Why I Hate Stepan Bandera

by Zoltanous

It's widely known that I hold disdain for Ukraine, Ukrainian nationalism, and Stepan Bandera. After much consideration, I have decided to elucidate the reasons behind my aversion to Bandera, purely from a historical perspective. Stepan Bandera, born in 1909 in what is now western Ukraine, was then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. He delved into the nationalist movement as a young man and joined the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) during the 1930s. It's accurate to label the OUN as a Ukrainian fascist organization.

The ideology of the OUN is best encapsulated by Mykola Stsiborskyi:

“It should be noted that the main ideas of fascism were not confined to Italy itself, but quickly spread their influence throughout the world, strengthening and formalizing the psychological and socio-political process that spontaneously erupted among various peoples after the last war: this is nationalism. Fascism itself is, first of all, nationalism - love for one's homeland and patriotic feelings, brought to self-dedication and the cult of sacrificial fanaticism.”

— Mykola Stsiborskyi, Natiocracy

After the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact in 1939, allies of Bandera distributed pamphlets criticizing Germany, signaling his opposition to Germany. During World War II, the OUN initially cooperated with Nazi Germany, but Bandera chose to oppose Germany, leading to a split in the OUN. Bandera’s faction adopted an anti-German position, creating a rift with members like Andriy Melnyk who supported Germany. This division in 1940 led to the formation of two factions: the anti-German OUN-Bandera (OUN-B) and the pro-German OUN-Melnyk (OUN-M), causing a significant divide in how Ukrainian groups interacted with Germany. In a letter from December 1940, Andriy Melnyk openly criticized the OUN-B's opposition to Germany.

A Ukrainian leaflet calling for Ukrainians to rise and fight against both the Nazis and Soviets

"The German nation is an accomplished fact, and if we don’t come to an agreement with it, we’ll get nowhere. That’s why I don’t understand the stubbornness of the other side, which is against any kind of agreement with Germany. Maybe they have a different idea about our national future, but I am convinced that we must come to an understanding with Germany. I’m not talking about an alliance, but about an agreement that would guarantee us the possibility of a national revival."

— Andriy Melnyk, December 1940

Andriy Melnyk

This statement reflects Melnyk's conviction that cooperating with Germany was crucial for the success of the Ukrainian independence effort. He also condemned the OUN-B faction for their refusal to negotiate or collaborate with the Germans.

"We believe that the Germans are not our friends, but our enemies, especially in the context of their geopolitical aspirations. The Germans will use us to achieve their goals and then betray us."

— Stepan Bandera, February 1941

Stepan Bandera

The critique of Bandera's vehement anti-German position highlights not just a strategic difference in achieving Ukrainian independence but also underscores deeper divergences between him and Melnyk. Their disagreements spanned several domains, including religious beliefs, where Melnyk and his followers emphasized the significance of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and held more religious views, in contrast to Bandera's faction that adopted a more secular approach, often displaying antagonism towards the Church. Their perspectives on Russia also varied significantly; Bandera and his adherents advocated for a Ukraine free from both Russian and Soviet control, embodying a strong anti-Russian sentiment. Melnyk's camp, however, aimed solely at independence from the Soviet Union without harboring animosity towards Russia or its people. The approach to violence further distinguished the two factions within the OUN. Both factions recognized violence as a tool for achieving their objectives, yet Bandera's supporters showed a greater propensity for extreme violence, including assassinations and sabotage during the German occupation. Melnyk's faction, on the other hand, exercised a more restrained use of violence, prioritizing collaboration with the Axis Powers.

This internal division weakened the OUN's cohesion and effectiveness, stirring tensions within the Ukrainian nationalist movement and complicating efforts to unite against common adversaries. This discord played a role in the eventual decline of Ukrainian fascism under Bandera's leadership. Despite the apparent need for German backing to establish a future Ukrainian government, Bandera unilaterally declared the Act of Restoration of the Ukrainian State and formed a provisional government on June 30, without securing an agreement with the German occupiers. This move led to the non-recognition of the government by the Germans and subsequent repression of its members. Notably, Bandera's connections included significant ties to Jewish individuals, exemplified by his close associate and the prime minister of the Ukrainian Nationalist government during the resistance against the Third Reich, Lev Rebet. Rebet, a Ukrainian Jew and a member of the OUN-B, supported Bandera's vision for an inclusive Ukraine, serving as his translator and aide, and stood by the promise of an Ukraine welcoming to all races.

The Jew Lev Rebet

In 1942, the Nazis captured Bandera due to his involvement in forming a Ukrainian insurgent army aimed at resisting the Nazi occupation of Ukraine. Following his arrest, he was sent to Sachsenhausen concentration camp, where he was held until his release in 1944.

"The OUN-B’s military wing, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), conducted a sustained sabotage campaign against the Germans... The UPA’s guerrilla war included a range of tactics from classic sabotage to individual acts of terror."

— Timothy Snyder, The Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, 1569-1999

After Ukraine fell under German control in 1942, the Ukrainian Resistance Army (UPA) came into existence, primarily initiated by members of the OUN-B faction. Roman Shukhevych, an associate of Bandera and a former Ukrainian military officer who had previously been detained by Soviet authorities, took the helm of the UPA. The group employed strategies similar to those of resistance movements across Europe at the time, including sabotage against German military facilities and supply routes, and assassination of German officials and their collaborators. The UPA also engaged in acts of violence against ethnic Germans in Ukraine. While discussions often highlight the UPA's anti-Jewish or anti-Polish actions, it’s crucial to recognize that ethnic Germans in Ukraine, often seen as collaborators, were also subjected to violence and ethnic cleansing efforts by the UPA.

"The UPA under Bandera's leadership began a campaign of terror against Polish, Jewish, and Ukrainian civilians who were deemed hostile to their cause. In addition, they took part in the German-led ethnic cleansing of German minorities in Volhynia and eastern Galicia, killing thousands of people in the process."

— John-Paul Himka, The Lviv Pogrom of 1941: The Germans, Ukrainian Nationalists, and the Carnival Crowd

The UPA faced daunting challenges in their struggle against the German occupiers, operating in difficult terrain with scarce resources and battling against superior forces, including Soviet partisans and the Polish underground. Despite these hurdles, they managed to execute significant operations against the Germans, particularly disrupting their supply chains and diminishing their military foothold in western Ukraine. The Nazis were acutely aware of the UPA's anti-German efforts. In January 1942, Erich Koch reported on the escalating activities of "Ukrainian terrorists" led by Bandera, noting numerous sabotage operations and assaults on German forces and facilities. Hans Frank, in April 1943, tagged the Bandera movement as a serious threat to security and regional stability, advocating for its elimination. Furthermore, Alfred Rosenberg, in a memo to Hitler dated July 1941, criticized Ukrainian nationalists for their self-serving attitudes and indifference to the idea of a pan-Germanic Empire, concluding that any cooperation with them would be unproductive.

"Bandera is a madman, an extremist, and a terrorist."

— Heinrich Himmler, quoted in The Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and Its Attitude Toward Germans and Jews by Volodymyr Serhiychuk

After being liberated from the concentration camp post-war, Bandera went underground and continued to dedicate himself to achieving Ukrainian independence. Throughout the 1950s, he emerged as a key figure in the Ukrainian nationalist movement abroad, working alongside the CIA and various Western intelligence services to fight against Soviet communism and push for Ukrainian sovereignty.

“Bandera was able to establish contact with the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies. In exchange for assistance, he agreed to provide information on Soviet activities and to carry out covert operations against Soviet targets."

—  Andreas Umland, The Ukrainian Radical Nationalist Movement: From Dissent to Political Violence

At this point, he explicitly renounced any ideological ties to fascism, emphasizing that Ukrainian nationalism was distinct from it, with its core focus on achieving Ukrainian independence and self-rule. In an interview, Bandera highlighted the crucial role of a democratic and sovereign Ukraine, voicing his resistance to all forms of totalitarian rule or dictatorship. Furthermore, he underscored the necessity of respecting human rights and freedoms, such as the freedom of speech and the right to assemble, indicating his alignment with liberalism.

“The conceptions Ukrainian nationalist, ‘nationalistic movement’, differ from similar terms used in the West. The Ukrainian nationalistic movement has nothing in common with Nazism, fascism or national-socialism. Ukrainian nationalism is fighting against totalitarianism, racism, dictatorship and violence of any kind.

The name ‘Ukrainian nationalist’ is consonant with ‘Ukrainian patriot’ who is ready to fight for freedom of his people, to sacrifice for his people everything he has, even his life.”

— Stepan Bandera interview to Cologne Radio Station 1954

In exchange for financial support and training from the CIA, Bandera provided crucial intelligence about Soviet operations in Ukraine and agreed to undertake secret missions targeting Soviet interests. He led the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council in executing sabotage acts and assassinating Soviet officials and their collaborators across Ukraine and other Soviet territories. Bandera's life was cut short in 1959 when a KGB agent assassinated him in Munich, Germany. This act was part of a broader Soviet strategy to eliminate Ukrainian nationalist leaders who were collaborating with Western intelligence. Bandera's assassination transformed him into a martyr and a symbol of the Ukrainian struggle against both Nazi and Soviet control.

While it would be an overstatement to claim that Bandera and the Ukrainian insurgents were solely responsible for the collapse of German power on the Eastern Front, their resistance undeniably played a critical role in undermining the Nazi military presence in the region. This contributed significantly to Nazi Germany's eventual defeat and the USSR's victory. Had Bandera been a staunch fascist ideologically, he might have seen the strategic benefit in siding with the Germans against the Allies. However, his decision to oppose the Nazis underscored his commitment to Ukrainian nationalism over any potential collaboration. His post-war cooperation with the CIA led to a deep infiltration of Ukrainian nationalist and independence movements by American intelligence. 

"The United States has been backing the Ukrainian nationalist cause since the end of World War II, when it provided support to the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), a group that was responsible for the massacre of tens of thousands of Poles and Jews in western Ukraine. In more recent times, the US has provided support to a number of far-right Ukrainian nationalist groups, including Svoboda and Right Sector."

— William Engdahl, Washington's Fascist Allies in Ukraine

“The United States has a long history of intervening in the politics of Ukraine, and has often supported far-right and nationalist groups in the country. This has had a destabilizing effect on Ukrainian society and politics."

— Mark Ames, How the US has backed Ukraine's nationalist rebels

In the course of the Orange Revolution in 2004, the US government threw its support behind pro-Western political factions in Ukraine, including nationalist groups such as the Svoboda party. In addition to this, the US provided financial aid and training to various Ukrainian civil society organizations and media platforms that promoted pro-Western values. In more recent times, the US has also supplied Ukraine with military and economic assistance in its confrontation with Russia, cooperating with different Ukrainian nationalist factions. Although the Azov Battalion is frequently associated with fascism, it does not celebrate Bandera or take inspiration from his legacy. A notable nationalist group in contemporary Ukraine that is influenced by Bandera is the National Corps, which was founded in 2016 by former members of the Azov Battalion. The Right Sector, a significant Ukrainian nationalist organization that came to prominence during the Euromaidan protests of 2013-2014—protests that received backing from the CIA and NATO — draws considerable inspiration from Bandera, as does the organization C14.

The Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that:

“There are indisputable heroes. Stepan Bandera is a hero for a certain part of Ukrainians, and this is a normal and cool thing. He was one of those who defended the freedom of Ukraine.”

— Volodymyr Zelensky, interview with Ukrainska Pravda 2019

Many Ukrainians view Bandera as a symbol of national heroism and the struggle for Ukrainian independence, an esteem akin to that held for Zelensky. This admiration for Bandera is a key reason behind my strong opposition to Ukrainian nationalism. Andriy Melnyk, who was staunchly pro-German, might be seen by some as a more fitting emblem of Ukrainian "nationalism" than the controversial Bandera. Despite this, there remains a contingent of people who continue to venerate him.

The Banderite cult of personality

Following World War II, Andriy Melnyk moved overseas and pursued his activities by collaborating with several Ukrainian organizations. In 1947, he founded the Ukrainian National Council, a body that maintained a pro-Western orientation without any connections to the CIA, unlike some contemporaries. Melnyk, however, has had far less impact in comparison to Bandera. This is part of the reason why I view the Russian depiction of contemporary Ukrainian "Nazism" as incorrect. Bandera actively distanced himself from fascism, and the Azov group, often labeled as fascistic, does not embrace many of Melnyk’s principles. This suggests a deep misunderstanding of Ukrainian nationalist sentiment.