Abstract: The past is never past, wrote William Faulkner. The great American writer had in mind his native Mississippi, but he might as well have written those words about Poland. Indeed, among history-conscious Poles, the findings of historians have had far-reaching social and political consequences that transcend the esoteric discussions of scholars. This was corroborated in recent times by the emergence of a discourse in Poland over what some have called polityka historyczna (Geschichtspolitik, or history policy), which focuses on the question of whether historians who write of the less glorious episodes in Polish history are actually acting against the interests of the nation. Many Polish historians, including the best-known scholars among them, have protested against this suggestion, which poses a clear danger to the fidelity of their discipline. The dissolution of the Communist regime in Poland at the end of the 1980s made possible the deconstruction of every aspect of contemporary history. The process of reconstruction, begun in earnest, proved to be complex and painful. This was particularly the case when dealing with the bitterest chapters in the millennial story of Polish-Jewish relations, which were, and continue to be, the subject of popular and intellectual discussion as well as serious scholarly research. Out of this process emerged a new understanding of history, one that renders much of the earlier canon on the topic virtually obsolete. It had, in fact, been under way for some years even before the collapse of Communism – especially in the pages of Poland’s extraordinarily vibrant underground press and also, to an impressive extent given the prevailing censorship, in those of Poland’s legally operated independent Catholic press. Polish émigré journals were also regularly smuggled into Poland and had significant influence. Nevertheless, it was only with the collapse of the old regime and the birth of Poland’s Third Republic that this activity could be carried out without interference and Poland could finally undergo its own Vergangenheitsbewältigung (coming to terms with the past). This chapter discusses the evolution of Poland’s confrontation with the destruction of Polish Jewry.
Abstract: Sixty years after the deportations of the Jews, it is perhaps time for Belgium, following the example of France, to acknowledge the Belgian state’s involvement in and accountability for the Nazi persecutions carried out on its territory. True, there are no grounds for comparing France and Belgium. France had a government – a head of state, ministers, and public services – which was independent, collaborationist and officially racist, whereas Belgium’s government, at odds with the king, had opted for exile. Nevertheless, from Brussels to Antwerp, via Liège and Charleroi, Nazi Germany could not have implemented the Final Solution without the active cooperation of local intermediaries, in the public services and the police force alike. Otherwise, it is inconceivable that fifteen German SS personnel could have organized the deportation from Belgium of some 25,000 individuals. Until recently, community-based conflicts kept the Shoah from occupying a place in the heart of Belgian memory of World War II. Now, although the path has been a rocky one, the Jews have set foot on the terrain of the history of World War II in Belgium. This chapter is divided into two parts. The first part will analyze Belgium’s perception of collaboration, concentrating mainly on political differences over this issue between Flanders and the two largely francophone regions of Belgium, Brussels and Wallonia. The second part will examine the country’s complex attitude to the memory of the Holocaust, and particularly to Belgian collaboration in the deportation of the Jews, and to the interests and compensation of Jewish victims and their descendants.
