The European Union and neo-Nazis are “fighters with totalitarianism”.

Is the rhetoric coincidence of last “anti-totalitarian” resolutions of the European Union and statements casual with which the neo-Nazi movements justify their activity? How the crisis phenomena influence its foreign policy decisions in Europe? The candidate of History, the department head of history of Russia at the Kharkov National University of Karazin Vladimir Mikhaylovich Dukhopelnikov answers these and other questions.

- The “Warsaw declaration”, accepted in Warsaw caused recently the wide resonance which was timed to the accepted by the European Union “Memorial Day of victims of totalitarian regimes”. What is your estimation of this declaration?

Let's see, what countries have signed this document: Lithuania, Estonia, Croatia, Romania, Czech Republic, Spain, Sweden, Slovakia etc. It is possible to study simply the geography of allies and helpers of Hitlerite Germany according to this list.

In Lithuania it is Smetona regime, in Estonia – Pyats regime, in Romania – marshal Antonesku, in Spain – the general Franco, in Poland – Pilsudsky regime. All these states, anyhow, followed lead of Germany, divisions of Vaffen SS were created there, they were at war against the resistance movements in the countries. Therefore, being before the danger of criticism of own historical past, they have started to criticize the others.

The obvious forgery is hidden in all similar resolutions of the European Union – the attempt to separate the history of fascist Germany, its development from dynamics of development of Europe as a whole at that time. I.e. it is supposed that with the help of such decisions the fascist Germany in itself was organized, has constructed army and has set to Europe and Soviet Union. Though, actually, it is thus held back that the position in Europe was that as a whole that exactly the fascist Germany “has ripened” thanks to this system situation. Here that is held back.

The equating of a role of the USSR and Germany in the Second World War unbinding is the following step on history falsification, attempt definitively to relieve of responsibility of other European states and as to reach the certain geopolitical purposes concerning Russia.

Besides, the general crisis situation in the European Union is imposed on these historical factors. The listed countries of the Eastern Europe, having entered into the European Union, till now are not far on the first roles. The entry into the European Zone has caused the numerous economic and political problems connected with a general crisis of this structure. Therefore it is necessary to distract the attention of the population from internal problems and to find guilty, to accuse "the totalitarian past" of today's problems.

It is necessary to consider that when we speak about a totalitarian regime in the USSR, so many questions and discussions exist here. The outstanding scientists and experts concern this theme much more accurately, having considering a universal situation of that time. But those who wants the doubtful popularity, so aspire to use these historic facts. Thus, blaming the past, don't give any accurate programs what to do in the present.

Other method of such discrimination influence is a theme of a civil society. They often accuse Ukraine and Russia that they have "insufficiently" civil society. But thus don't give the accurate definitions what is such civil society. The disorders which now occur in Europe is a civil society? That occurs now in the European Union, namely in Greece, Italy, Spain? This aggravation of internal problems is one of the aspiration reasons to find guilty somewhere outside.

- Thus, is it possible to ascertain, that the revanchist attempts to recoup on the historical past are caused in many respects by internal political problems of these European states?

It is necessary to consider, of course, the colloborist past of these countries. But in modern conditions it both economic and political problems existing in them. Can Romania make the order in the state which would promote the development and the country normal state? We see that can't. In the same way, as many other European countries. And thus it wants to take Moldova under "guardianship", creates there the Proromanian lobby. It does not turn out yet. There was a successful attempt to tear off a piece of Ukraine. But it has gone right because it was a gift from Yushchenko.

And now the Romanians bring the question of the Danube channels, demand to move the border. But it is caused not by aspiration to develop the state but to find the possibilities to receive not known whence the taken profits. Outwardly it is the rhetoric on justice search but as a matter of fact it is a struggle in the international competition.

- Is the support of neo-Nazism in the East Europe states a part of the general company on revision of the historical past of the countries of the former USSR?

If to consider the neo-Nazism strategy, so what it justifies in all East Europe states? That it struggled with a totalitarian regime of the USSR. If to look in the Baltic States, in the Western Ukraine, so there is one justification of neo-Nazi movements everywhere in present time – there was a struggle against the Soviet totalitarian aggressor and we are the successors of this movement.

But don't we observe here, that the ideological maintenance of these movements, "blessing" on struggle, "indulgence" are just the decisions accepted in the European Union? Whether casually or intentionally, but it becomes the parts of one whole - the acceptance of "Warsaw declaration" and other resolutions where the totalitarian regime and actions of neo-Nazis are condemned which are justified by means of the same rhetoric.

Except this tendency, the neo-Nazism support, unfortunately, is necessary to the governments of those states, where it develops to be kept in power. So it is a question of the justification of legitimacy in the Eastern Europe, not so long ago the arisen ruling regimes, strengthening of their power. The problems connected with scale emigration in the Western Europe. All it causes the activization of neo-Nazi movements as the attempt by inadequate, "simple" way to solve these problems. There are the appeals of creation of the mononational states and others radical slogans. I do not think that it will strongly develop because in the Europe there is no necessity that any state became fascist. In the conditions of the Schengen zone it will be very heavy "gift". But while this nationalist card is played, though it conducts in anywhere, but can result in accident.

- Are these resolutions and political decisions of the European Union the attempt to strike blow on fundamental concepts of national identity of the people of the former USSR, namely on the Great Victory, the aspiration somehow to discredit, belittle the importance of heroic events of our general history?

The most interesting, if to compare the administrative efficiency of present state system and that which existed in 40-50 years, so we can draw following conclusions: the strategic targets of the campaign occurring in Europe are the suggestion of special feeling of inferiority of Russia and Ukraine by those periods of the past when these states were most effective and made the most heroic acts. I.e., as a matter of fact, to cut the grass from under feet of these states. And there are objective geopolitical reasons. Russia has started to develop and be restored actively, has overcome the consequences of world crisis more successfully many other states, creates the common economic space. Therefore the western countries can't simply ignore such state of affairs at the competitor. Certainly, it is impossible to rehabilitate Stalin and his environment.

But in the conditions of the international competitive struggle the state should have a strong historical and world outlook base and the citizens should have the pride of the country. In the history of the majority of the European states there were many bloody and terrible pages. But it doesn't prevent to glorify it positive sides of the history. Why should we make differently? Why we urged to refuse all past, to repent for it? The answer is simple – to weaken us in the present and to receive the certain benefits from it.