为什么波兰总统在与弗拉基米尔·泽连斯基的争端中援引了战时历史

There have long been tensions, political, economic and cultural, between Poland and Ukraine. But that hasn’t prevented Poland from being the biggest supporter of its neighbour, taking in millions of Ukrainians fleeing the war, about 1 million of whom have remained.

And in 2023, Poland conferred its highest honour, the Order of the White Eagle, on Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky. At the time, then-president Andrzej Duda told the Ukrainian president: “It is difficult to hide the tears of emotion watching your service to your homeland.”

But on June 19, the current president, Karol Nawrocki, announced he was rescinding the order and stripping Zelensky of the honour. He did so after Zelensky awarded the honorary title “Heroes of the UPA” to an elite unit of Ukraine’s special forces. Zelensky said he had awarded the honour at the unit’s request. He said it was his duty as commander-in-chief, who “must provide them with everything they need to protect our people and our land”. He added: “And if they are motivated by our heroes … and if this is very important to them, I must do whatever they tell me.”

Political spats between the two countries over historical memory are nothing new. But this is the first since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine to escalate to this degree. And the fact is that it has more to do with domestic Polish politics than any long-term rift between Poland and Ukraine.

First, some background. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) was a Ukrainian nationalist formation that fought against the Soviets during the second world war. After harsh Soviet rule in Ukraine many in the UPA saw the German military invasion as liberating them from Soviet repression.

But it turned out that the Nazis were even worse than the Soviets. For the Poles, though, memories of the massacre of ethnic Poles in Volhynia, now Volyn, in Ukraine, by members of the UPA, remain raw.

As American historian Timothy Snyder has written: “Ukrainians think about the UPA mainly through … the struggle against the Red Army after 1945. Poles remember … 1943, when the UPA killed tens of thousands of Poles in Volhynia.”

These memories lead to different interpretations which are used to serve often divergent domestic political purposes in the two countries. Despite the UPA’s history, Ukraine continues to award UPA-related honours because the nationalist movement has become a symbol of resistance to Soviet and Russian rule, which fits with the broader post-2014 campaign to rid Ukraine of vestiges of its communist past.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has reinforced this trend, making such honours less about revisiting the past than about mobilising contemporary symbols of national resistance in Ukraine – even if they remain deeply controversial in Poland.

Nawrocki claims he revoked Zelensky’s award because “his countrymen’s pain threshold has been crossed”. It’s a strong reaction, which drastically contrasts with Nawrocki’s own previous position as head of the Institute of National Remembrance in 2023, when he stated that Ukraine was free to honour its own historical figures, including the UPA’s leaders.

The Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, was more restrained, urging both countries to stop quarrelling about the past for the sake of the future. His deputy Radosław Sikorski, who is also Poland’s minister of foreign affairs, pointed out that while Zelensky’s decree was inappropriate, that Nawrocki’s reaction was disproportionate and had been welcomed in Moscow.

Jockeying for political advantage

This contrast between the responses of Nawrocki, a rightwing populist, and the centre-left government suggests that the dispute cannot be explained by history alone. It illustrates the friction between the right-leaning president and the left-leaning government. Nawrocki has unofficially started a campaign for next year’s parliamentary election and is rallying for his Law and Justice party (PiS) by playing up anti-Ukrainian sentiment.

Before being elected, Nawrocki promised to block Ukraine’s accession to Nato. He has also been against Ukraine’s membership of the EU. Zelensky has given him an opportunity to capitalise on anti-Ukrainian narratives that play well to Poles disaffected by the war.

Additionally, by revoking Zelensky’s honour, Nawrocki has laid down a challenge to Tusk. The prime minister’s countersignature is required to validate the decision – and this would put him in a difficult political situation domestically.

Following the dispute, Nawrocki’s approval ranking is at a historic high of 54.8% – up by 8.4 percentage points from a month before.

While anti-Ukrainian rhetoric falls on fertile soil in Poland due to popular fatigue at supporting so many refugees, there is still strong support for Ukraine.

Jerzy Wójcik, a prominent Polish journalist and media executive, who has led major humanitarian campaigns like Warmth from Poland for Kyiv, initiated a petition to present Zelenskyy with Citizen’s Order of the Future award. He said that “the Polish right wing has launched a campaign ahead of the parliamentary elections and is ruthlessly exploiting the Volhynia tragedy for political gain”.

UPA’s past links to genocide are felt by most Poles. But there is still a strong tension when it comes to Nawrocki’s revocation of Zelensky’s order. This, along with Polish public support for Ukraine, suggests that the dispute is more complex than the political rhetoric implies.

The dispute is not primarily about the UPA – nor is it evidence of a fundamental shift in Polish foreign policy. While it has the potential to become a bigger diplomatic challenge for the two countries, it illustrates a broader phenomenon: political leaders mobilising contested history to solve present-day domestic political problems.

Similar dynamics can be seen in relations between Serbia and Kosovo. Their political leaders regularly invoke competing historical narratives surrounding the 14th-century Battle of Kosovo to strengthen their domestic political standing, often at the expense of dialogue between the two sides.

These strategies may generate short-term domestic political gains. But they risk undermining strategically important relationships.

Artur Nadiiev does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.