The History of Babyn Yar Is Not Just About Executions—Vitaliy Nakhmanovych
The historian and Executive Secretary of the Public Committee for the Commemoration of the Victims of Babyn Yar speaks about the competition for creating a memorial park space in Babyn Yar.
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych is a historian, an ethno-politologist, the leading researcher of the Kyiv History Museum, and the executive secretary of the Public Committee for the Commemoration of Babyn Yar Victims. He spoke to “Encounters” about the new project for a memorial park in Babyn Yar, a competition supported by the Ukrainian Jewish Encounter.
Iryna Slavinska: How would you identify this future landscape park we are going to discuss today?
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: I'd rather call it a memorial park. It is very important that this memorial park project wouldn't just be tied to the 75th anniversary of Babyn Yar.
Iryna Slavinska: How would you explain this?
The 75th anniversary is a good opportunity to hold such a contest. However, there are two conceptual approaches to the commemoration of anything, including Babyn Yar. A project can be carried out, as they say, timed to a specific date. This is exactly what actually happens in Babyn Yar in particular, but not only there. We can also see some commemorative activities happening in Chernobyl, because there is now a Chernobyl anniversary. But it is clear that afterwards Chernobyl will be forgotten for another five to ten years, and nobody will do a thing.
The same, in fact, is happening with Babyn Yar. Ukrainian officials would visit the site on every anniversary. If this were a landmark date that can be divided by five, then foreign visitors would come. There would be some official ceremonies, concerts, wreaths, and speeches—and then everything would be forgotten.
Iryna Slavinska: Do you mean that during the year this event and this location are missing in the daily discourse?
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: During the year, this location is missing, or rather, it is present four times a year, but every time this is due to some group’s action. Every September 29th there is an official ceremony commemorating the anniversary of the mass executions. Also in the fall there are activities related to Yom Kippur when the Jewish memorial events take place at the Menorah monument. As for the official ceremonies, they take place at the old Soviet monument to the victims of mass executions. In February there's a ceremony next to the cross on the anniversary of [writer—Ed.] Olena Teliha's execution. And in August, there normally are events held by the Roma community. Now they have a stone plaque, where they commemorate the Roma Holocaust.
These are the four days of the year when some memorial events take place in Babyn Yar. All of them occur locally. Babyn Yar first of all is a large space. Secondly, in and around Babyn Yar there are already about thirty monuments. All of the ceremonies take place at a particular monument and are dedicated to a specific memory of Babyn Yar.
At the same time, the area of Babyn Yar itself and the cemeteries around it are really not maintained. By its status, Babyn Yar is partly a recreational park, partly a forest park, which exists in a littered state.
Iryna Slavinska: Nearby there's also a subway station, and a number of kiosks...
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: No, this is not quite correct. They are situated not nearby, but literally within the borders of Babyn Yar, at the site of the executions. This is very important.
Within this area there is a television center, on the former cemetery. There are regional archives, some sports complex, and gas stations. Some places are not occupied by anything like that, but there is a disorganized park or a forested recreational zone. This means there are people who come there throughout the entire year. These are people who live nearby; they have to go out somewhere. They just don't understand where they wander. They wander into some green area. There are some monuments for some reason, and there are a lot, but it's not very clear why they are here. People who come there obviously don't get it. This is evident from their behavior. They are strolling with their children, drinking beer, making love, relaxing, and sunbathing. They behave the same way as they would near any pond.
It is therefore necessary to transform this area into a memorial park for people to visit and to be aware where they are. There's no goal to prevent people from coming there. On the contrary, everybody may come and relax, but there are various forms of recreation.
Iryna Slavinska: What do you mean by "being aware where they have come?" After all, in fact, this atmosphere of a green area in Kyiv that has just been described implies a relaxed mode of being that contrasts sharply with the terrible events that took place at this site. How is it possible to bring about a change with the help of organizing a memorial park? Perhaps, there are some special markers or logic in restructuring this public space because, in fact, it is also about a public space.
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: It is primarily about a public space. I can give an example of such a public space where, on the one hand, people can relax and, on the other hand, they can yet commemorate certain events. It is the Park of Glory. This is an open public space. People go there on weekends, newlyweds go there to celebrate. But nobody plays football there. If someone is sitting on the bench drinking beer, they do so quietly, without making noise and realizing that perhaps they shouldn't necessarily do it right here. People don't sunbathe there. This is an obvious memorial—it's now already a double memorial space, because it is dedicated both to the events of the war and to the Holodomor [the 1930s Terror-Famine—Ed.].
How this can be done—this is the subject of the competition and a challenge for the architects. The main task that was placed before them is to put in order what already exists on the territory of the Babyn Yar memorial and all of this area, since the memorial space that is intended—theoretically to be reorganized by the authors in the meantime—is much more vast than Babyn Yar. Everything that is situated there is being preserved. In fact, Babyn Yar was filled up with soil. The cemetery, the gravestones—almost everything was destroyed. Something was built there, but all of those are also monuments to the history of Babyn Yar.
The history of Babyn Yar is not just about the executions during those two days in the autumn of 1941 or throughout the two years of the German occupation of Kyiv. It is also the entire post-war history, including the Kurenivka mudslide disaster, the banning of memory, the destruction, the real estate development, as well as the neglect of the cemeteries and the memory of the tragedy. These thirty monuments, which absolutely do not relate to one another, and have been installed by separate groups according to unrelated plans, are also monuments of the history of Babyn Yar that we also have to preserve. Just to understand how the scene of the tragedy can be not just ignored, but also deliberately destroyed, defaced.
However, all of this, the entire space, should be transformed by means of a landscape design, as the architects say, into a coherent memorial space. That is, if you come, let's say, to your job at the television center, you realize that your workplace is an expression of disregard to the buried and to the tragedy. People who live there have to realize that they live on a destroyed cemetery—on a recently destroyed cemetery. If they are fine with that—let them live there. If they are not, this place will lay in empty ruins.
The issue is that Babyn Yar, unlike many places where there were mass executions of Jews and non-Jews during World War II, did not remain intact. This means the people were shot, forgotten, and everything was left as is. The best example of that is Drobytskyi Yar in Kharkiv. It is located outside the city. It retained its authentic structure, the external landscape. By contrast, Babyn Yar had a long prewar and postwar history. A multi-confessional necropolis emerged there. However, it started to develop more than 150 years before the war. I'm not even touching the much older and exciting symbolic history of Babyn Yar. Of course, all of that must be designated.
Obviously, there are events of major significance—the wartime tragedies, the executions of the Jews tragedy—and this historical background has to be saved. It has to be integrated into something coherent. The memorial park should unite all of that and give the history of Babyn Yar a frame. This being said, it cannot freeze this story. Today there are many people, groups, and communities who are unhappy with the state of their memory or the memory about specific events. For instance, the Roma want to erect a decent monument, and they still weren't allowed to. Also, instead of the cross, there should be a monument to Olena Teliha. There exists a project for this monument. The creation of the Path of the Righteous in honor of the people who saved Jews during the war is being discussed. Obviously, all this has to be done, but only on the basis of a memorial park complex.
Iryna Slavinska: Can the memorial park we are talking about reconcile these memories? In fact, is there such a task? Is there a need to reconciliate?
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: You know, there are two sides to the problem. These memories are partly in dispute, and we can try to patch up this dispute. But this challenge appears to be much more complicated because of the memories that exist in different strata and never overlap. The groups that manifest themselves as heirs of certain groups of Babyn Yar victims are rather self-enclosed. They are concerned only about their own memory. They usually are not interested in the memory of other groups.
This is a great problem. In fact, there are even conflict situations there. For example, there is a conflict between Jewish and Roma memory—whether there were two true genocides, and therefore should they be honored equally, or was there only the Jewish Holocaust, and the Roma were annihilated some place around there? There is also a conflict between Jewish and Ukrainian nationalist memory, because many believe that the OUN [Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists—Ed.] members who were shot in Babyn Yar took part in the executions of the Jews, and their memory does not deserve such an honor.
Fundamentally, these questions can be settled easily, because such irreconcilable extremist views are not absolute even within the same group. But the situation is especially complicated because even the uncommitted attitude is emotionless and apathetic. In other words, commemorate whatever you want, we don't care. But places like Babyn Yar don't exist on their own. If it was just a local place where someone was shot and where you can come to commemorate—and that's all...But it's a symbol not only for Kyiv, not only for Ukraine, but also for the entire world. And these places that are international symbols reflect what is happening in society in general.
Iryna Slavinska: I agree. Actually, this subject reminds me of the brilliant essay "Poisoned Landscapes" by Martin Pollack in which he muses about how the government or those who are in positions of power make places invisible, such as the sites of mass shootings and other mass slaughters, manipulate memory, allowing or not allowing something to be remembered, letting or not letting this memory, alive and visible, to exist. If we take a look at Europe's locations similar to Babyn Yar, we'll see that they also were invisible and not designated for a long time. Actually, in different countries there is the same process going on by gradually marking these places and making them visible. That's why there are groups of Holocaust survivors, or their children or grandchildren, traveling to the places where their ancestors lived and discovering together with the witnesses of the tragedies the locations where they occurred. I believe, in Lviv, for example, and in other cities of Ukraine one can find similar examples.
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: Certainly. But, once again, not all places represent the burial sites of Jews and other victims of Nazism together. Places like Babyn Yar that would be related also to post-war tragedies, dramas, and conflicts are quite rare. But all these places represent all the problems that I've mentioned. For example, Auschwitz also has a problem with the clash of different memories, and it hasn't been solved yet. And the battles of memory there were much more fierce than in Babyn Yar.
You know, there is a populist viewpoint that there is a bad government, and it has to do good, and there is a good people who are just waiting for a good government. This is an entirely false viewpoint. The situation is different from the Soviet Union, where indeed the government coerced and tried to ban the memory of Babyn Yar, and then imposed a distorted memory of the alleged civilians who were shot here.
Iryna Slavinska: As the caption on the monument says: "Here were shot Soviet citizens." Actually, this sign is very typical, it can be found in many places.
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: This is not just typical. Up to this day that old Soviet monument where all official government events take place has signs stating: "Here were shot 100,000 Kyiv residents and prisoners of war." And these signs are written in three languages—Ukrainian, Russian, and Yiddish. The choice of these three languages is unclear, if it's all about the ordinary citizens of Kyiv. But after independence, the government has absolutely no effect on what happens with the monuments. It has completely pulled away from this problem. The government is ready to support any initiative. And all of these thirty monuments were erected not by the government, but by different communities acting on their own. Most of these monuments don't even exist officially. That means, they were installed, but they have never been registered.
Here we don't have a problem of the government imposing something. We have a different problem: the government has totally pulled away. Instead of mediating public debate, it's just watching. Is Babyn Yar large enough to hold another three hundred monuments? It doesn't matter.
Iryna Slavinska: And what about the project we are talking about, the memorial park project? Are there any prospects for its implementation? Here continues the subject that was mentioned earlier—the interaction with the authorities. It is interesting to hear about the dialogue with the city authorities. What does the municipality say?
Vitaliy Nakhmanovych: First, there is a dialogue not only with the city authorities, but also with the central administration, because this location is partly the Babyn Yar National Reserve territory, partly the Lukyanivka Historical Memorial Reserve territory, partly an urban area, part of it is a park zone, and part of it is leased to different commercial or government agencies.
The city authorities in fact formally support this competition. The Department of City Planning and Architecture of the Kyiv State Administration approve it. This is a requirement. The competition is held according to the existing regulations and documents. It is supported by the International Union of Architects and is regulated by its rules; it is supported by the National Union of Architects, by the city authorities represented by the General Office of City Planning and Architecture, and the Institute of National Remembrance. This is not some kind of public entertainment not related to anything.
How will it be developed further? At a formal level the dialogue with the local authorities on the subject hasn't started yet, because there's still nothing to suggest. At the informal level, the issue is simple. Is there money for this project? I've asked whether they'll give permission. They said if there's money, there wouldn’t be any problem with permission. That is the position of the authorities.
At the central level the authorities have a somewhat different position. They express general support and a full understanding of the issue, but there is a National Committee for the 75th Anniversary Commemoration. The Prime Minister and the Head of Administration lead it. When [former Prime Minister—Ed.] Yatsenyuk was the committee co-chair he believed that something needed to be done in honor of the anniversary. I explained to him—I am also a member of this organizing committee—that there is a competition and that we should do long term work. "When will the results of the competition be ready?" – "In early June." – "That leaves too little time." – "Too little time for what?" – "We have to erect something by the date."
Therefore, there was a project to construct the Path of the Righteous by the date. However, since some of the Jewish organizations say that the victim’s memory hasn't been honored yet, there will also be created a Path of the Victims.
All this took place during the organizing committee's work. Then the Roma stand up and ask: where is a monument to the Roma? Very well, we'll erect a monument to the Roma also. Then the Ukrainians stand up and remind us that a monument to Olena Teliha has been missing for many years. That means, instead of adopting a consistent strategy in this field at the highest government level, they once again prefer the task to do something by the date.
I don't know whether we'll succeed—since the Prime Minister has changed and, therefore, the co-chairman of the organizing committee has also changed–in altering the approach to this problem. Yet here's the level of understanding we have to deal with. We see that when the government wants to do something, it responds to proposals. After all, the Path of the Righteous is also an idea that wasn't invented by the government. This is an old project. "We want to do something" is the highest level of the government's understanding. This and this, that and that—we will do everything. So this is the way it stands in matters dealing with our government.
Iryna Slavinska: The program “Encounters" program is produced with the support of the Ukrainian Jewish Encounter charitable organization in Canada. Listen. Think.
Originally appeared in Ukrainian (podcast) here.
This article is part of a series of interviews conducted by Hromadske Radio dedicated to the 75th anniversary of Babyn Yar. The views expressed are the author’s own.
