TheHouseofEuropeanHistory.ReportonthePermanentExhibition

30October2017

2

TheHouseofEuropeanHistory.ReportonthePermanentExhibition

BythePlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConscience,

PreparedbyPawełUkielskiPh.D.(Editor)withMonikaKareniauskaite,Ph.D.andYanaHrynko

(Co-editors)This report was prepared as a result of a study visit of representatives of differentinstitutions,membersofthePlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConscience,totheHouseofEuropeanHistory(HEH)inBrusselson10thAugust2017.Theparticipantsareexperiencedexperts in fields of commemoration, remembrance, history as well as creating narrative,historicalexhibitions.ThePlatform’srequesttotheHEHtoreceivethefullnarrativelineoftheexhibition (the setof all textspresented in theexhibition) remainedunanswered.Thefollowingreporthasbeencompiledbasedonevaluationformsfilledinbytheparticipants.Participantsofthestudytrip:

• GöranLindblad(Sweden,President,PlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConscience)• NeelaWinkelmann(CzechRepublic,ManagingDirector,PlatformofEuropean

MemoryandConscience)• ToomasHiio(Estonia,MemberoftheExecutiveBoard,PlatformofEuropean

MemoryandConscience;ChairmanoftheBoard,EstonianInstituteofHistoricalMemory)

• SiegfriedReiprich(Germany,MemberoftheExecutiveBoard,PlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConscience;Director,StiftungSächsischeGedenkstättenzurErinnerungandieOpferpolitischerGewaltherrschaft)

• PawełUkielski(Poland,MemberoftheExecutiveBoard,PlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConscience;DeputyDirector,WarsawRisingMuseum)

• IgorBigun(Ukraine,CentreforResearchontheLiberationMovement)• IgorCașu(Moldova,Director,CenterfortheStudyofTotalitarianism)• IneseDreimane(Latvia,MuseumoftheOccupationofLatvia)• ChristianFuchs,(Germany,BoardCommissioner,UnionofVictimsofCommunist

TyrannyUOKG;President,InternationalUnionofPoliticalPrisonersInter-Asso)• YanaHrynko(Ukraine,NationalMuseum„HolodomorVictimsMemorial”)• MonikaKareniauskaite(Lithuania,ChiefResearchandCommunicationsOfficer,The

GenocideandResistanceResearchCentreofLithuania)• RobertKostro(Poland,Director,PolishHistoryMuseum)• CecyliaKuta(Poland,InstituteofNationalRemembrance)• AlžbětaMajerová(CzechRepublic,PlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConscience)• GunārsNāgels(Latvia,Director,MuseumoftheOccupationofLatvia)• AnnaPiekarska(Poland,DeputyDirector,PolishHistoryMuseum)• PeterRendek(CzechRepublic,Director,CentreforDocumentationofTotalitarian

Regimes)• Julia Spohr (Germany, Stiftung Sächsische Gedenkstätten zur Erinnerung an die

OpferpolitischerGewaltherrschaft)• MaciejZakrzewski(Poland,InstituteofNationalRemembrance)

3

Museumexhibitionsarepowerfultoolstoshapetheremembranceofpeople.Thenarrativeline,proportions,presentedfacts,languageusedandeventhescenographyofthedisplay–all those factors influence thevisitors’ imaginationof thepresentedpast.Everyexhibition,duetoitsnature,isahugesynthesisofhistory,wherealltheabovementionedfactorsplayavitalrole.Thereforeitisnotenoughtojudgeanexhibitiononlyonthelevelofdetails(ifthefacts presented are right or not), but also onmany different levels,with a kind of „meta-level” of the general message delivered to the auditorium, the way it interprets history.Every exhibition leaves also impressions, feelings or interpretations, which stay with thevisitors long after the tour. All those must be evaluated in order to deliver a complexjudgementofthepresentation’svalue.

1. Theoverallmessage

IntheHouseofEuropeanHistory,onecouldhaveexpectedtofindanexhibitionthatwouldbuild(orreferto)acommonEuropeanidentityandaprideinEuropeanvalueswhichstandbehindthehistoryofEuropeandtheEuropeanintegration.Asitisdefinedonthewebsite:„TheHouseofEuropeanHistory isdedicated to theunderstandingof the sharedpast anddiverseexperiencesofEuropeanpeople.It'saplacewhereyoucandiscoverdifferentpointsofviewandcommongroundinEuropeanhistory.TheHousethusbecomesameetingpointforpeopleofallgenerationsandwalksoflife.”However, this statement is unfortunately far from the truth. The House of EuropeanHistory’smessageiseverythingbutdiverse. IntheopinionofthePlatform,themessageoftheexhibitionintheHouseofEuropeanHistoryisinfluencedbyanideologicalHegelianorneo-Marxist interpretationofEuropeanhistoryused. It createsa strong impressionof theinevitable evolution andprogressofEuropeanhistory after theFrenchRevolution (1789)towardtheidealofaclasslesssociety.TherearesomepointsthatcanbereadassympathytowardsCommunism(!).Asoneoftheparticipantscommentedit:„toomuchcomment,toofewobjects”.Thisrefersalsotodataandnumbers.What isat leastas important is thatEuropeanvalues,suchasdemocracy, freedom,ruleoflaw or human rights, are not stressed sufficiently enough to become a message of theexhibition.Eventhegreatestsuccessesandvictoriesofthosevalues,suchasthedefeatofthetotalitarian evil in the Cold War, are not presented in a proper way – this message iscompletelyblurred,andtheyear1989isnottreatedasavictory,butassomethingthat„justhappened”.All furthermistakes, omissions,misinterpretations or even distortions of facts have theirrootsintheabovementionedbasicideologicalassumption.

2. Thenarrativeline

Themost important consequences of the ideologicalmessage for the narrative line of theexhibitionareasfollows:2.1. ThedecisiontopresenttheFrenchRevolutionas„thebeginningofthestory”insteadof

the more obvious Charlemagne seems to express the Marxist ideological lens tointerpret European history as a string of revolutions culminating in a classless

4

CommunistsocietybasedontheideologyofMarx,EngelsandBakunin(thevisitordoesnot learn why him?), which is presented as the best and most progressive thoughtoriginatingfrom19thcenturyEurope.Europeanhistorydidnotbeginin1789.Therewere the Charlemagne’s empire, the Holy Roman Empire, Venice, Rzeczpospolita,Reformation,TurkishWars, the30-yearWar and thePeaceofWestphalia andmanyotherimportanteventsthatwereinstrumentalinthecreationofmodernEurope.TheMiddleAges,RenaissanceorBaroqueepochsarealsostillshapingouridentity.

2.2. Regarding the selection of ideas to present „the roots” – entitled „Memory and

EuropeanHeritage” (in this ideological concept, rootsareall ideas thatpreceded theFrenchRevolution):2.2.1. Point „Marxism, socialism, Communism” – the section „Roots” describes

history(inavery,verysmalldosage)beforetheFrenchRevolution.Acompletefalsification of history is the statement that countries of the Eastern bloc„decidedtohaveCommunism”afterWWII.ThelastsentenceaskingaquestionifCommunism still has a future is outrageous for the people who were killed,tortured,diedandsufferedunderCommunistdictatorships;

2.2.2. Lackofliberalism–itisevenmoreoddthattheideathatshapedcapitalismof19th century, and still is very influential (and emerged prior to the FrenchRevolution)isabsentinthispartofexhibition.WhileKarlMarxappearsinmanyplacesoftheexhibition,wehavenomentionofAdamSmithorJohnStuartMill;

2.2.3. Lackoftheconceptoffreedomassuch,whichisabasisoftheentireEuropeancivilisation;

2.2.4. Lack of Roman law, as the constituting theory of law in the Europeancivilisation;

2.2.5. Verynegativeattitudetowardsnations,whicharepresentedasabasicreasonformostofEuropeansufferings–chauvinism,xenophobia,FascismandNazism.The positive side of nations is strongly downplayed. Controversial (or evenfalse) theses are presented in that context (such as a conviction that nationsemerged in the 19th century). This attitude goes completely opposite to theEuropeanUnion’sideaofthe“unityindiversity”andlacksanyreferencetotheideaofself-determinationofnations.InthewaypresentedintheexhibitionitisratheracallforthecreationofaHomoSovieticus–peoplewithnonationalities,ahomogeneousmassofidenticalpeople;

2.2.6. ManynationsexistedintheMiddleAgesaspowerfulkingdomsandtheirlonghistoryconstitutesan importantpartof thehistorical identityof thesenations(e.g.Hungary,SwedenorSpain).Buttheexhibitiongivestheimpressionthatallofthememergedaslateasinthe19thcentury.

2.2.7. Very negative attitude towards Christianity, which is not even presented assuch but as an „omnipresence of Christianity” (which suggests it is somethingwrong) – the only such situation in that part of the exhibition. Ridiculous,offensive comment: "a religion that dominates the continentbut fortunately isgivingway";

2.2.8. Very poor and insufficient presentation of the phenomenon of philosophy,withanabsurdpresentationof twopersonalitiesonly:AristotleandSlovenianMarxistSlavojŽižek.

5

2.2.9. TherootsofEuropecouldbesummarizedbyafamousproverb,saying:„Whatis Europe? It is philosophy from Greece, law from the Roman Empire andGolgotha!”Itwasnotmentioned.

2.3. Lack of presentation of the role of the different religions, their roles and mutual

interplaythroughtheages(Judaism,ChristianityandIslaminEurope).

2.4. Presentation of the civil war in Spain as a conflict between dictatorship anddemocracy.Presentationof theRepublicansideof theconflictas„democracy” is farfromtruth.

2.5. Languageused.Theterm„Stalinism”asadescriptionofoneoftwototalitarianisms,

whichismethodologicallywrong–itwasnot„Stalinism”whichpresentedtotalitarianideology,inthesamewayastherewasnotany„Hitlerism”.Therewere„Nazism”and„Communism”, which is also recognized in official European documents (e.g.Resolution 1481 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe of 25January 2006 or European Parliament resolution of 2 April 2009 on Europeanconscienceandtotalitarianism).

2.6. Quotes by Communist dictators such as Lenin in Stalin presented in fancymetallic

letteringonthewallsandintheshowcasesintheexhibitionhalls.Thisisoffensive.ItwouldbeunthinkabletodolikewisewithquotesbyHitlerorGoebbels.

2.7. InthenarrativeonWWIItheroleoftheMolotov-Ribbentroppact;HitlerandStalin,

NaziGermanyandSovietUnionasalliesispoorlypresented.Thefactoftotalitariancooperationin1939-1941ismissing.

2.8. ThewayofpresentationofthestoryoftheColdWarwhichishardtounderstand–

thevisitordoesnotgeteithertheinformationoreventhefeelingthatitwasaconflictbetween European values (freedom, democracy, rule of law, human rights) withtotalitarianism (violations of fundamental human rights). TheEastern andWesternblocsarepresentedas twodifferent,butequalpoliticaland ideological systems(oreventwodifferentversionsofsocialism).

2.9. Thebasiceconomicdifferencebetweentwoblocsisnotpresented.Theinefficiencyof

state-owned,plannedeconomyisnotexplained,thecharacterofpropertyownershipbetween both blocs (private vs. forcible state ownership) is not shown. Forcednationalisationofpropertyisnotexplained.

2.10. FollowingtheColdWarpart,theyear1989ispresentedinthesamemanner–with

no explanation why Communism fell, why the nations of the Eastern bloc feltliberatedandwhatwasthemeaningoftheendoftheColdWarforEurope.And,themost important – even the biggest victory of European values over totalitarianismafterWWIIisnotusedtobuildthecommonidentityofvalues,asitisnotpresentedasavictory.

6

Otherfundamentallimitationsofthenarrativeline:2.11. GiventhattheexhibitionbeginswiththeFrenchrevolution,itsurprisinglyomitsthe

followingNapoleonicwarswhichhadanimpactonEurope,aswellasotherwarsin19thcenturyEurope.

2.12. NotenoughattentionisgiventotheShoah,whichispresentedinaverylimitedway(e.g.,thereismoreonremembranceontheShoahandcomingtotermswithitthanontheShoahitself).Othergenocides(forinstancetheHolodomorinUkraineortheSintiandRomagenocide)arecompletelyabsent.

2.13. Complete lack of reference to the educational, cultural and scientific history ofEurope. European architecture (Romanesque, Gothic, Baroque, Renaissance,Classicism,Jugendstil....)oruniversitiesarealsoomitted.Europecontributedsomanywonderful things to the heritage ofmankind in the realms of knowledge, arts andsciences,architectureandengineering–music,literature,sculpture,finearts,theatre,photography,cinema,aswellasgroundbreakingscientificdiscoveriesandinventionsin physics, mathematics, chemistry, biology, medicine, technology, communication,etc.

2.14. Proportions among different topics do not correspond to their real meaning inhistory.VeryshortpartconcerningWWII,verylimitedspacedevotedtotherootsofEuropeetc.

2.15. Lack of data.Numbers,maps, facts always give better understanding andbuild thecontext.Veryoftenthesespresentedintheexhibitionarenotsupportedbynumbersorfacts.

2.16. PoorrepresentationofthesmallerEuropeannations,theirexperience,achievementsand impactonthedevelopmentofEurope(usuallyof theEasternsideof it,butnotonly, because such countries as e.g. Switzerland, Finland or Denmark are alsomarginalized).

3. Detailedevaluationofindividualsections

In this partwepresent our evaluationof differentparts of the exhibitionwhichwerenotpresented in the general evaluation of the narrative line. We are aware that a museumexhibition isagreat synthesis,whichdoesnotpermit thepresentationofall the factsandissues; it isnotanencyclopaedia.Duringanydiscussion, themainstressshouldbeputonthe overallmessage and the general narrative line.However, in our opinion the extent ofomissionsandgapsintheexhibitionexceedsbyfaranyacceptablecompromiseanditalsoinfluencesthemessageoftheexhibitionanditsnarrativeline.

7

3.1. TherootsofEurope

Describedincomplexabove.Quotationofonecommentmadebyparticipantofthetour:„IwouldexpectmoreabouthistoricalbondsbetweenEuropeannations: starting fromtheAncient Mediterranean world, through Christianity (including Jewish roots). Issues likeurbancommunitiesandurbanself-government,universities,circulationofbooksandideas,economic routes, inventing and spreading of capitalism, parlamentarian, republican anddemocratic traditions, human rights in theirmodern and pre-modern concepts. Europeanarchitecture and arts from the ancient, byzantine and medieval art, renaissance throughmodernart.”

3.2. Colonialism

The19th centurypartof theexhibition concerning the roleofEurope in theworld isone-sided. ItpresentsEurocentrismanda ideologyofsuperiority,exploitationandracist ideasonly.Regardlessof the evil of colonialism,Europeoffered to theworld also great culturaland technical civilization input, which influenced the overall development and which ismissingintheexhibition.But even this one-sided presentation is missing certain important aspects - no facts ornumbersarepresentedaboutcountries involved in theslave tradeandcolonialism–whohadwhichcolonies,theextentofhumanrightsviolations,humansuffering,etc.Thereisalackofmoredetaileddata–thegeneralpresentationofcolonialcrimesandabuseofpowerdoesnotincludeconcreteexamplesandnumbers,likee.g.thegenocideinCongobytheBelgianpower,GermancrimesinNamibia,etc.Disturbingartefactsarepresented–colouredcastsofrealhumanheadswithclosedeyes-withnoexplanationoftheirorigin,purposeoruse,andwhytheyshouldbeexhibitedhere.

3.3. WorldWarI

This is thebestpartof theexhibition,withquitea fairexplanationof therootsand tragiceffects of thewar. One can see that the results of a big effort of research and awarenessraisingregardingthehistoryofWWIinconnectionwiththe100thanniversaryweretakenintoaccount.Correctpresentationofthewarasthefirstmajorconflictthatinvolvedwholesocieties,notonlyarmies.However, also in this part one can find strange formulations – e.g. that nationalism andSlavicexpansionismareresponsiblefortheoutbreakofWWI.Itishardtounderstandwhat„Slavicexpansionism“meansandwhatitsinfluenceontheoutbreakofWWIwas.The Spanish Flu is notmentioned. It killed up to 50million people in 1918-1920, and itsseveritywasadirectconsequenceofthewar.However,thisisjustaminorcriticism,andthispartisthestrongestinthewholeexhibition.

8

3.4. Interwarperiod

Thepresentationoftwototalitarianismsastwosidesofthesamecoinisinprinciplecorrect.ThebiggestproblemofthispartisthefactthattheSoviettotalitarianismisonlydefinedasStalinism, ignoring the Bolshevik and Lenin’s mass terror since 1917. Also, the lack ofattention to the Soviet crimes such as the Holodomor is obvious. Also, the deeperpresentationof the social, historical andother reasons for totalitarianism ismissing - andthe long-lasting impact of totalitarian regimes on societies. Totalitarianism is representedonlyon thesurface,asamatterof thedictators,whoseemtobedemonized. Ingeneral, aproper presentation of the phenomenon of totalitarianism, based on thorough academicresearchandcontemporaryacademicknowledgeisneededinthemuseum.The importance of nationalism in the transition to authoritarianism or dictatorships isoverrepresented.Until today, theviewfromtheWesternpartofEuropeincludes,onsomeoccasions,certainelementsofpatronising.ThebirthanddevelopmentofnationalstatesinEastern Europe has a central place in the historical identity of many nations in EasternEuropeandthathastobetakeninaccount.The statement that creating new stateswas a cause for problems in European politics isformulated from an arrogant perspective of the Great Powers.Was it rather not GermanrevisionismandimperialSovietpolicies?

Missingaspects:3.4.1. RoleoftheTreatyofVersailles3.4.2. Russiancivilwar3.4.3. Polish-BolshevikWar1919-19203.4.4. WarsofindependenceofBalticstatesandFinland3.4.5. Definitionoftotalitarianism3.4.6. RoleoftheGreatDepressioninshapingextremepoliticalideologies3.4.7. Holodomor-agenocideoftheUkrainiannationin1932-1933whichclaimedthelives

of7millionpeople.3.4.8. GreatTerror,Moscowshowtrials.3.4.9. Notenoughattentiontotheforcedcollectivization.3.4.10. Lackofmaps:oftheGermanconcentrationcampsandSovietGulag.3.4.11. ExplanationoftheGulagphenomenon.3.4.12. InformationabouttheSovietmassdeportations.3.4.13. Information about the victims of Soviet repressions in Russia, Ukraine and other

SovietRepublicsbeforeWWII.3.4.14. FailureoftheLeagueofNations

3.5. WorldWarII

As it was already stated, the part devoted to the history of World War II is too smallcompared to its significance for Europe. Themeaning ofWorldWar II for the history of

9

Europein20thcenturyiscrucial,itstoodalsoasabasisforEuropeanintegration(thisfactoriscompletelyabsentintheexhibition).Missingaspects:3.5.1. Not enough attention to the Shoah and other genocides (for instance the Sinti and

Romagenocide).3.5.2. Vichycollaborationregimeanditsco-responsibilityforShoah.3.5.3. NotenoughspaceandattentiondedicatedtotheSovietcrimes.3.5.4. TheWarsawUprisingandtheroleoftheHomeArmyaremissing.3.5.5. NotallcrimesandmassacresofWWIIaredepicted.3.5.6. NotallvictimsofCommunismandNazismarerepresented.3.5.7. NotenoughinformationabouttheeventsontheEasternfrontarepresented.3.5.8. Notallmainresistancesaredepicted.3.5.9. Theissueofthecollaborationinthecountriesoccupiedbytwodifferentoccupation

powersisnotpresentedinitscomplexity.

3.6. ColdWarandthe„IronCurtain”

TheColdWarispresentedcontinuouslyasarivalryoftwoequalblocs,withoutdistinctionbetween the world of democracy and European values and the totalitarian Communistsystem forcibly introducedby the SovietUnion in theCentral-EastEuropean statesunderviolationsofhumanrightsanddemocraticprinciples,whichisunacceptable.Onecanseeitinthestatement:„Finally,twopoliticalsystemswereestablished:democraciesintheWestandsocialistrepublicsintheEast,wherecommunistpartiesplayedthemainrole“.Eventhepresentationofposters(easternandwestern)withoutanycommentdeepensthatfeeling.TheeconomicnatureofCommunismisnotpresentedintheexhibition–thereisastatementthat inCommunist countries in the1970s, “economicgrowthwas replacedby stagnation“(!). One can hardly speak about economic growth in the Communist bloc after theCommunist takeover after WWII. Upon seizing power, the Communists nationalised,expropriated, stole and destroyed private economy and devalued the currency, creatingunwieldy, unproductive state enterprises and cooperatives which could not match theproductivityandoutputoftheeconomyintheWest.Thepermanentshortageofbasicgoodstypicalforplannedeconomiesshouldalsobebetterpresented.The stress is put instead on ”positive”, consumerist aspects of Communism, not coveringproperly the other aspects that can give a more complex and truthful image of whatCommunism was in Eastern Europe and the USSR after 1945, its human costs, the all-permeatingfear,theabsenceofdemocracy, justiceortheruleof law, itssystem-immanentviolations of all fundamental human rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of belief,freedomofresidence,freedomofmovement,freedomofassociation,etc.Missingaspects:3.6.1. Armed anti-Communist resistance in the entire Communist bloc, especially in the

BalticStates,Ukraine,Poland,Romania,Bulgaria.

10

3.6.2. Soviet famine (1946-47) in Moldova, Ukraine and Russia, as an effect of Stalin’spolicy.

3.6.3. Dissident and oppositionalmovements in Eastern and Central European countries,thephenomenonofillegalpublishing,samizdat.

3.6.4. Thepoliticalcontrolofthepublicsphere,censorship.3.6.5. TheBerlinWallasthesymboloftheColdWar.3.6.6. ThekillingsofpeopleattheIronCurtainwhoattemptedtoescapetotheWest.3.6.7. Nucleararmsrace3.6.8. IncorrectrepresentationofthePolishdebatesabouttheHolocaust.3.6.9. Uprisingof17June1953inEastGermany.3.6.10. 1956:Hungarianrevolution(shortfootagewithoutanyexplanationcannotbetreated

aspresenceofthetopic).3.6.11. 1968:thePragueSpringanditscrushingbytheWarsawpactinvasion(shortfootage

withoutanyexplanationcannotbetreatedaspresenceofthetopic).3.6.12. ThescaleofrepressionsandpersecutionoftheCommuniststatesagainsttheirown

citizens.3.6.13. Masssurveillance,secretpolice(Stasi,KGBetc.).3.6.14. Civic and human rights movements in the Eastern bloc arising alongside with the

Helsinkipeaceprocess–e.g.theCharta77movementinCzechoslovakia3.6.15. MartiallawinPoland.3.6.16. Forcedconfinementinpsychiatry,persecutionofdissidents.3.6.17. Theexhibitiondoesnotdepictthegeneralatmosphereofthefear,indoctrinationand

statecontrolintheCommunistcountries.3.6.18. LackofinformationaboutthecountriesoccupiedbytheUSSR.3.6.19. Lackofinformationabouttheviolationofhumanrights:Freedomofspeech,freedom

ofbeliefandreligion,freedomofmovement.3.6.20. ThephenomenonoftheUndergroundChurch.3.6.21. Onepartysystem,noalternativeparty,ideology,choice.3.6.22. Prohibition,discriminationorpersecutionforthelisteningofWesternradiostations,

music,followingtheWesternlifestyleandfashions.3.6.23. The important role of Western broadcasters in spreading truthful information,

Western/today’s European values – freedom, democracy, justice, the rule of law,protection of human rights, etc. - and supporting domestic opposition in the Easternbloc(VoiceofAmerica,BBC,DeutscheWelle,RadioFreeEurope...)

3.6.24. Blackmarketphenomenon,corruptionetc.3.6.25. RootsofEuropeanintegration,lackofclearchronologicallineofitsdevelopment.3.6.26. SovietsupportfortheCommunistpartiesintheWest.3.6.27. Communist bloc support of leftist terrorism in the West, political murders,

abductions,etc.3.6.28. Communist bloc support of leftist nationalistmovements, coups and installation of

leftistandpro-CommunistgovernmentsinAsia,AfricaandtheMiddleEast-especiallymilitaryandsecretpolicetraining,armsdeliveries,etc.

11

3.7. TheendoftheColdWar

ThestoryintheexhibitionabouttheendoftheColdWarandthereunificationofEuropeisvery limited.Theexhibition forms theconclusion that theCommunist regimes indifferentEuropeancountriesdisappearedontheirown.Thisisfalse.Suchanimpressionistheresultof insufficient information in the exhibition about the strength of the growing oppositionmovements andabout thepublicprotests and theirbrutal suppressionby theCommunistgovernments.(e.g.theeventsin1989inRomania,or1991inVilnius,Riga).ThereisnosufficientexplanationoftheroleofthearmsracewiththeUSAandNATOwhichdefactodepletedtheresourcesoftheUSSRandsupportedtheprocessofdismantlingoftheEastern bloc. There is no sufficient explanation of themeetings of the U.S. American andSovietleadersRonaldReaganandMikhailGorbachevinthe1980sandtheaccordsbetweenthetwopowers,underlyingthisprocess.The total collapse of the Soviet-style economy is commentedonlywith an absurdphrase:„Communistswereproudoftheiridealsofsocialjustice,howeverinsomecountriespeoplelackedfoodandbasicgoods,inotherpeopleescaped“(sic!).There isnoexplanationwhyEasternEuropestrivedtowards theEU, theroleofEuropeanvaluesinthatprocess.Missingaspects:3.7.1. TheroleofPopeJohnPaulII,RonaldReaganandMargaretThatcherinthecollapseof

CommunistregimesintheCentralEurope.3.7.2. EconomicreasonsforthefallofCommunism.3.7.3. Eventsintheindividualcountries(inthemovie,5minutesaredevotedtotheevents

inGermany,whileonly2minutestoothercountries,althoughthefallofCommunismdidnotstartinGermanyandevenwasnotthemostdramaticthere).

3.7.4. TheproblemofcomingtotermswiththeCommunistpast(forawiderunderstandingof integration processes in Europe, there is a need to look at issues of declassification ofarchives, restorationof justice, recognitionof crimesofCommunism, and rehabilitationofvictimsofthesecrimes).

4. Factualmistakes

Theparticipantsofthestudyvisitwerenotabletogetfamiliarwiththecompletesetoftextspresentedontheexhibition.However,duringthestudyoftheexhibition,certainhistoricalandtechnicalerrorswererevealed:4.1. ThestatementthattherootsofChristianityreachtheMiddleAges(2ndfloor,partabout

the roots of Europe), is a basic falsification. Christianity became popular in ancientRome - in 313 Constantine I issued the Edict of Milan, officially legalizing Christianworship. On 27 February 380, with the Edict of Thessalonica put forth underTheodosius I, theRomanEmpireofficiallyadoptedTrinitarianChristianityas itsstatereligion.

12

4.2. The statement that ‘Countries eastern to the „Iron Curtain“ introduced communism’(2ndfloor,partabouttherootsofEurope)isfundamentallyfalse,astheywereforcedbytheSovietUnionwithRedArmy,NKVDandSmersh.Thesamestatementfollowsonthe4thfloor,whereitsaysthat“intheEast,socialismoftheSoviettypeprevailed“.

4.3. ThemapofWWIIinEasternEuropeisprobablybasedonsometranslatedSovietmapfromtheeraoftheColdWar-TallininsteadofTallinn,VilnoinsteadofVilnius,KovnoinsteadofKaunasandsoon.

4.4. ThetreatyofPotsdamin1945formallydidnotdecide–asmentionedintheexhibition–thattheareaeastoftheriversOderandNeiße(especiallySilesia,EasternPomeraniaand Eastern Prussia) become a new part of Poland; this was reserved to a laterinternationalconference(whichdidnottakeplacefinally).

4.5. Therearesomeprintingmistakes indates. In thedisplayof theKloogaconcentrationcamp it iswritten that togetherwith SS also Estonian Policewas responsible for themanagement.EstoniawasoccupiedandnoEstonianPoliceexisted.Therewasapoliceforce as a part of German Ordnungspolizei that was recruited from among the localEstonianpopulation.

4.6. Maria Skłodowska-Curie was of Polish origin, in the exhibition her Polish surname(Skłodowska)ismissing.

4.7. “In 1940Ulmaniswas forced to resign under pressure from the Soviet Union,whichwouldsubsequentlyoccupyLatvia”.Thisstatementisfalse.Itwillbecorrecttosay:“In1940 theSovietUnionattackedLatvia, andas a resultof itsultimatum, subsequentlyoccupiedthewholecountry”.

The explanation: In fact, the Soviet Union attacked three LatvianBorder Posts on 15June,1940,killing3borderguardsandtwocivilians.37peopleweretakenashostagesto theUSSR.On16 June theSovietsgaveanultimatumto theLatvianAmbassador inMoscow – the Latvian government must resign and be replaced by a governmentdesignatedbytheUSSR,andallowtheentryofSoviettroopsinunlimitednumbers.(InaccordancewiththeMutualAssistancePactofOctober1939,theSovietUnionalreadyhad50000troopsinLatvia-morethanthewholeoftheLatvianarmy).Latviadecidedtocapitulate, andon thesameday theLatvianPrimeMinisterUlmanishanded in theresignationof theLatviangovernment to theLatvianPresidentUlmanis (heoccupiedbothposts).PresidentUlmanisstayedasthenominalheadofstateuntil21July1940.

4.8. Inthepart«PresentationoftheroadtoWWII»thechronicleofmassstarvationin1921-1922 in the Volga territories (Russia) is used in the context of Stalin’s policy at thebeginningofthe1930s,whichisasignificanthistoricalmistake.

4.9. In the exhibition these events are defined as a mass starvation that occurred as aconsequenceofcollectivisation,mainlyinUkraineandtheCaucasus.Thisstatementisincorrect.Duringthelast20years,anumberofproofswererevealedandpromulgated.TheyhaveproventhatmillionsofpeoplewerekilledbytheSovietregimeledbyStalin,because thosepeoplewereUkrainiansand theyresisted thepolicyof collectivisation.

13

Moreover, theytriedtoseparatefromtheUSSRandwantedto live inanindependentstate.

4.10. “Around500000menfromalloverEuropeenteredtheSS.Someweredrafted,butmanyjoinedvoluntarily.IntheBalticStates,occupiedbytheSovietssince1940,manycollaborated with the Nazis, who were seen as liberators”. There are some factualerrors. Firstly, it should be theWaffen-SS, as non-Germans could not enter the SS.Secondly, in Latvia there were more draftees than volunteers. Thirdly, apart fromisolatedcases,the“collaboration”inLatviawaswiththeGermanoccupationforces,notwiththe“Nazis”.TherewerenoQuislingorVichyequivalentsinLatvia,simplybecausetheGermansdidnotallowthatlevelofLatvianparticipation.

4.11. Thedisplayof“Fascistpartysymbols”alsoshowstheswastika.WhichFascistpartyhadthissymbol?FascismandNationalSocialismweredifferentideologies.

5. Conclusions

The House of European History is an institution organized under the umbrella of theEuropean Parliament. The European history exhibition should present commonEuropeanvalues and ties between European nations. It should also reflect the achievements ofEuropean culture.TheEuropean integrationprocess shouldbepresentedasbasedon theprincipleoffreedom,democracy,ruleoflawandrespectforhumanrightsasanalternativeto the totalitarian and authoritarian concepts or the system of big powers controllingsmallernationsanddividingthecontinentaccordingtotheirinterests.TheExhibitionfailsatpresentingEuropeanhistoryinthreedimensions.

1. Structure.Too shortpresentationof the rootsofEuropeanunityand thehistoryofthe continent before 1789. It ismuch too focused on the political perspective. Toolittleinterestsandattentionfortheperspectiveofmedium-sizedandsmallcountries.

2. Concept.Theexhibitiondoesnotfocusoncommonvaluesandties.ItpresentsaverycriticalassessmentofEuropeanhistoryasahistoryofviolenceandprejudicestobeovercome by an integration process, focusing on bureaucratic aspects rather thancommonvalues.The presentation of totalitarianism and the Cold War is not satisfactory. Theexhibition fails in presenting the criminal nature of Communist rule and theimposition of the Soviet system in Central and Eastern European countries.Embarassing,sometimesoutrageousstatementsconcerningCommunismarepresent.ThepoorpresentationoftheShoahdoesn’tmeetitssignificanceinEuropeanhistory.

3. Facts. Some mistakes create the impression of an ideological bias that leads forinstance to belittling or omitting to mention Communist crimes. Other factualmistakes can reflect complicated structure of the narrative and should be easy tocorrect.

Animportantcauseforthefailuretomeetthegoalsoftheexhibition,i.e.topresentcommonvaluesandtiesbetweenEuropeannations,emergespartlyfromthefactthattheexhibition

14

was prepared in a non-transparentway,with a lack of any broader discussion about themethod of presenting European history. Any attempts to begin the debate aswell as anycritical remarks were refused. A proposal by the Platform of European Memory andConscience to participate in the work (as its 55 member institutions have substantialexperience and expertise in the presentation of history, especially the heritage of thetotalitarianpast)madeinpersontothechiefcuratorwasrejectedin2012.As a result, visitors get an ideologically biased, chaotic narrative line with manyshortcomingsorevenfalsifications.Themainideaismissing,seemstobeovershadowedbythenarrow-mindedMarxism-rootedconcept.Especiallyinthepartsdescribinghistoryofthenineteenthcentury, thehistoryof theColdWarand in thepresentationofEuropeanrootsthis ideological perspective is burdening and prevails over presentation of facts andprocesses.Tosumup:Giving the fact that the exhibition is presented under the umbrella of the EuropeanParliament, it needs a deep debate on the plenarymeeting of the Parliament. A panel ofexpertsshouldbenominatedbydifferentpoliticalgroupsandMEPsfromdifferentregionsoftheEUtoevaluateandconsequentlyproposechanges.IntheopinionofthemembersofthePlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConsciencethebestsolutionwouldbeworkoutanewconceptoftheexhibitionproperlydefiningitsgoals.Thenewconceptoftheexhibitionshouldbeworkedoutandconsultedwithbroadercirclesofscholars,museumprofessionalsandexperts from institutionsof remembranceandhistory education fromallEUmemberstates.

15

DRAWINGINSPIRATIONfromthecultural,religiousandhumanistinheritanceofEurope,fromwhichhavedevelopedtheuniversalvaluesoftheinviolableandinalienablerightsofthehumanperson,freedom,democracy,equalityandtheruleoflaw,RECALLINGthehistoricimportanceoftheendingofthedivisionoftheEuropeancontinentandtheneedtocreatefirmbasesfortheconstructionofthefutureEurope,CONFIRMINGtheirattachmenttotheprinciplesofliberty,democracyandrespectforhumanrightsandfundamentalfreedomsandoftheruleoflaw,(...)FromthePreambletoTheLisbonTreatyPhotographsonthefrontcover-clockwise,fromtoptobottom:HouseofEuropeanHistory,Brussels;PlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConsciencestudygroup;ashowcasewithEUposterincludingfivehammerandsicklesymbols,agoldenreliefwithLenin,acommercialproductwithalargehammerandsicklesymbolandaT-shirtwithRussianAEROFLOTlogo;scenefromfilmwithMarx,EngelsandBakuninasleadersofEuropeanthought.Contact:PlatformofEuropeanMemoryandConscienceLondýnská43,12000Praha2CzechRepublictel.:+420–222561053www.memoryandconscience.euwww.memorialbrussels.euDr.PawełUkielskiMember,ExecutiveBoardtel.:+48–509697013ukielski@poczta.onet.pl