As May 9 approaches, Russia is preparing to commemorate an emblematic date: the day of victory, which celebrates the capitulation of Nazi Germany in 1945. This day, of capital importance in the Russian collective imagination, is traditionally used by the regime of Vladimir Putin as an opportunity to underline the historical role of the Soviet Union in the fight against Nazism. However, in this period of conflict in Ukraine, these celebrations take a particular turn, marked by a manifest will to cement a story of resilience and remobilization.
### The myth of resistance
May 9 became, over the years, a symbol of national pride. The regime highlights the memory of the Soviet heroes who fought the Nazi forces, establishing a direct link with the current situation. The rhetoric used justifies the importance of Ukraine’s “denazification”, a term which has imposed itself in official discourse and which seems to call for a kind of historical continuity between the fight against Nazism during the Second World War and contemporary military actions.
This communication strategy is part of an approach aimed at legitimizing Russian engagement in Ukraine, by mobilizing deep emotions associated with collective memory. In this way, the story of the war becomes an extension of national identity, using anecdotes and historical references to galvanize the population and strengthen support for the government. Thus, various events, celebrations, parades and monuments, multiply throughout the country and in the occupied territories, stressing this desire to build a shared history.
## Collective memory management
The importance of historical memory in Russia cannot be underestimated. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the memory of the Second World War has been recovered and reinterpreted many times, shaping a story where Russia plays the role of the big winner. By referring to a glorious past, the Putin regime hopes not only to unify the nation around a common objective, but also to justify contemporary actions deemed controversial.
The reputation of Volgograd in Stalingrad airport for future celebrations illustrates this trend. This type of symbolic gesture aims to evoke a feeling of belonging and to recall the sacrifices made by the ancestors. Such an approach raises questions about how states use history for political ends and the means of manipulation that can result from it.
### International repercussions
However, the instrumentalization of this event for propaganda purposes is not lacking in inducing tensions on the international scene. Western countries observe this remobilization with concern and skepticism, some fearing that it would contribute to a climate of militarization and exacerbated nationalism. This celebration and resentment cycle could indeed transform this commemoration day into an opportunity for division rather than reconciliation.
The orchestration of a nationalist discourse by the Kremlin can also nourish a feeling of isolation among certain fringes of Russian society, especially when the economic and social reality of the country is undermined by the geopolitical context. Debates around historical truth, collective memory and national identity become essential in this ambivalent discourse.
### What prospects?
In this context, it is essential to consider constructive paths to deal with these dynamics. This could include initiatives aimed at promoting an intercultural dialogue, to encourage reflections on historical memory in a framework that is not only that of propaganda, but rather that of a sharing of experiences between nations.
Exploring historical accounts by giving them nuances, by opening the possibility of critical debates on past events, could contribute to a positive transformation of international relations. Can we imagine a future where May 9 would not only be a symbol of victory, but also an opportunity for dialogue and reconciliation?
Ultimately, the celebrations of May 9 in Russia illustrate a complex phenomenon where the national memory, national identity and political strategy intertwine. The way in which these celebrations are perceived at the international level as well as in Russian society even poses considerable challenges, but also offers avenues to envisage a more nuanced and potentially reconciling approach.