Politization of history and its role on the international relations: theoretical and empirical analysis on example of Polish-German relations

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Politization of history and its role on the international relations: theoretical and empirical analysis on example of Polish-German relations

Stetsiuk N.M., PhD in Historical Sciences, Head of the International Relations Department; Boichuk O.I., PhD in Political Sciences, Senior Lecturer at the International Relations Department; Strutynska T.Z., PhD in Political Sciences, Associate Professor at the International Relations Department, Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University

Abstract

Development of bilateral relations between States is a complex and multifaceted process. There are many factors to affect the quality, and sometimes-quantitative characteristics of the relationship. For example: economic feasibility (bilateral patterns of trade, economic interest in partners, and level of investment attractiveness), political expediency (to what extent the partner country is of interest to political elites or the public), image of the country within society, cultural cooperation level. To the above list, which is by no means exhaustive, historical memory should be added. Historical memory of yourself and partner's country, or how this term is articulated within a given society.

Keywords: Historical memory, Historical politics, Bilateral relations, Poland, Germany, Theoretical approaches.

Introduction

It is difficult to deny the importance of historical memory in the process of the nation preservation and consolidation. At the same time, there is again a problem of distinction between the terms. We consider the categories `national memory' and `historical memory'. For a thorough coverage of the issue, we are going to describe an understanding of these terms and their derivatives. We also address what is a derivative, and what is a common term in the Ukrainian researchers' papers. Russian scientists have their visions of the implication and use of the term too, but mostly it is similar to Ukrainian and polish research approach.

Research

Some aspects of the memory policy in Ukraine in its various manifestations (taking into account ideological, ethnic, religious and other factors) are actively being studied by such scientists as V. Vyatrovich [Vyatrovich, 2019], M. Gon [Gon, 2012], A. Kyrydon [Êèðèäîí, 2010, 2011], A. Konik, Yu. Opalko [Opalko, 2009], V. Soldatenko [Soldatenko, 2011]. A common element in the papers is the consideration of historical politics in a Ukrainian context, with some analysis by foreign scholars.

According to L. Nagorna, the leading Ukrainian scholar in historical politics, the way in which a State forms its national identity stereotype determines which mode of evaluation of the past it prefers.

F. Artogh identifies three choices, according to him, an inadequate "regime of historicity": passeism, an excessive focus on the past and its dramatization; presentism, a comprehension of the past in the context of actualized demands of the present, and futurism, searching the connecting links between the past and the future [Artog, 2002]. F. Artogh has negative opinion about any political interference in historical facts and the use of history for political interests. It is an instrumentalization of history that has a negative impact. However, the focus is concentrated on philosophical reflections on the role of the history and the historian, on its objectivity.

V. Rasevych considers instrumentalization of history to be a negative phenomenon, which can lead to deterioration of relations within society, as well as relations with external partners of Ukraine. According to him, "instrumentalized history is a history selected to serve a specific political agenda"[Baturyn] that is, history is used as a tool for political propaganda. To some extent, we agree that instrumentalization is a negative phenomenon.

Ukrainian researcher Y. Zerniy links historical politics to "the implementation of the Ukrainian national project" [Zerniy, 2008, p. 46). The article is entirely devoted to the argument for historical politics in Ukraine, which should become a foundation for new Ukrainian nation. In defining historical memory, the author notes that "recorded in the forms of knowledge, cultural stereotypes, symbols and myths, historical memory is a unique collection of the national community ideas about its past" [Zerniy, 2008, p. 42]. As we can see, it is about the fact that historical memory is closely related to the concept of "nation" and is linked to nationalization or the usurpation of history through one nation is observed.

V. Soldatenko, a former head of the Institute of National Memory of Ukraine (hereinafter - INMU), also presents historical politics through the prism of historical memory and its national identity, calling it a policy of national memory [Soldatenko, 2011, p. 13].

Following the concept of historical politics, the term “historical memory” is highlighted. It is noted that “historical memory” and “history of memory” should not be confused. We consider the “history of memory” as a category that is not related to the political science and international relations, rather it is related to history and philosophy, or is a part of the of a historical methodology study. As pointed out by L. Nagorna [Nagorna, 2012, p. 114] and V. Stelmakh [Stelmakh, 2006, pp. 10-11], while studying “Theory of possible histories” by R. Kozelleck, the history of memory is the object of this theory and the general characteristic of historical phenomena, considers the problem of the relationship between the modalities of time - past, present and future ” [Stelmakh, 2012, p. 114]. Nevertheless, historical memory is a part of political science and international relations, because historical politics is actually aimed at the formation of a vision of history, and thereby the formation of historical memory.

Jorn Rusen, a German scholar, concludes that historical memory, on the one hand, is the mental capacity of a subject to retain memories of the experience lived through, which is the basis for the formation of historical consciousness, and on the other hand, it is a result of certain sensemaking operations when memories are produced during the historical consciousness formation as a result of comprehension of historical experience [Polianskii, 1999, p. 17]. In fact, it confirms our distinction and defines historical memory to be an object of historical politics. According to J. Rusen, sense-making operations are part of vision of history formation. However, this is not always a negative connotation of the concept, as sense-making operation can be a part of a historian's activity, who being an expert, intends to systematize his field studies or archival operations, presenting his opinions and making conclusions.

Exploring the process of constructing national memory in Ukraine, the author A. Volianiuk divides discussions on the relationship of history and politics into two directions. Thus, “the polemic regarding the role and importance of the state, as well as other socio-political actors in the construction of public memory has been reflected in the developed theoretical approaches. [...] they can be conditionally divided into two groups” [Volianiuk, 2012, p. 178]. The author presents two types. The first is a value-based approach, represented by A. Miller and G. Mink, who define memory policy as various social practices and norms, including projection of the past for the sake of the future and taking place in the public space through a dialogue between historians and social forces. He defines another group of approaches to historical politics as an instrumental interpretation. The value approach means the creation of historical politics through a democratic dialogue that allows you «freely present your own visions of the past in public space." [Volianiuk, 2012, p. 178].

As opposed to democratic dialogue, the instrumental approach is based on the statist monologue, which bears the primacy of the state in the creation of historical politics [Volianiuk, 2012, pp. 179-182].

O. Volianiuk believed that the value-based interpretation of historical politics should be used and considers it to be one of the important elements in creating the identity of the Ukrainian people. We believe that the division into value and instrumental types of historical politics is appropriate.

It is noteworthy that an instrumental approach to historical politics was used in Poland and in the former German Democratic Republic (hereafter referred to as the GDR) during the Cold War. In recent years, the examples of the instrumental approach can also be observed in Poland. We can state that the first example of instrumental approach was initiative 2006, in which the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Poland gave instructions to diplomatic offices regarding the "incorrect memory code" to be used in the media and other publications [Polish: Wadliwy kod pami^ci, Interwencje], The most recent interference in the media activity (hereinafter referred to as "the media") took place in the United Kingdom [UK ? ?, Twitter] regarding Mark Santora's article in The New York Times, where the term "Polish Death Camps” [Polish: polskie obozy koncentracyjne] was used [UK ? ?, 2018T07:34, Twitter].

The latest example of the aforementioned approach to the historical politics was the adoption of the Law “On the Institute of National Remembrance of Poland” [Komisji Scigania Zbrodni przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu, no date], especially in the case of punishment for misinterpretation of history. In fact, the article is dedicated to that process [Santora].

In his other paper, the author addresses the issue of memory conflict in political processes. Thus, according to O. Volianiuk, "conflict of memories" can become radical and lead to violence [Volianiuk, 2013, p. 46]. “The conflict of memories is a dangerous socio-political phenomenon, as its participants do not try to find out the historical truth, but only seek and select for their own position, which, in time, can have devastating consequences for the social development" [Volianiuk, 2013, p. 46]. Politicians and political forces use the past to get power by using controversial and ambiguous arguments and facts. This, in turn, leads to a conflict between supporters of various political forces. The conflict can go beyond a country in case a ruling political force pursues a policy of historical memory that runs counter to the narrative of historical politics among the political elite of another country.

The conflict of memories can also be observed in the international arena. The situation takes place in Ukraine-Poland and Israel- Poland relations after the last amendments to the Law “On the Institute of National Remembrance of Poland” in early 2018 were adopted.

O. Volianiuk distinguishes between two types of conflicts of memories: real and artificially created. The real ones are the conflicts based on “inherited confrontational memories” [Volianiuk, 2013, p. 48]. The subjects of these memories are real persons with real memories of the past. Artificially created conflicts are usually provoked by political forces [Volianiuk, 2013, p. 48].

There is often no distinction between the terms "memory policy" and "historical politics" in Ukrainian scientific, public and political discourse.

However, professor L. Nagorna believes that there is a difference between these concepts. So "memory policy" is a general notion and "historical politics" is a clarifying denomination for the processes taking place when the State intervened in memory policy” [Nagorna, 2012, p. 113]. It is understood that “memory policy” " determines the process of forming a vision of past in the society. And “historical politics” is a certain branch of the memory policy, which takes into account the interference of the State and the formation of a historical identity through a certain instrument or State body.

However, according to L. Nagorna, to distinguish between these two terms and provide them with an appropriate definition, consensus and agreement in the scientific community is needed. “But agreement in interdisciplinary communication is a rare phenomenon” [Nagorna, 2012, p. 113]. It should be noted that the author pointed out that historical politics is of interdisciplinary nature, which increases challenge for the term definition and characterization and most likely depends on science. Taking into consideration the complexity and the lack of compromise among the scientific community, L. Nagorna notes that determining approaches and terms in the field “one has to focus on those traditions regarding application of the terms that had been developed in individual countries” [Nagorna, 2012, p. 113].

O. Volianiuk emphasizes the interdisciplinarity of the «memory policy" and "historical politics" studies. According to her “[...] interdisciplinary basis of memory studies, which combine history, political science, sociology, anthropology, literature, arts, and social psychology” [Nagorna, 2013, p. 51]. On the other hand, we consider that the theory of international relations should be added to the above list.

In her paper, L. Nagorna has identified two traditions: German and Polish. Thus, according to the author, historical politics is a socio-political conceptual apparatus, which is not only an indicator of change, but also a socio-political factor that shapes the mentality and provide guidance within a society (in relation to its past - Author's note) [Nagorna, 2012, p. 113]. By the way, this definition applies to memory policy in Germany.

Exploring the issue, the contemporary Russian researcher A. Miller, notes that about the memory policy “we speak when referring to practices and rules related to the regulation of collective memory." The scholar proposes to distinguish "the politicization of history as a phenomenon that exists for a long time and in any way is inevitable"[Miller, 2007, p. 6].

According to A. Miller, "if memory policy can be more or less open to the influence or dialogue of different social forces and historians, or generate new conflicts by created images of the past," then historical politics (in the original , A. Miller gives the term - "politicization of history" [Miller, 2007, p. 6) - Author's note) - "is a fundamentally new, much more intensive interfering with history interpretation by the part of the political elite that controls the government at the moment, to fight internal opposition and to achieve certain goals in the nation-building" and also to gain some advantages in international relations" [Kyrydon, 2010, p. 118] . As we can see, there is a division between the terms "historical politics" and "memory policy".

The point is that memory policy is a natural process that takes place in any society. Its purpose is the role of society in the world, the search for its identity and, ultimately, the formation of its own identity.

In continuation of his vision for history and politics, A. Miller points out that the process of politicization of history is a fait accompli [Miller, 2007, p. 6]. The process of politicization of history begins from a historian, because he is always influenced by the situation, whether political or public, when working on the study of history. His conclusions, despite scientific methodology and aiming to objectify any science, have his own subjective basis [Miller, 2007, pp. 6-8].

Presenting his vision for memory policy, A. Miller speaks of a rather interesting process - "forgetting or not remembering" (Russian: çàáûâàíèå). "Forgetting is used when a society does not touch on certain specific, more often not distant (in time - Author's note) events that are especially painful and those that generate o contribute to conflict in a society"[ Miller, 2007, p. 6].

Looking through the development of historical politics in West Germany (hereinafter referred to as the WG), we can say that such events took place after 1949 in the WG, and especially during the reign of Chancellor K. Adenauer. It should be noted that A. Miller points to similar processes, which have had place in other countries - in the case of the Vichy government in France and in relation to the Spanish Civil War [Miller, 2007, p. 6[. Typically, the issues the society would like to forget, in the future are of high interest for historians and society [Miller, 2007, pp. 4-8]. Then we are back to WG where in the 1960s and 1970s, there were used new approaches to the past of Germany.

Presenting his vision for history and politics, A. Miller also mentions historical politics. According to him, historical politics is a political phenomenon that must be explored, "first and foremost as a part of politics" [Miller, 2007, p. 8]. Historical politics is different from the politicization of history. A. Miller describes historical politics as "the relationship between politics and history, where politics is the primary and history is the extra" [Miller, 2007, p. 8]. It should be noted that the author has a positive attitude towards historical politics and has a negative vision about the politicization of history, dividing them and presenting the above-mentioned definition of historical politics.

In modern conditions of democratization and pluralization of society, new mechanisms of historical politics are emerging. A. Miller points out that historical politics implementation is not a new phenomenon. It also took place in the past. However, comparing the historical politics of the Soviet Union and the post-Soviet countries at the present stage of development, he notes that they have received or developed new mechanisms to “legitimize” historical truth.

Thus, according to the author, the mechanisms of implementation of "historical politics" can be conditionally divided into two categories: institutional and legislative. The institutional dimension of historical politics is manifested, first, in the creation of special institutions that study and develop historical politics. We are talking about the Institute of National Remembrance of Poland (hereinafter - INR) (Polish: Instytut Pami^ci Narodowej) in Poland and Ukraine, in 1999 [Andrychowicz-Skrzeba, 2014, p. 167] and 2006 [Kasyanov, and Miller, 2011, p. 14], respectively. Another manifestation of the historical politics institutionalization is the creation of museums under the direct "patronage of individual political forces"[Kasyanov, and Mille, 2011, p. 11].

The legislative category includes various enacted laws, which makes it an offence for those who «deny such (an official- Author's note) interpretation [Kasyanov, and Mille, 2011, p. 11]”. An example of the recent legislative instrumentation of history is the adoption of amendments to the Law "On the Institute of National Remembrance of Poland» in Poland, which at the initiative of A. Duda has been sent to the Polish Constitutional Court. It should be noted that it going on criminal liability in the case of public thoughts, which impute facts about crime against people, which made by Polish populations and Polish state [O co chodzi z tq ustawq o IPN? Tlumaczymy, kto sic cieszy, a kto mapretensje, no date]. Also, need pay attention that criminal liability aren't researchers and artists [Komisji Scigania Zbrodni przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu, no date].

Professor G. Kasianov gives an interesting example of instrumentalisation. Exploring the processes of historical politics making in Ukraine, and especially the politicization of the events of the Holodomor famine of 1932-1933, G. Kasianov notes that a standing working group was established at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine in 2005 to draft "position papers and coordinate activities of embassies, aimed at promotion knowledge about the Holodomor. The group and heads of foreign diplomatic missions has worked closely with Ukrainian Diaspora organizations” [Kasianov, 2007, p. 38]. Thus, we can see the transition of historical politics to international relations.

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in memory issues not only among academics but also among politicians. However, referring to politicians, they use historical politics for their own political purposes. Thus, according to J. Mink, in recent years, " we observed the open use of historical tools in public affairs (for example, when the use of the conflicting past served to Mitterrand / Kohl pairing ; not to improve relations [...], but to mobilize electorate of a particular party or coalition around their intended goals [or, Author's note] symbolic [or - Author's note] militant demands in the domestic arena and in the interaction with the outside world "[ Mink and Neimeier, 2007, p. 16]. We are interested in the vision of J. Mink about historical strategies and their role in the bilateral relations, or in other words, in bilateral agreement. We believe that J. Mink sees the historical politics through the strategies of historicizing a conflictogenic legacy [Mink and Neimeier, 2007, p. 16].

Thus according to him, these strategies have three different objectives, depending on the goals set by “leaders”. “Strategies are aimed at reaching consensus (the principle of reconciliation of society) or, conversely, they are aimed at opening some aspects of the displacement of history (the principle of distinction, symbolic recognition and integration into a national historical narrative), or to escape from responsibility, “erasing traces of the criminal past" [Mink, 2009, pp. 64-71].

In his paper, Kyrydon presents historical politics as a set of social practices aimed at representing (or modifying) certain images of the past actualized by the contemporary political context. That is, history is becoming an instrument of modern politics. The scientist also presents the basic features of historical politics [Kyrydon, 2016, p. 217]. Thus, according to A. Kyrydon, memory policy:

- concerns primarily the interpretation of the past [Mink, 2016, p. 217). As a result, the history is revised and used in accordance with the purpose set by the policy maker. That is in line with the vision of J. Mink for historization strategies;

- is developed in view of the specific external and internal factors of the functioning of the State and the nature of political power [Kyrydon, 2016, p. 217]. In this case, we can take into account the historical politics that took place in the Polish People's Republic (hereinafter - the PPR). According to the Soviet ideology, there was fear of the German foreign policy concept "Movement to the East" (German: "Drang nach Osten") in Poland during the Cold War. However, it should be noted that this concept was either «mitigated" or "aggravated» in accordance with the external and internal political situation;

- historical politics is an important component of the humanitarian policy [Kyrydon, 2016, p. 217]. The point is that the State has always had some strategy of historical politics, which might not have any official document, but was expressed by support of one or another historical narrative. An illustrative example is Poland and much more Ukraine;

- it is characterized by actualization and selectivity, focused on some events, heroes or places, ignoring others [Kyrydon, 2016, p. 217]. Such situation took place in the historical discourse of West Germany in the early 50s and 60s.

Thus, according to the author, memory policy is a reflection of: the experience of society, the current status of its basic institutions, its socio-political structure, the balance of social forces and beliefs and evaluation of politicians and state leaders [Kyrydon, 2016, p. 218].

N. Yakovenko's opinion is slightly different, she states: “Historical memory is just a beautiful metaphor. Human memory of past experiences usually can reach up to three generations, so it is a fictional image of the past, some kind of "collective experience" that consolidates the community ... In this sense, "historical memory" is identical to the myth, from the chaotic flow of things it chooses only some, necessary to society, and it also allows to overcome the temporality and brevity of a human life” [Yakovenko, 2007, p. 34].

In accordance with the subject matter, it is also necessary to understand the approaches to "historical politics" in German and Polish scientific circles.

For several years, historical politics has been actively used in the debate, both public and scientific. According K. Woycicki [Woycicki, 2004, p. 12] and J. Andrychowicz-Skszeba [Andrychowicz-Skrzeba, 2014, p. 17], it is difficult to determine the date on which this term began to be used in Polish science. L. Nagorna [Nagorna, 2012, p. 114], R. Traba [Traba, 2004, pp. 871- 873], and A. Miller [Miller, 2007, p. 23] file the year 2004. However, now it is an integral term in the study of both the state of bilateral relations with neighboring countries and the attitude to its past within a country.

The term "historical politics" has caused many interpretative problems for researchers. Although the phenomenon itself is known and recognized, there is no general definition of it in scientific discourse. There are at least a few concepts in scientific discourse that are closely related to it, and two of them are used most often: memory policy [Zaborski, 2011, p. 14] and policy of the past (Meier, 1997, pp. 202-206). Sometimes they also use the term «culture of memory" [Wawrzyniak, 2013, pp. 233-234].

All of them are parallel and are often seen as synonymous. Each science posits its own meanings and differences. Reviewing papers of Polish authors, we can point out to some common aspects. For example, sociologists are more likely to use the term "memory policy", and political scientists are increasingly inclined to use the term "historical politics". In Polish, both terms are calques from other languages [Miller, 2007, p. 7; Nagorna, 2012, p. 114].

Historical politics comes from German (German: Geschichtspolitik). It is believed that the term became popular in the eighties of the twentieth century, and was first used in the scientific discourse by Ch. Meier, at the Congress of German historians in Trier in the year 1986 [Wolff- Pow^ska, 2007, pp. 3-4].

The definition was mainly used by the researchers studying the XX century issues and soon gained a negative connotation. It should also be noted that the term had been used in the debate of German historians on the assessment of national socialism, which became the public debate in the 80th of the 20th century in Germany.

This term indicated primarily the deliberate instrumentalization of history for political purposes and for specific achievements. At that time, it was nearly always used in a negative way [Wolff-Pow^ska, 2007, pp. 7-9].

Polish academia takes into account two concepts: “historical politics” and “policy regarding the past”. J. Andrychowicz-Skcheba also connects the use of “historical politics” or “policy regarding the past” with the German terms “Geschichtspolitik” and “Vergangenheitspolitik”, respectively [Andrychowicz-Skrzeba, 2014, p. 18]. The concept appeared in the German literature much earlier, immediately after the end of World War II (hereinafter -WW II). According to her scientific searches, the “policy of historical memory” as a term was introduced in Polish science by M. Czichocki [Andrychowicz-Skrzeba, 2014, p. 18]. K. Woycicki in his scientific explorations has the same opinion [Woycicki, 2004, p. 17].

It should be also noted that according to German journalist and publicist A. Mix (Mix), the term is rarely used nowadays in Germany. “I want to note that at this historical stage, the term“historical politics (German: Geschichtspolitik)” is rarely used in German scientific thought” [...] This is due to its meaning. In the Federal Republic of Germany, which was created after WWII, this term was used to describe events related to the crimes committed by the Nazis, as well as to define their policy, both internal and external, in the context of finding those responsible for the crimes”. The introduction of this term in German scientific and public discourse is associated with the government of G. Kohl [Wolff-Pow^ska, 2007, p. 17]. Cancelour Kohl, being a historian by training, decided to use historical issues to confirm his political success. He appointed M. Sturmer, a professional historian, as his political adviser and started talking about the need for a “moral-political turn” in Germany. A thesis to confirm more positive character of German Patriotism was an important element of the “turn” [Miller, 2007, p. 8]. It meant that patriotism or social identity of the German people should not be based only on pleading guilty for the crimes of the Third Reich. As A. Milller notes, “historical politics” (German: Geschichtspolitik) in this sense was closed [Miller, 2007, p. 8].

The term culture of memory (from German «Erinnerungskultur») or “policy regarding the memory” (from German Erinnerungspolitik) are used in the temporary German science much more often” (Mix, no date).

J. Andrychowicz-Skszeba in his work "Historical politics in Poland and Germany after 1989» uses the term "historical politics" [Andrychowicz-Skrzeba, 2014, p. 14]. According to her, "historical politics is a reflection or interpretation of history in accordance with the current political situation in the country." It should be noted that this concept defines historical politics well enough, and we can use it for our further scientific study. At the same time, J. Andrykhovych-Sksheba gives other concepts of historical politics in her monograph.

According to her, historical politics is also a process or tendency in politics that consists in recognizing the influence of history on current political problems or the processes of existing and future programs, which are concerned to the knowledge of the past [Andrychowicz-Skrzeba, 2014, p. 38]. The point is that this is a conceptual aspect of historical politics. It takes into account the fact historical memory and its functioning have a certain program basis, according to which it is carried out in the society. The other definition, given by the author, relates to the formation of the consciousness of a society in general and its individual elements. It is an individual or a community. According to her, historical politics is a process of creating a historical consciousness of a society, the purpose of which is to unite the society around the proposed political program [Andrychowicz- Skrzeba, 2014, p. 38]/

Her definition may include some elements of advocacy. At the same time, this definition shows the negative aspects of historical politics. To unite society, political parties or political leaders can use history in “the right” context in order to increase their electorate.

The process of forming a "right" knowledge of history sometimes has nothing to do with objective facts. That can often be used by political parties for their own political purposes. A practical example of the use of historical politics is the influence of public authorities on the formation of related to history school curricula. Another example would be selection of historical persons and historical events to naming streets, squares etc.

One of the most recent examples is a direct falsification of history and historical facts or the manipulation of the glorification of historical persons, organizations or events. In Poland, during the period of the People's Republic of Poland, the situation regarding the Warsaw Ghetto uprising in 1945-1946 can be also served as an example. R. Kobylazh writes that in order to consolidate their legitimacy the Soviet authorities had to rebuild the attitudes of the Polish population. To change the attitudes the Soviet authorities used the glorification of the persons they considered to be relevant [Kobylarz, 2009, pp. 178-190].

M. Gavin, Vice-director of the Warsaw Uprising Museum, presents a vision for historical politics as a field related to the foreign policy of the State. In his article in Zhychie (Polish: Zycie) in 2000, M. Gavin sees historical politics as a tool for interpretation of historical facts and events which democratic governments use to achieve their political ends [Nijakowski, 2008, p. 43].

M. Chikhotski, former director of the European College of Natolin (Polish: Centrum Europejski Natolin) in Warsaw, defines historical politics as a phenomenon in itself. Historical politics is in every country and it is always different. In other words, the State uses historical politics to consolidate society or to create an opinion “friend-or-foe”; to do this the appropriate instruments and facts are needed [Nijakowski, 2008, p. 48]. In the realities of Poland, the term "historical memory" appears to be random and reflects the process of understanding one's past. Accordingly, the existence of “historical politics” as an institution or instrument is more important for existing the society than its definition.

Historical politics is the process of strengthening public discussion or interest about the past within a country and abroad through various institutions, both public and private [Nijakowski, 2008, p. 48].

The historical politics of Poland is a range of actions aimed not only to receive reproaches from the Federation of Expellees (Germ: Bund der Vertriebenen) (hereinafter referred to as FE), it is, above all the struggle for historical truth, the struggle for the place of Poland and the Poles in Europe. This understanding of historical politics reflects its pragmatic nature and aims to shape the image of the country abroad. Through the instruments of diplomacy, the State in the international arena and in bilateral relations is trying to build its own scheme of the past and show its past in the best ligh [Rozmowa z Boguslawem Sonikiem:Walka o Polske, regiony i Europe]. At the same time, there is a danger in such a statement. Practical manipulation of historical memory creates a precedent for subjective interpretation and its instrumentalization under a separate political power. When falsifying historical past political forces can use a subjective approach to the vision of history. Their views haven't nothing common, in extreme cases, with methodological researches and empirical facts.

L.M. Nijakowski presents his vision of historical politics as a various activities, which may be conscious or not, constant, systematic, or sporadic. In his paper he uses the term "memory policy". This activity is aimed at strengthening the public memory of the Poles or changing it. He believes that all the citizens are involved in implementation of the memory policy by the publication of memoirs of their ancestors, writing various materials on the Internet or participating in celebrations dedicated to significant events in the history of a town, region or country as a whole [Nijakowski, 2008, p. 73].

According to L.M. Nijakowski, the memory policy is politicians' and government officials' activities with formal power to establish, eliminate or revise the content of social memory. He compares the national memory to propaganda activities [Nijakowski, 2008, p. 73]. In order to strengthen its legitimacy the State via its institutions seeks to change public memory of its citizens. Both democratic governments and totalitarian ones carry out propaganda on memory policy. Propaganda can be defined as the process of controlling the flow of information, managing public opinion, or manipulating public beliefs. In this case, public or better write, national, as we mentioned above, memory policy can be seen as a process of controlling information in a society (Nijakowski, 2008, p. 73). An example would be the Polish Government's policy of using the term "Polish concentration camps" in foreign media.

Another practical option for implementation a national memory policy can be seen in the process of school curriculum developing or l through school education in general. L.M. Nijakowski gives an example of use the terms “enemy" and “traitor" in school curriculum [Nijakowski, 2008, p. 74]. In this way the opinion about a politician or certain population is formed.

K. Kqcka, who tried to deal with the issue of historical politics in Poland, stated that "... after Poland regained its independence, the issue of historical memory was constantly subject to change"[Kqcka, 2015, p. 60].

The author believes that there was no question of who and what to remember, it was about a change in approach to the historical politics issues. Historical politics and debates about the past take place in three areas: politics, academic debate, and intellectuals' environments (Kqcka, 2015, p. 61). According to the author, intellectual are people who with their works create different debates in society. We are talking about writers, publicist or publicly recognized individuals [Kqcka, 2015, pp. 70-75].

Following the breakup of the Soviet Union and collapse of communist ideology, there were some developments concerning historical politics in Poland. As M. Saryusz-Wolska notes, almost all issues related to the past, are in public discussions and are carried out mainly by those who are associated with political parties or politics in general [Saryusz-Wolska, 2009, pp. 15-16]. Regardless of academical discover or of level of research of historical issues, the level of conducting of debate about historical issues usually depends on politicians [Saryusz-Wolska, 2009, pp. 15-16. Important role in the historical debates plays the media. That's also argues A. Kyrydon. On the other hand, M. Sariusz-Volska gives the media a secondary role and notes that the importance of the discussions is mostly represented in the modern media: `it is worth stressing that because of the social media explosion the importance of their traditional counterparts: radio, television and press (print media- Author's note) is much less” [Saryusz-Wolska, 2009, p. 18]. She further notes that the Internet is a perfect tool (in the hands of politicians - Author's note) to influence people and their vision of historical events [Saryusz-Wolska, 2009, p. 18].

K. Kqcka emphasizes the role of politicians in the processes of discussing the past and points to an "emotional dispute" regarding Y. T. Gros's book. Accordingly, it is an issue of the extermination of the Jews by the polish population in Poland [Kqcka, 2015, p. 60]. Thus, K. Kqcka notes, «political arguments have dominated in the debate (concerning the extermination of the Jews by the Polish population - Author's note)” [Kqcka, 2015, p. 60]. According to K. Kqcka, the same situation is happening now with the “cursed soldiers” (Polish: zolnierzy wykl^te). In the process of glorification of the “cursed soldiers” and in the public 'debate on this issue, policy makers play the most important role [Kqcka, 2015, p. 71].

Politicians play an important role in the process of historical politics making and we can assume that it is the most important one. However, any politician is intended solely to gain power. Therefore, they often distort historical facts in the debate on historical events. The obvious question here is why experts in history do not act as arbiters or moderators in the process of historical politics making.

In the context of Poland, K. Kqcka gives quite interesting vision of that and notes, “there are several reasons for this”. According to her, the first and, most likely, one of the most important in Ukraine and Germany is the professional circles tightness. It should be also noted that this was the case in Germany only in the 1950s. That was the conclusion Anna Wolf-Powi^ska [Wolf-Powi^ska, 2011, pp. 75-103], the Polish researcher, and A. Huyssen [Huyssen, 1991, pp. 112-118], the American researcher, have reached. According K. Kqcka, "scholars are accustomed to writing (their papers - Author's note) for themselves, and the debate on historical issues is held in closed environments and is not accessible to an external listener ". The author also points to the reasons, which are the role of the Soviet science system and a lack of willingness on the part of scientists to expose their scientific findings «to the world" [Kqcka, 2015, p. 61].

According to K. Kqcka, challenges that face the intellectuals' proactive position include insufficient funding to ensure their participation in historical debate and negative public attitude towards intellectuals' interventions [Kqcka, 2015, pp. 62-64], which might raise painful to society topics and lead to a rejection in the society of their ideas. In the 60s, this has also been an experience in Germany in connection with K. Jaspers' speech, which caused an indignation in the society or Thuringen Memorandum publication in 1961. Another example might be production of films that was a disappointment to the society. This is about the Holocaust film screened in 19781979 of the 20^th century in the territory of West Germany. In Poland, they had the similar situation with the film Aftermath (Polish: Poklosie), which touches on a subject that many Poles do not accept - cases where Poles were rounding up, and in some cases, killing Jews.

K. Kqcka, in our view, presents an interesting thesis about different types of historical politics depending on the role of experts, intellectuals and politicians in the process. According to her, there are two types of historical politics: German and Polish [Kqcka, 2015, p. 63]. Others are representation or combination of these policies. We can cautionary accept that thesis as historical politics in USA and France was not taken into account. In addition, that very well may be the fact. To study German-Polish relations it is an argument for a separate presentation of the development of historical politics in Poland and Germany.

Almost all States and most political forces are involved in historical politics. Public memory and policy regarding the past are integral phenomena. K. Kqcka notes that the interference of politicians in the process of forming a meaningful and ideologically filled memory space is interpreted as a norm of political life of society [Kqcka, 2015, p. 67]. Therefore, it is worth considering the concept of T. Adorno.

Studying the process of historical politics making in Germany, T. Adorno uses the processes connected with role and activity of national-socialism. It should be noted that the author considers such processes negative. In his article, which was published in 1977 under the title “What does the processing of the past mean” (German: Was bedeutet: Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit) [Adorno], the author refers to the events that took place in the Western Germany in the 50's - 60's of the 20th century and had concerning, as writed these processes E. Wolfrum, N. Frei and A. Wolff-Powi^ska as «silence»

He is opposed to the K. Adenauer's policy in the field of historical politics, which he defines as “processing of the past”. He believes that government policy should be minimal in this issue. The scholar considers total forgiveness and oblivion, which took place in the West Ukraine in 50's 60,'s to be an ominous trend [Adorno]. He defines that process as “processing of the past” (German: Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit) [Adorno].

In his vision of the processes that took place in the past in the West Ukraine and the attitude to these processes, he concludes that "distortion of facts, avoid of self-criticism, oblivion (crimes of National Socialism - Author's not.) Can be defined as a certain sign of totalitarism" [Adorno].

To summing up his thesis, the historical politics is an interconnection of a social structure that, through its maturity, works on its past, without avoiding its painful pages (Adorno).

Z. Wilkiewicz, studying the process of historical politics in bilateral Polish-German relations, notes that the concept of "restoring the myth of sacrifice" was created in Eastern Europe countries. The point is that after the Soviet bloc collapsed, they started to develop a different conception of the past - through a struggle against the totalitarian past. It is about the Soviet Union. Contrary to the East European concepts, there was a German conception of the past, which he describes as being one formed based on public discussions [Wilkiewicz, 2011, pp. 15-31].

Yan Assmann and Adelaida Assmann constructed the past on the “group” and “society” basis [Assmann and Czaplicka, 1995, p. 127]. A departure from national usurpation of the past was observed and stated that each group or society had its own vision of the past.

Actually, the historical politics of the past is formed based on discussions of groups and historical units. Various political forces, representing different social groups, are constantly involved in this process [Assmann and Czaplicka, 1995, p. 128].

Taking into account the conception of A. and Y. Assmann, Z. Wilkiewich uses the concept of "historical politics" (German: Geschichtspolitik), which, according to him, is an intervention of the state, parties, unions or individuals in the process of forming a common vision of history. The term "Historical politics" refers to a politically constructed vision of the past that can be described by the “top down”scheme [Wilkiewicz, 2011, p. 23].

The use of "different pasts" by different groups of political forces becomes a part of the struggle for political power. Z. Wilkiewich uses the term "war for memories" to construct the vision of the past by political parties in order to obtain electoral privileges (among voters- Author's note) [Wilkiewicz, 2011, p. 23].

As has already been mentioned, the terms “policy regarding the past” (German: Vergangenheitspolitik), “culture of memory” (German: Erinnerungskskultur) and “memory policy” (German: Erinnerungspolitik) are increasingly used in German literature whereas “historical politics” (German: Geschichtspolitik) is used less frequently.

Ì. Luczewski and P. Bednarz-Luczewska studied and compared the “cultural memory” and “historical politics” terms. They conclude both terms are comparable and describe the process in reunified Germany, which they call “policy regarding the past”

The above-mentioned authors interpret culture of memory and historical politics as a process and action that form people's understanding of the past [Luczewski and Bednarz-Luczewska, 2011, p. 19]. According to the authors, this includes the daily practice of interference from public actors and political units in the process of promotion a certain historical vision. The authors attribute the following features to these processes: special historical facts are selected; other historical facts are ignored; antagonistic relationships between different social units are formed; own conclusions regarding historical events are developed.

Historical politics making takes place in two dimensions: the subject of the process and the transfer of the process to the target audience [Luczewski and Bednarz-Luczewska, 2011, p. 19].

The subjects of the processes, according to the authors, are: individuals (micro-level) groups and institutions (meso-level), and the state (macro-level, this is a level of State institutions activities) [Luczewski and Bednarz-Luczewska, 2011, p. 120].

Means of communication are the ways in which visions of the past are transmitted. These include: individual transmission (when a certain subject tells the past - internationalization level); discourse (visions about the past are presented in the media and television - externalization level) and cultural artifacts (the image of the past is represented in memorable places, namely, establishment of museums or monuments - objectification level).

In addition, according to the scholars, the difference between historical politics and culture of memory comes from how a vision of one's past is created. Thus, historical politics is a process of developing visions about one's past, which is realized by the state so called «top-down» or «state- led». On the contrary, culture of memory is the process of developing a vision about one's past and is realized by society so called “ bottom-up” or society-driven [Luczewski and Bednarz-Luczewska, 2011, p. 20].

E. Wolfrum considers historical politics to be a field of activity and politics, in which different political actors unite the past and their different political interests, and subsequently struggle for their acceptance from public opinion [Wolfrum, 1999, p. 120].

In this regard, it should be noted that A. Wolff-Powenska interprets this notion through the development of historical memory. According to her, historical politics is a conscious effort of the political class the purpose of which is to create a pattern of historical memory of society [Wolf- Powi^ska, 2011, p. 10]. As it can be seen, both authors working on the development of historical politics in Germany clearly define that as a conscious action of different actors. Both point out that the subjects of historical politics are the elites: politicians, journalists, intellectuals, and scholars.

K. Ziemer in his paper presents a culture of memory as unification of different cultures of different social memories, which are accepted by a large number of people [Ziemer, 2011, p. 35].

The German historian K. Schonhoven points out that history is a weapon in the political war for electorate and legitimization of the power. Historical politics as an instrument is used not only by authoritarian regimes but also by the democratic ones. Memories of the past are confronted and criticized at the boundary between generations, older and younger. The point is that the younger generation memory is no longer overwhelmed by the past; on the contrary, they have their own vision [Nijakowski, 2008, p. 35].

In his paper, O. Olszewski distinguished four models of historical politics: conservative, liberal, critical, and totalitarian [Olszewski, 2013, pp. 67-72]. The influence of the State or political parties on the processes of historical politics making is taken into account.

Thus, conservatism in historical politics is based on a positive vision of the historical past and the honouring of the heroes of the past [Olszewski, 2013, pp. 67-68]. This model is also characterized by the importance of historical politics in the country's foreign policy [Dudek, 2008, p. 199]. At the same time, the model mainly promotes the "white" past, but the difficult pages of the past are not considered. Accordingly, this model is criticized as one to reject historical pluralism.