“Stepan Bandera it was not antisemitic and was not a mass murderer of Jews and rods“. That’s what the ambassador said Of Ukraine to Berlinin an interview given by the German journalist last July Tilo Jungin reference to the most uncomfortable and divisive character in all respects in history and in the collective consciousness of the Ukrainian people: Stepan Bandera. Not even the government’s distancing Kyiv and the grievances of the Jewish community managed to appease the spirits, demonstrating the fact that the wound in the collective memory it is still open and bleeding profusely. charismatic leader of ounUkrainian Nationalist Organization and representatives of the country’s pro-independence BanderaIn fact, he was blamed for the massacre of hundreds of people menwomen and Jewish children completely during the German occupation Second World Waras part of the so-called “Eastern Advance” by rich. However, despite the historical truths being written and accompanied by survivor testimonies, discussions about the actual involvement of Stepan Bandera in the Nazi massacres, they continue to enliven public debate inside and outside Ukraine. On the one hand there are indeed those who deny responsibility for it Banderaas the Nationalist leader was not physically present at the time cleaning ethnic operated by the German armed forces because it was restricted by the Leaderin the General Government, in the region chelmin Poland; On the other hand, however, there are those who have the undisputed leadership of theounwrites him the errors of massacre also carried out with the participation of his men, although he was actually not physically able. In short, one figure controversial it is at Trains contradictorywhose responsibilities are still being discussed. In hometownnot taken lightly, of course, especially since we are talking about a political leader still viewed today by part of the population ukraine the father of the fatherland and hero of independence during the propaganda Russian Brand him as an employee of Nazispro-fascist u antisemitic.
In his essay “The Criminal Hero. Stepan Bandera and Ukrainian nationalism”, edited by Rubbettino, Marco Fraquelli, scholar of right-wing culture, traces the life of Stepan Bandera first as a militant nationalist and then as the leader of the OUN. This is a journey that starts from root historical and ideologically by nationalism Ukrainianthrough the formation of the OUN, a movement that has seen the succession of different leaderships, not without internal power struggles – and in which Stephen Bandera represented the new generation of nationalists and separatists, who managed to gather around them many young Ukrainians, and then got to the birth of the nationalists Svoboda you hate Pravyj sector. So in this book brothers analyzes Ukrainian nationalism under the microscope stained by a Alleged anti-Semitism which was at the same time opportunistic – because it aimed to gain the support of the Germany Nazi- against i Soviets and the Poles who had occupied and oppressed the country populations local people — and sometimes shared because it’s based on it beliefs and on an unfounded one mistrust towards the Jewish people. But come to a precise definition of the so-called “banderism”, or insert Bandera and its movement into a specific and well-defined political category with specific connotations is not easy. The reality is much more complex and oversimplifications can easily lead to wrong conclusions.
So “The Criminal Hero” is not only a lucid historical analysis of the events, but also one dissertation political science which cannot be ignored if you want to get acquainted with modern Ukraine. More than 60 years after his death Stephen Banderacontinues to be a central figure in the political debate and ideologicalshrouded in a mystical aura based on the strong Christian religious connotation that shaped Ukrainian nationalist ideology.
On February 24, 2022, Russian forces invaded Ukraine and the head of kremlin, Vladimir Putinjustified the step by saying that he wanted to denazify Ukrainei.e. to rid the country of these phalanxes extremist nationalists who he believed were still in control of the country and who were threatening stability and the security of Russia. Minus the historical events and the radical components that remain today Ukraineas Fraquelli states in his essay, one certainly cannot say that this phenomenon, albeit very visible, is political and social dangerous to justify an open act of aggression.