Khmelnitsky. German newspaper. Khmelnitsky. German newspaper.
Interview by Moritz Schwartz.
Mr al Khmelnitsky you criticize the fact that intellectuals west focused on Hitler as the perpetrators of the 2nd mv. Is this version does not have to like you as levoliberalnomu Russian-Jewish publicist?
DH.-And what have all my background? For me, this first research question, and even the question of intellectual boldness (courage). When I moved into the 87th year of the Soviet Union to Germany, I was surprised to find that here the emergence of second mv of war is described in almost the same as in the Stalinist propaganda in Soviet history books.
I am from a family of dissidents, and even though we were not resistance fighters, we have adapted look something like everyone else, but our family always rejected the ideology of the Communist Party, and we read all of the alternative literature, which could get. More so amazes me that many historians of democratic countries adopted the thesis of Stalinist propaganda. According to my opinion that is unexplained.
MIN-Maybe because this propaganda right?
HH-No, we are talking about Stalin's role in the emergence of 2oymv. And this is proved already pact MolotovaRibbentropa. And historians know that too. But when you start a conversation on this topic, they vdrg silent.
As if there kakayato public agreement on a decent liberal historian should not speak on this topic. American historian Richard Raak, specials on Stalin time, IU said: when I speak to German historians on the subject, then suddenly their faces are stone, their eyes empty.
"Hitler and Stalin together SPEECH WAS DELIVERED Evrpe war "
MIN-German historians so why respond?
HH Good question. I sometimes think that this phenomenon is also a topic for scientific investigation. When I tried to draw the German storikov for my project (ie PVA) is a specialist on Soviet istory I predicted: "In Germany you will not find historian who depends on public funding, which will be ready to publish on this subject. " MIN
you surprised?
HH me the first thing razozlilo.Chto it shows? It demonstrates that here the subject is excluded from science. But if science is politically motivated arguments that can not be checked it is not science. I say this as a former Soviet citizen.
-MSH and that your not right in the description of a war?
HH-Complete fixation on Hitler and a complete disregard for the role of Stalin. As though he did not have geopolitcheskih plans. In the second deysvitelnosti mV is a consequence of the pact dvhu dictators. Decisive yavletsya calculation which was founded in the pact. That is to say that these two have stated Evrpe war. Why is the first in September as the beginning of WW2? Likewise, you can assign beginning of the war on Sept. 17 when the Soviet Union invaded Poland. Yes, the first of vremeli goes to 17th, but it is the 17th pochi completely disappeared over the first is absurd. Since the first prinalelit 17th, it was podgotvkoy and part of 1/9/1939. Voobscheto can assign the day the war began on 23 August, since then, it was decided at the beginning of the war.
MIN-Army Polshi was engagement in, its strategists and ideologues dreaming of lands to the west, south and east. What role did this?
HH at the 39th Poland srategicheski played no role, regardless of what dreamed Polish nationalists. In the great game of dictators, Poland was just objects.
MSH in June storik Russian Sergei Kovalev wrote: nepredvyato who studied the history of the war, he knows that it started from the refusal of Poland meet German demands.
HH Nonsense.
MIN-A as Kovalev to thought of this before?
HH is ask him.
MSH He does not interview Am.
HH He knows why. The war was zapalnirovana two dictators.
"with Putin again vzyais of Stalinist falsification "
MIN Russian Defense Ministry was hanged this interview on your site.
HH And then again erased.
MIN Following the intervention of Poland.
DF must know what is happening in Russia. With Putin's time they try to ustanovt "patriotic" historiography. That is, they again took up the Stalin falsification of history according to which Russia is an innocent victim and osvobotilnitsa countries that zavatil Hitler. Therefore, they seek to blame where they can dump their guilt, are Poland, England and of course Hitler. MIN
you published in Russia, a series of collections of theories Suvorva.
HH I personally know of Suvorov, and I asked the historians domestically and abroad, what they think about his theories, and asked about participation in my collections. Not all written in Suvorov, such Meltyuhov been in my collection and in the book against Suvorova.Moi ny
blikatsii out at the publisher Yauza, the second largest, sold well, and provoked a strong debate as it shows protivopublikatsii. MIN
In Germany, you have released one collection in the right publisher pourlemerit.
HH If all you can argue against my book is that He went in the right publishing house, then I'm satisfied. Since from the scientific point of view you vozpazit nothing. You know, I'm still a publisher, right, left or centrist. While I have the opportunity to publish my work without censorship. Yauza is apolitical publisher, they publish anything that pays money.
Khmelnitsky questioned what is to blame just Hitler, and this is due to Russia? I am sure that the lecturers who were involved in my book is not like but they still took up my books, as yaua hoping to make money, and they did not have miscalculated. Of course they will be releasing books that meeya damned elsi they earn on it. Let them produce. and I like them no matter whether the lecturers at the publishing house pour le merit my thesis or not. As a result, the quality konechnm izdateltva zavsit the quality of the books that they publish. I am responsible for the quality of my books. But I Euclidean scientific level of production pour le merit. And it is good that in the final finally won the freedom of speech, unless other izatelstva in Germany do not want to publish my books.
"in Berlin on my theses are right, in Moscow on the left."
MSH was wrong?
HH I do not know. I have not tried to find a publisher. pour le merite themselves came to me.
MSH And what is your political position?
HH I would call myself a Democrat. "Left" I'd dismissed as I have seen in Russia, which lead to the Left ideology. Since e "right", as nationalism and patriotism for me have unequivocally negative value. I'm in 99th opubikoval a book about racism and nationalism of the Soviet emigration. And I'm in the newspaper die welt defended Litvinenko. But just as in my example you can see, how absurd pytatsya cram this topic in the political framework. In Germany, for theses Suvorov called the right, but in Russia the opposite. In Russia, Suvorov supports liberal and democratic society, but against him are the rule, neo-fascists and stalinsty.
So I publikovasya in Russia and in Germany. I am now the "left" as the Russian or the "right" as it would say the Germans. Do you see how absurd it all. But if you are calm, then I choose the FDP.
MSH But Suvorov lacks the final evidence of their theses.
HH I do not agree. I've studied the era of Stalinism. We need to understand that Stalin's policy was a template that you want to recognize. He subjecting the same goal-the army. Thesis Suvorva-Stalin planned a war against the West, explained the inconsistencies with mnoie kotoryi I have encountered.
MShNo authors reaches konstatirovali that the latter has no evidence.
DH In my Suvorov's no shortage of evidence. Suvorov doctatochno proved that Stalin had no drgih planov except to attack Europe, primarily in Germany and Asian countries to increase their empire. and the fact that an attack on Germany was be in the summer of 1941 Suvorov also sufficiently proved. And many other scientists have confirmed the results of his work for his research. But there is absolutely no serious arguments for an alternative theory. Bacteria do not have argued that Stalin planiroal defense. Or that he did not think about oorone or about the attack. To do this, there is absolutely no evidence. Everything speaks in favor of one that all vntrenneya and foreign policy subordinated to Stalin's secret military purposes. Take for example the collectivization and industrialization. If you address that topic, you will see that they were not for the development of mills or supply, and the basis for the Army. What is industrialization? This means raising the standard of living. And in Stalin's Soviet Union the production of civilian goods all the time decreased. Things came to a gigantic famine, in which both are known for killing millions.
MSH You Architects, as you zayalis this topic?
HH I zaschalsya arhiekture of Stalinism, in order to be deeply Zante this theme. And there are many links between architecture and history voennoy Stalin. I stumble on such a strange project: early 41go was a contest for a monument "for the taking Perekopa "among arhitektorv. a place in the Crimea, where there was absolutely neznachitelnaya Red Army's victory. When I carefully considered this project, I realized it was actually. My thesis: it was a cover for the creation of the monument will be installed in all Western capitals after the attack to the west. Or podumaye of pamtnike for air mocta in Berlin. How did the Germans can salute the monument airlift and the Soviet monument in Berlin, with its Stalinist citations?
But I wonder if Western intellectuals are willing to ignore Stalinism, why are they at least do not realize that they are the version of the beginning War podderzhiayut nationalist veriyu Putin and Medvedev, and thereby the course of Russia on the right?
MSH And that, the Stalinist version of the war will last forever?
DH is my no, sooner or later will be a new generation of historians, and more importantly the readers. In my now marked changes, with such historians as Heinz Magenhaymer, Bogan Muslim and Stefan Shiloh. And last but not least I have hope that this amazingly survived the last Stalinist dogma Eastern Europe is broken about the reality of historical experience vostochnh Europeans.
