The chairman of Yad Vashem, Israel’s Holocaust memorial, Dani Dayan, has confirmed that he rejected a request from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to address a local audience at the institution. The decision, revealed in an interview with the “Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung”, underscores a growing sensitivity surrounding the conflation of contemporary conflicts with the historical singularity of the Holocaust.
According to Dayan’s account, Zelenskyy initially sought to deliver a speech before approximately 300 guests, coupled with a global broadcast, shortly after Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine. Dayan’s refusal stemmed from a concern that allowing the address would equate the current war in Ukraine with the Holocaust, a proposition he deemed historically inaccurate and potentially damaging.
“Not every war crime is a genocide and not every genocide is a Holocaust” Dayan stated, emphasizing Yad Vashem’s commitment to honoring the specific victims and experiences unique to the Shoa. He further pointed to the involvement of Ukrainian collaborators during the Holocaust, a contentious point in the historical narrative that prompted his caution.
The move, while intended to safeguard the distinct memory of the Holocaust, risks complicating the already intricate relationship between Israel and Ukraine. While Dayan stressed that the decision does not reflect a lack of solidarity with Ukraine, it highlights the delicate balancing act Israel faces in expressing support for a nation experiencing immense suffering while fiercely protecting the integrity of its historical memory.
Zelenskyy subsequently delivered a virtual address to the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, which itself drew criticism for its explicit references to the Holocaust, reinforcing the sensitivity surrounding the issue and prompting questions about the boundaries of historical comparison in the context of contemporary geopolitical conflict. The incident raises broader questions about the responsibility of institutions like Yad Vashem to navigate increasingly complex political landscapes and to uphold rigorous historical fidelity, even when facing urgent pleas for empathy and solidarity.