parliament, we created a Commission of the Security Service of Ukraine, which drew a clear line between operative files and proper criminal files, concealing crimes against humanity and all the concealed reprisals. Then another step followed: according to Ukrainian legislation, no crime against humanity can be classified. There were classified files of this kind, and the commission was working to declassify them, thus making them public.
“Another moment concerned the work of more than one hundred investigators working on a definite crime committed by the communist, Bolshevik regime, both Soviet and Ukrainian: the genocide of 1932-33. These were the tasks our investigators were concentrating on.
“The Security Service completed this mission in 2009. In each oblast, and in Kyiv in particular, the SBU opened rooms equipped with computers to give citizens free access to the declassified files.
“I assess everything that is going on now as an act of aggression. It is an aggression of the regime against Ukrainian historians, whose only fault is their love for Ukraine. According to Ukrainian legislation, no crime against humanity can be classified as a state secret.
“I am convinced that this has to be stopped, and the parliamentary committee has to submit a report, since the Security Service is accountable to the parliament by law; this report has to be made public, and public hearings have to be organized, with experts, scholars, and historians invited, in order to protect the historians themselves against aggression on the part of the regime.”
