To save the world from new tragedies similar to the 1932-1933 Manmade Famine, Ukraine suggested that various countries sign a joint statement to be released as official document of the UN General Assembly’s 58th session. However, the adopted statement lacked of the word genocide as characterization of the tragic events in Ukraine in the early 1930s. A number of opinions were expressed as to why this term was not included in the joint statement. One of them is that the governments of Russia, the US, and Britain insisted on this. Did they really do so? Here follow answers to this question of The Day by diplomats from the embassies of these countries. The US Embassy also commented on why Washington failed to support the efforts to characterize the Manmade Famine in Ukraine as genocide.
Embassy of the United States of America in Ukraine:
“The Commission on the Ukraine Famine, formed by Congress in 1984, came to the conclusion that Joseph Stalin and his entourage had perpetrated genocide against Ukrainians in 1932-1933. The House of Representatives resolution No. 356, unanimously adopted on October 20, 2003, unequivocally supports these conclusions. We fully support the House of Representatives resolution.”
Embassy of Great Britain in Ukraine:
“Great Britain did not insist on withdrawing the word genocide. This was a Ukrainian proposal which the Ukrainian side put forward in a joint statement with Russia.”
Aleksei SAZONOV, Minister Counselor, Embassy of the Russian Federation in Ukraine:
“It is common knowledge that the 1932-1933 famine brought misfortune to many families of the former USSR’s citizens. From this perspective, the tragedy equally affected the Russians, Ukrainians, Kazakhs, and other nationalities. It is therefore clear why Ukraine, Russia, and Kazakhstan initiated a statement to this effect, which found support among the world community during the current session of the UN General Assembly.
“The 1932-1933 famine, or manmade famine, as it is known in Ukraine, left a deep imprint in the history of our peoples. This is our common pain, our common tragedy. Yet, in my view, the so-called jubilee factor should not prevail where the moral choice is determined by a human and filial duty.
“It is in general clear to all of us why researchers of various countries, Ukrainian and Russian historians, show professional interest in this stage of the USSR history. These studies must and will continue. For there still are some differences in the assessments and opinions, for example, whether one can regard the Stalinist domestic policy that brought about the manmade famine as genocide of the own people. God willing, the debates on this question will not hide the main conclusion: totalitarianism must never return to our families.”
PS: UKRAINE’S MISSION DROPPED THE WORD BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED. THE DAY‘S CONSULTANT SPOKE TO THOSE INVOLVED AT THE UNITED NATIONS. UKRAINE’S DIPLOMATS WILL PURSUE THE MATTER FURTHER AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
