Latest news with #Stalinism
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Monument to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin in Moscow metro stirs debate
MOSCOW (Reuters) -A monument to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin erected in Moscow's metro is stirring debate, with some Russians welcoming it as a historical tribute, but others saying it's a mistake to commemorate someone who presided over so much suffering. The life-size wall sculpture in Moscow's Taganskaya metro station depicts Stalin standing on Moscow's Red Square surrounded by a crowd of Soviet citizens looking at him in admiration, and is a recreation of a monument that was unveiled in the same station in 1950, three years before Stalin died. The Moscow metro said that the original monument to Stalin had been "lost" in 1966 when the Taganskaya metro station hosting it had been reconfigured. Nearly 700,000 people were executed in Stalin's 1937-38 Great Terror amid show trials and purges of his real and perceived enemies. Many other Soviet citizens were sent to the Gulag, a grim network of prison camps, spread across the world's largest country. The Moscow metro said in a statement that the new version of the monument, which was presented to the public on May 15, was one of its "gifts" to passengers to mark the 90th anniversary of the sprawling, ornate and famously efficient transport system. The work's original title, "Gratitude of the People to the Leader and Commander,' was dedicated to Stalin's role in delivering victory for the Soviet Union in World War Two, the 80th anniversary of which Russia marked with pomp this year. "This man (Stalin), he created a lot," said Yevgeny Ivanov, a Moscow resident, who had come to look at the new monument on Wednesday. "He has something to be proud of. And it is not for us to tear it down. A man did something - we must respect what he did." Kirill Frolov, another resident of the capital, said he accepted that Stalin's record was mixed and that you couldn't call him "good." But he said that Stalin's role as a victor in World War Two and his successful industrialisation of the Soviet Union meant he had achieved real results and deserved to be remembered. "This man did more for our country than anyone else. That's why I think that this (the new monument) is good and there should be more... Because the generation of, say, the 2000s and later, they don't really understand at all who this is." Others condemned the monument. The Moscow branch of the liberal Yabloko party issued a formal protest against what it called the return of a monument to "a tyrant and a dictator" and demanded that the Moscow metro focus on commemorating the victims of Stalin's repressions instead. "The return of symbols of Stalinism to Moscow is spitting in the face of history and an act of mockery against the descendants of the repressed," Yabloko said in a statement. Unidentified individuals initially left two signs at the monument containing quotes from Russian President Vladimir Putin and former president Dmitry Medvedev which were critical of Stalin. They were later removed. DE-STALINISATION Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev denounced Stalin for his brutality and crimes in 1956 and images of Stalin would later be systematically removed as part of a de-Stalinisation campaign. In recent years, some monuments to Stalin have begun to reappear in some places though his legacy remains deeply divisive. Alexander Zinoviev, a researcher and expert on Soviet architecture, said he felt the new monument and the period it evoked had some parallels with the current mood inside Russia at a time when it is locked in a standoff with the West over the war in Ukraine. "It is the same self-isolation, it is the same conservative ideology and reliance on our own strength," he said. "And this theme with Stalin, with his we need to trust our leader and be happy and not criticise those in power, it is very in tune with our time."
Straits Times
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Straits Times
Monument to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin in Moscow metro stirs debate
MOSCOW - A monument to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin erected in Moscow's metro is stirring debate, with some Russians welcoming it as a historical tribute, but others saying it's a mistake to commemorate someone who presided over so much suffering. The life-size wall sculpture in Moscow's Taganskaya metro station depicts Stalin standing on Moscow's Red Square surrounded by a crowd of Soviet citizens looking at him in admiration, and is a recreation of a monument that was unveiled in the same station in 1950, three years before Stalin died. The Moscow metro said that the original monument to Stalin had been "lost" in 1966 when the Taganskaya metro station hosting it had been reconfigured. Nearly 700,000 people were executed in Stalin's 1937-38 Great Terror amid show trials and purges of his real and perceived enemies. Many other Soviet citizens were sent to the Gulag, a grim network of prison camps, spread across the world's largest country. The Moscow metro said in a statement that the new version of the monument, which was presented to the public on May 15, was one of its "gifts" to passengers to mark the 90th anniversary of the sprawling, ornate and famously efficient transport system. The work's original title, "Gratitude of the People to the Leader and Commander,' was dedicated to Stalin's role in delivering victory for the Soviet Union in World War Two, the 80th anniversary of which Russia marked with pomp this year. "This man (Stalin), he created a lot," said Yevgeny Ivanov, a Moscow resident, who had come to look at the new monument on Wednesday. "He has something to be proud of. And it is not for us to tear it down. A man did something - we must respect what he did." Kirill Frolov, another resident of the capital, said he accepted that Stalin's record was mixed and that you couldn't call him "good." But he said that Stalin's role as a victor in World War Two and his successful industrialisation of the Soviet Union meant he had achieved real results and deserved to be remembered. "This man did more for our country than anyone else. That's why I think that this (the new monument) is good and there should be more... Because the generation of, say, the 2000s and later, they don't really understand at all who this is." Others condemned the monument. The Moscow branch of the liberal Yabloko party issued a formal protest against what it called the return of a monument to "a tyrant and a dictator" and demanded that the Moscow metro focus on commemorating the victims of Stalin's repressions instead. "The return of symbols of Stalinism to Moscow is spitting in the face of history and an act of mockery against the descendants of the repressed," Yabloko said in a statement. Unidentified individuals initially left two signs at the monument containing quotes from Russian President Vladimir Putin and former president Dmitry Medvedev which were critical of Stalin. They were later removed. DE-STALINISATION Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev denounced Stalin for his brutality and crimes in 1956 and images of Stalin would later be systematically removed as part of a de-Stalinisation campaign. In recent years, some monuments to Stalin have begun to reappear in some places though his legacy remains deeply divisive. Alexander Zinoviev, a researcher and expert on Soviet architecture, said he felt the new monument and the period it evoked had some parallels with the current mood inside Russia at a time when it is locked in a standoff with the West over the war in Ukraine. "It is the same self-isolation, it is the same conservative ideology and reliance on our own strength," he said. "And this theme with Stalin, with his we need to trust our leader and be happy and not criticise those in power, it is very in tune with our time." REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
The Star
22-05-2025
- Politics
- The Star
Monument to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin in Moscow metro stirs debate
MOSCOW (Reuters) -A monument to Soviet dictator Josef Stalin erected in Moscow's metro is stirring debate, with some Russians welcoming it as a historical tribute, but others saying it's a mistake to commemorate someone who presided over so much suffering. The life-size wall sculpture in Moscow's Taganskaya metro station depicts Stalin standing on Moscow's Red Square surrounded by a crowd of Soviet citizens looking at him in admiration, and is a recreation of a monument that was unveiled in the same station in 1950, three years before Stalin died. The Moscow metro said that the original monument to Stalin had been "lost" in 1966 when the Taganskaya metro station hosting it had been reconfigured. Nearly 700,000 people were executed in Stalin's 1937-38 Great Terror amid show trials and purges of his real and perceived enemies. Many other Soviet citizens were sent to the Gulag, a grim network of prison camps, spread across the world's largest country. The Moscow metro said in a statement that the new version of the monument, which was presented to the public on May 15, was one of its "gifts" to passengers to mark the 90th anniversary of the sprawling, ornate and famously efficient transport system. The work's original title, "Gratitude of the People to the Leader and Commander,' was dedicated to Stalin's role in delivering victory for the Soviet Union in World War Two, the 80th anniversary of which Russia marked with pomp this year. "This man (Stalin), he created a lot," said Yevgeny Ivanov, a Moscow resident, who had come to look at the new monument on Wednesday. "He has something to be proud of. And it is not for us to tear it down. A man did something - we must respect what he did." Kirill Frolov, another resident of the capital, said he accepted that Stalin's record was mixed and that you couldn't call him "good." But he said that Stalin's role as a victor in World War Two and his successful industrialisation of the Soviet Union meant he had achieved real results and deserved to be remembered. "This man did more for our country than anyone else. That's why I think that this (the new monument) is good and there should be more... Because the generation of, say, the 2000s and later, they don't really understand at all who this is." Others condemned the monument. The Moscow branch of the liberal Yabloko party issued a formal protest against what it called the return of a monument to "a tyrant and a dictator" and demanded that the Moscow metro focus on commemorating the victims of Stalin's repressions instead. "The return of symbols of Stalinism to Moscow is spitting in the face of history and an act of mockery against the descendants of the repressed," Yabloko said in a statement. Unidentified individuals initially left two signs at the monument containing quotes from Russian President Vladimir Putin and former president Dmitry Medvedev which were critical of Stalin. They were later removed. DE-STALINISATION Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev denounced Stalin for his brutality and crimes in 1956 and images of Stalin would later be systematically removed as part of a de-Stalinisation campaign. In recent years, some monuments to Stalin have begun to reappear in some places though his legacy remains deeply divisive. Alexander Zinoviev, a researcher and expert on Soviet architecture, said he felt the new monument and the period it evoked had some parallels with the current mood inside Russia at a time when it is locked in a standoff with the West over the war in Ukraine. "It is the same self-isolation, it is the same conservative ideology and reliance on our own strength," he said. "And this theme with Stalin, with his we need to trust our leader and be happy and not criticise those in power, it is very in tune with our time." (Reporting by Moscow newsroomWriting by Andrew OsbornEditing by Alexandra Hudson)
eNCA
15-05-2025
- Politics
- eNCA
French lawmakers divided over PM child abuse hearing
French politicians were divided on Thursday over the marathon hearing of Prime Minister Francois Bayrou, who was grilled by lawmakers about claims of sexual abuse at a Catholic school. Some deputies were outraged at the way Bayrou was questioned for five and a half hours on Wednesday, one of them comparing the hearing to a "Stalinist" trial. Others accused the 73-year-old premier of obfuscation. Even the two co-rapporteurs of the inquiry were divided, with one claiming Bayrou had admitted to "lying" and the other saying she believed him. On Wednesday, Bayrou faced one of the most delicate moments of his five months in office when he sought to defend himself before a committee investigating widespread claims of abuse at a school in southwestern France. During the tense hearing, Bayrou, who served as education minister between 1993 and 1997, struck a defiant tone and said he only knew of allegations of sexual abuse from media reports. He accused the commission, and particularly one of the co-rapporteurs, a lawmaker with the left-wing France Unbowed party (LFI), of seeking to "bring down" the government. - 'Moscow trial' - "I tend to give credence to the prime minister's public words," said far-right National Rally party vice-president Sebastien Chenu, adding that the hearing made him uncomfortable. "For me it was more like a Moscow trial," he told broadcaster TF1. He particularly criticised the behaviour of the LFI co-rapporteur, Paul Vannier, regretting what he called an "exploitation of a tragedy". Marc Fesneau, a Bayrou ally, was even more outspoken, describing "this way of treating people as pretty disgusting". "It's Stalinism," he told broadcaster Radio J. But Boris Vallaud, the head of Socialist lawmakers, described the prime minister's tactics as "smoke and mirrors". "At the end of this hearing, do the French people, the victims, feel that they have been enlightened about what happened?" Vallaud said. "I don't think so." - 'Best defence is good offence' - Bayrou has faced opposition claims that he knew of widespread physical and sexual abuse over many decades at the Notre-Dame de Betharram school. Several of Bayrou's children attended the school and his wife taught religious studies there. Centrist Bayrou, the sixth prime minister of President Emmanuel Macron's mandate was named head of government in December and given the task of hauling France out of months of political crisis. He has managed to survive a no-confidence vote in a divided parliament but the Betharram affair has damaged his credibility and his approval rating has been declining. Vannier, the LFI co-rappourter, said Thursday the prime minister had admitted having "lied" in February when questioned in parliament for the first time. He told broadcaster franceinfo the committee would carefully study Bayrou's latest statements, pointing to "one important lesson -- yes, Francois Bayrou lied to the National Assembly" in February. Speaking to reporters later in the day, he said it was "too early to say" if Bayrou had lied on Wednesday. His co-rapporteur, centrist Violette Spillebout, disagreed, saying Bayrou had offered an "extremely vigorous defence" following months of attacks by Vannier. "And I believe him," she said. They are expected to deliver their conclusion in June. Analysts say the scandal could embolden the prime minister's enemies. "Francois Bayrou's hearing on the Betharram affair turns into a political confrontation," said French daily Le Monde. Left-leaning Liberation said those who had expected to hear the truth would be disappointed. "The prime minister made it clear from the outset: the best defence is a good offence," the newspaper added. The hard left ramped up their pressure on Bayrou. "Can we accept a prime minister who lies to MPs when they are exercising their constitutional prerogative of overseeing the government's action?", LFI national coordinator Manuel Bompard said on X. "For us, the answer is no!" By Veronique Dupont And Anna Smolchenko
The Guardian
15-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Ukrainian director Sergei Loznitsa decries ‘nightmare' of Putin-Trump alliance
One of Ukraine's leading film-makers has spoken of the 'nightmare' of an emergent alliance between authoritarian leaders in Russia and the US, as his new film on contemporary echoes with the Stalinist era opens at the Cannes film festival. 'The events that unfolded in the past 100 days really surprised many people all over the world,' said director Sergei Loznitsa, whose new film Two Prosecutors received its world premiere on Wednesday. 'One couldn't even imagine in a nightmare such a union, such an understanding between two authoritarian leaders.' Two Prosecutors is based on scientist Georgy Demidov's novella of the same name, written during his 14-year stay in various Russian gulags and only released to his relatives by the KGB in the 1990s. Set at the time of Stalin's Great Terror, the tragicomic film tells the story of young and idealistic prosecutor Alexander Kornyev (played by Russian actor Aleskandr Kuznetsov), who receives an anonymous letter written in blood that speaks of the brutal torture at the hands of the secret police. Undeterred by the prison directors' resistance, Kornyev seeks to investigate and alert higher authorities to the abuse of power – seemingly oblivious to the risk he is putting himself in by doing so. Loznitsa told Variety that Russia under Vladimir Putin was 'hurtling back toward Stalinism – a country that breaches international law, a country that wages wars with its neighbours'. The US, he continued, used to be regarded as a champion of the human rights that Kornyev believes in, 'a fortress of democracy, that doesn't only proclaim the rule of law and human rights, but also a country that fights for human rights.' Under Donald Trump, however, he feared that it was only a matter of time before 'these two countries will become equal'. Loznitsa, a Cannes regular whose 2018 film Donbass won the Un Certain Regard award for best director, has been based in Berlin for more than 20 years and is a controversial figure in his native Ukraine. He resigned from the European Film Academy in 2022 over the body's 'neutral, toothless' response to the Russian invasion, but was ejected from the Ukrainian Film Academy over his criticism of an all-out boycott on Russian artists and culture. He sounded evasive when asked at a press conference on Thursday about his view on US president Trump pressurising the Ukrainian government to accept Moscow's demands for a peace deal, such as recognising Russian control of Crimea. 'I don't think we should think in terms of what leaders are doing, the decisions they are making, because it's not just the leaders, it's us too,' Loznitsa said. 'And it is imperative that we don't give up, we have to think about it every time, and we have to ask ourselves what to do in the circumstances in which we find ourselves.'
