Governance, Memory and History

“Historical Knowledge for Peacebuilding, Conflict Prevention and Resolution”

(Potsdam; June 1-3rd, 2026)

Distinguished colleagues, esteemed scholars, and honoured guests,

It is a profound privilege to address this distinguished assembly here in Potsdam, a city whose very fabric bears witness to the intricate entanglement of power, memory, and history. Today, we confront a paradox of our contemporary moment: the past, though immutable, is continually reinterpreted, contested, and, at times, instrumentalized. Memory is not merely a repository of events; it is an instrument of authority, shaping national identity, legitimizing political power, and influencing foreign policy.

In Russia, memory politics are deployed with remarkable precision. Historical narratives from the Second World War to the legacies of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire are selectively amplified, suppressed, or curated to serve state objectives. Scholars have repeatedly demonstrated that such narratives are not mere academic curiosities; they actively shape identity, public sentiment, and strategic decision-making.

Yet Russia is not unique. In Serbia, memory has been central to post-Yugoslav state-building. Competing narratives of the conflicts of the 1990s, from commemoration of war heroes to denial of atrocities, have influenced national identity, regional relations, and reconciliation processes. Here too, memory is contested terrain, illustrating how historical interpretation directly affects both domestic cohesion and international diplomacy.

Against this backdrop, Germany’s post-war experiment in Vergangenheitsbewältigung offers a compelling contrast. Memory became a civic project, a moral imperative, and a form of democratic discipline. Through acknowledgment, institutionalized remembrance, and public debate, Germany has shown that societies can confront even the most traumatic histories without succumbing to denial or revisionism. Yet this process is ongoing, reminding us that historical consciousness demands continual scholarly vigilance and public engagement.

It is also essential to recognize the Nordic perspective, particularly Finland’s role in fostering dialogue on contested histories. Through initiatives such as History in Exile, Finnish historians and educators promote critical engagement with Russian memory politics while encouraging transnational scholarly exchange. Finland’s model demonstrates how smaller nations, positioned at the intersection of East and West, can contribute meaningfully to the global discourse on memory, accountability, and reconciliation.

The contemporary global landscape makes clear that memory is a battleground. Across Eastern Europe and the Nordic-Baltic region, historical narratives underpin national strategies, shape diplomatic postures, and influence international alignments. Understanding these dynamics requires rigorous historical research, interdisciplinary scholarship, and public engagement that enables societies to distinguish between manipulation and truth.

Engagement with memory politics is not merely academic; it is a civic imperative with profound implications for future generations. How societies remember or choose to forget the past shapes the moral and political frameworks inherited by young people. Universities, as critical sites of knowledge production, have a special responsibility in this regard. By including the study of contested histories and memory politics in curricula, universities equip students with analytical tools to discern manipulation, evaluate sources critically, and understand the interplay between past and present. In doing so, higher education fosters informed citizens capable of participating in democratic debate, resisting authoritarian narratives, and contributing to a culture of historical responsibility.

Equally vital is sustained parliamentary engagement with memory politics. Legislative bodies shape not only laws but the frameworks through which societies remember and commemorate the past. Parliamentary debates signal public commitment to transparency, accountability, and ethical governance. By confronting contested histories, parliaments guard against the instrumentalization of memory, ensure narratives remain inclusive and critically examined, and reinforce democratic norms. Such scrutiny embeds historical responsibility into the fabric of public life.

Cultural diplomacy also plays a crucial role in addressing memory politics. By fostering cross-border dialogue, promoting shared historical understanding, and creating platforms for exchange between scholars, educators, and the public, cultural diplomacy counters monopolization of memory by authoritarian or revisionist actors. International conferences, educational partnerships, exhibitions, and collaborative research projects create spaces where contested narratives can be examined critically and empathetically, building trust and mutual understanding. Far from symbolic, cultural diplomacy strengthens democratic resilience, nurtures informed civic engagement, and enables societies to engage responsibly with their past.

In conclusion, the politics of memory is neither abstract nor remote. It shapes our identities, informs our policies, and defines the possibilities for reconciliation and justice. How we remember, teach, debate, and reflect upon the past determines the moral and political character of the present. Engaging with history responsibly is therefore both an academic endeavor and a profound civic responsibility.

Thank you.

Mark Donfried

• Independent