2023-10-03 05:52:00
Every year on October 3, Germans celebrate German Unity Day. 33 years ago, in 1990, on this day, the German Democratic Republic officially joined the Federal Republic of Germany. The Germans began to live in a single state again.
This chapter of German history is inextricably linked with the history of the USSR and its ex-president Mikhail Gorbachev. If both the general public and historians have long been accustomed to the dual assessment of the role of Gorbachev – in Russia and in the West, then the new interpretation of the reunification of Germany, which is presented in the latest Russian history textbook for the 11th grade, causes a very emotional reaction among German historians . The fact is that instead of unification there is an “annexation” of East Germany.
Textbook 2021 and “Medinsky’s textbook”. What is the difference?
Until recently, Russian schoolchildren studied the events of 1990 exclusively as the reunification of the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany. The textbook for the 11th grade of 2021 (Prosveshchenie publishing house, author – Soroko-Tsyupa) talks about the “velvet revolution” in the GDR and the unification of Germany. This book explains to Russian schoolchildren that a “deep political crisis was brewing” in the GDR, and “a way out could only be found through a change of power.” Here there is information about the agreement on the entry of the lands of the GDR into the Federal Republic of Germany and the all-German elections, which consolidated the very process of unification of the country. The textbook was republished for the third time in 2023, but retained the same wording and main message.
However, officials now claim that this “old” textbook only offers a “basic level” for learning history. For those who like to “dig deeper,” from September 1, 2023, in Russia there is a “more complex” history textbook – for “advanced” students (this is how it is sometimes presented in Russian schools, and we do not exclude a degree of irony in the words of teachers who essentially left without the right to choose).
In the “Medinsky textbook” it’s a completely different story: the interpretations of events actually contradict the theses from the 2021 textbook. In the section “New Thinking and Changes in Foreign Policy” of the new textbook there is a passage that talks about how the unilateral withdrawal of Soviet troops from Eastern and Central Europe in 1989 was an “ill-considered decision” that led to the weakening of the USSR’s military presence in allied countries. countries, caused a “sharp intensification of nationalist and anti-Soviet sentiments,” which in turn took advantage of the collective West. As a result, “velvet revolutions” occurred in Poland, the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Albania. Just below we read: “The GDR was absorbed by the Federal Republic of Germany. At the same time, the leaders of Western countries gave Gorbachev verbal promises not to expand NATO to the East. These promises were subsequently broken.”
This passage is illustrated by a German poster from 1990, “West and East together create the future for Germany and Europe.” It has a signature from the authors of the textbook: “The annexation of East Germany by the Federal Republic of Germany caused euphoria in German society. However, it soon became clear that the declared sharp “lifting” of the standard of living of the former GDR to the level of the Federal Republic did not take place.”
The 2021 edition talks about both the general German elections and the victory of the CDU in four of the five states in the territory of the former GDR, and also concludes that “thus, not only a national question (the desire of the Germans to live together), but also a social question (unwillingness to live under socialism) in Germany became the driving force of the German unification process.” There is not a word about all these facts in Medinsky’s textbook. In general, when you leaf through the 2023 textbook authored by the former Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation Vladimir Medinsky and MGIMO Rector Anatoly Torkunov, you get the feeling that along with Gorbachev, the history of the unification of Germany was buried in Russia. Surprisingly, both textbooks are still in use: Soroko-Tsyupa’s and Medinsky’s.
Saxony, January 1990: demonstrations in support of the unification of the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany Photo: dpa/picture alliance
German historians on the “annexation of East Germany”
DW decided to ask German historians what they think about the new interpretation of the unification of Germany in the Russian Federation. We asked only two, in our opinion, main questions about the significance of October 3, 1990 in the history of the country and about “annexation.” In an interview with DW, Ute Frevert, director of the Max Planck Institute for Human Development (Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung), voiced their position; Niko Lamprecht – head of the German Union of History Teachers (Bundesvorsitzender Verband der Geschichtslehrerinnen und -lehrer Deutschlands e.V.); Zaur Gasimov is a lecturer in East European history at the University of Bonn.
DW: What is the significance of October 3rd in German history?
Ute Frevert: This is the only national holiday in Germany. There are many more such days in other countries. And this is a day of rejoicing over the reunification of Germany, which took place in 1990. For more than 40 years, East and West, the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany, were divided. The country united again and, already united, received a democratic Constitution and democratic institutions. We owe all this to the peaceful revolution carried out by hundreds of thousands of citizens of the GDR in the fall of 1989. It swept away the authoritarian and decaying regime of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany and cleared the way for the unification of the German states, which took place on October 3, 1990.
Niko Lamprecht: This day plays a very important role in the history of Germany. When teaching history, I always have to put the event into context. You can’t just tell the students that it was such a jingoistic day. Events developed before and after. In our lessons we try to show the development of both the collapse of the GDR in the 1980s and November 9, 1989 (the fall of the Berlin Wall. – Ord.), and demonstrations in Leipzig in October 1989 (“Monday Demonstration.” – Ord.). If enough time is allocated to consider this topic, then different points of view can be presented. There are different interpretations – even legends or fakes. Already in those days it was a struggle for narratives and the right to interpretation. In the People’s Chamber of the GDR and in the 1990 election campaign, different parties, of course, expressed different positions. The party, led by Helmut Kohl, was for the unity of Germany, and as quickly as possible. Others advocated taking it slow. But the will of the majority led to reunification. And this was consolidated by all-German elections (on December 2, 1990, the first all-German parliamentary elections since 1932 were held, which were won by the Christian-liberal coalition led by Helmut Kohl. – Ord.).
Zaur Gasimov: This day is of great importance in the history of Germany and symbolizes the political and economic reunification of the country in the center of Europe, which was completed almost 35 years ago. The impact that this day had subsequently, and the memories of it, have their own dynamics and differences throughout the country, which in itself is quite natural. And it remains a fascinating phenomenon for many scientists who study the dynamics in public memory of October 3 in Germany.
DW: Why is the new Russian textbook calling the unification of Germany “annexation”?
Ute Frevert: Some former citizens of the GDR also talk about the so-called “Anschluss”, while consciously resorting to semantics that take us back to 1938, when the German and Austrian Nazis ordered the inclusion of Austria in the “German Reich” (the official name of the “Third Reich” until 1943 .- Ord.). Using this provocative term, they express their feelings of disappointment and anger against unification in 1990. In their view, as in the view of Putin and his falsifiers of history, the unification of Germany was an act of colonialism: the strong imperialist West subjugated the weak East. Although, of course, this does not correspond to historical facts in any way. But this fits both the anti-Western narrative of the Putin regime and its aggressive imperialist policies.
Niko Lamprecht: President Putin has completely rewritten history. We have already observed something similar with his statements about the beginning of World War II and the Hitler-Stalin (Molotov-Ribbentrop) Pact. Ord.). Now he does the same with the post-war period and with recent history. From his point of view, the Russian empire is always right and can take back whatever it wants. To strengthen this position, he needs analogies. Therefore, he needs to show that the GDR was “annexed”, they say, this is a controversial area to which he may return. From my point of view, this no longer has anything to do with history and international law. At the same time, I want to emphasize once again that there were different points of view regarding the unification of Germany, including the absorption of the East by the West, but then the toxic word “Anschluss” was used. Putin is rewriting the history of a union that was consolidated democratically, resorting to concepts that were then popular among the minority, and takes us to a new level: from “Anschluss” to “annexation.” Putin argues that the legitimacy of borders in East Germany is a moot point because, according to his reinterpretation of history, it was a land grab. If you ask me, I will say: yes, we are dealing with a politically motivated reinterpretation of history based on false facts. There was never a majority against the unification of Germany! The majority supported this idea! In 1989 and 1990, there were no German tanks that crossed the border to occupy the territory of the GDR. A completely different solution was found to this issue.
Zaur Gasimov: In Russia over the past decade there has been a pronounced and obvious nationalization of discussions on historical topics. One of the main elements in this process of nationalization was radicalization in the choice of words and argumentation. In this regard, it was school history classes that were particularly strongly influenced. After the annexation of Crimea and the invasion of eastern and northern Ukraine in February 2022, these phenomena only intensified. The unification of Germany is seen in the context of Gorbachev’s perestroika, which, from the point of view of the ruling elite in Russia, caused the collapse of the Soviet empire. Medinsky and the ruling circles curse the unification of Germany as a landmark event in the reorientation of Europe towards NATO. Perhaps this is the reason we are seeing such a radical change in concepts.
Results
At the end of the article, it is important to note: German historians do not idealize unification and are not afraid to talk about the difficulties of reunification and the differences between East and West. There are also obvious critics among them – if not of the unification as such, then of exactly how it happened. Probably the most famous critic is Iko-Sascha Kowalczuk: in his book “Die Übernahme”, published on the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Wall, he sums up the process of unification. However, German historians precisely agree that the history of German reunification in Medinsky’s textbook is a pure falsification.
See also:
#Putin #rewrote #German #history