Soviet rule, 1939-1941
The first two years of the war have received much attention. Volodymyr Kubiio- vych’s detailed history of Ukrainians in the Generalgouvernement from 1939 to 1941 includes much information on those parts of Ukrainian Galicia (the area around Przemysl and the Lemkian Region) that had at the outset of the war come under German rule.[583]
The period of Soviet rule that lasted from September 1939 to June 1941 in the part of Galicia that was east of the German-Soviet demarcation line (San River) is the subject of several works by Soviet Ukrainian authors.
They view this period as one in which the local population was finally liberated from the centuries-long period of oppression by foreign rulers in cooperation with local Ukrainian bourgeois elements-a “dark era” that had lasted since the fall of the Galician- Volhynian principality in the fourteenth century until 1939, when the region was finally “reincorporated” into the bosom of the Soviet Ukrainian motherland.14The Soviets have prepared a collection of documents on the unification of the western Ukrainian lands,15 histories of the administrative, socioeconomic, and cultural changes that resulted,16 and a praiseworthy account of the Communist party’s role in these developments.17They have also written individual studies on what are considered the many positive achievements of Soviet rule: nationalization of industry,18 collectivization of the land,19 restrictions on the church and reorganization of the educational system,20 and the “creation of a new Soviet
14 For contemporary works outlining the general Soviet historical view of Galicia, see chapter 2, n. 45.
On the Red Army’s military operations in September 1939, see the recollections of the participants in U.R Krikun, Geroizm otvaga, muzhestvo i doblest' : rasskazy uchastnikov boev za osvobozhdenie trudiashchikhsia Zapadnoi Ukrainy i Zapadnoi Belorussii (Kiev: Gospolitizdat 1940).
15 Vozz" iednannia ukrai'ns'koho narodu v iedynii Ukra'ins’kii Radians’kii derzhavi (1939-1949 rr.): zbirnyk dokumentiv i material™ (Kiev: Derzhpolitvydav URSR 1949).
16 Vasyl’ L. Varets’kyi, Sotsialistychni peretvorennia u zakhidnykh oblastiakh URSR (v dovoien- nyi period) (Kiev: AN URSR 1960); B.M. Babii, Vozz"iednannia Zakhidno'i Ukrainy z Ukrains’koiu RSR (Kiev: AN URSR 1954).
17 Narysy istorii 1'vivs’koi' oblasnol partiinoi orhanizatsi'i, 2nd rev. ed. (L’viv: Kameniar 1969), especially pp. 62-125.
18 V.L. Varets’kyi, “Sotsialistychne peretvorennia promyslovosti zakhidnykh oblastei Ukrainy v 1939-1941 rr.,” Z istorii borot’ by za vstanovlennia radians'koi vlady na Ukraini, Naukovi zapysky Instytutu istorii AN URSR, XI (Kiev 1957), pp. 289-323; H.I. Koval’chak, “Rozvytok sotsialistychnoi promyslovosti v zakhidnykh oblastiakh URSR u 1939-1941 rokakh,” in Z istorii zakhidnoukra'ins'kykh zemel’, vol. IV, ed. I.P. Kryp”iakevych (Kiev: AN URSR 1960), pp. 121-131; D.D. Nyzovyi, “Sotsialistychna perebudova naftovoi promyslovosti radians’koho Prykarpattia v 1939- 1941 rokakh,” Z istorii zakhidnoukra'ins’kykh zemel', vol. V (Kiev: AN URSR 1960), pp. 153-167.
19 M.K. Ivasiuta, “Pershi uspikhy kolektyvizatsii sil’s’koho hospodarstva v zakhidnykh oblastiakh URSR (1939-1941 roky),” inZ istorii zakhidnoukra'ins’kykh zemel’, vol. IV, ed. I.P. Kryp”iakevych (Kiev: AN URSR, 1960), pp. 132-144.
20 F.I. Steblii, “Perebudova i rozvytok vyshchoi osvity v zakhidnykh oblastiakh URSR v pershi roky radians’koi vlady (veresen’ 1939-cherven’ 1941 rr.),” inZ istorii' Ukrains’koi' RSR, vol. VI-VII (Kiev: AN URSR 1962), pp. 126-141; TH. Sokolovs’ka, “Ideino-vykhovna ta intelligentsia.”[584] [585] Of course, the forcible character of the process that led to such “achievements,” even though they were carried out with a Ukrainian national coloring and in the name of the Ukrainian people, is not to be found in Soviet accounts, but rather in a collection of mostly anonymous eyewitness accounts of the period edited by the former parliamentary deputy Milena Rudnyts’ka.[586]
Political developments
In an era of war, rapid political change, and extreme violence, it is not surprising that the activist movement founded in Galicia during the interwar period-the OUN-would come to play a dominant role in Ukrainian affairs. After the generally respected head of the OUN, levhen Konovalets’, was assassinated in 1938 by a Soviet agent, the directorate (Provid) of the organization chose Andrii Mel’nyk (1890-1964) as its new leader.
Mel’nyk had fought in the Ukrainian Sich Riflemen during World War I and was arrested in 1924 by the Poles for being the leader of the underground Ukrainian Military Organization (UVO) during the 1920s. But his generally moderate attitude toward political change and reluctance to use violent methods as well as his close relationship with Metropolitan Sheptyts’kyi- all of which made Mel’nyk a leader who could appeal to a broad spectrum of Galician-Ukrainian public opinion-were at the same time characteristics deplored by the younger, more radical, and military-minded members of the OUN. These included Stepan Bandera (1910-1959), Mykola Lebed’ (b. 1910), Roman Shuk- hevych (Taras Chuprynka, 1907-1950), and laroslav Stets’ko (b. 1912), who were suspicious of anything that suggested compromise, a policy that had been adopted by older Ukrainian leaders and which they believed had failed totally.These differences in attitude came to the fore when, as a result of Germany’s defeat of Poland, many imprisoned younger members of the OUN were released.
They proceeded to denounce Mel’nyk and the OUN directorate and in February 1940 established a rival Revolutionary Directorate of the OUN headed by Stepan Bandera. This was the origin of the struggle between the Melnykites (Mel’ny- kivtsi) and Banderites (Banderivtsi), which severely weakened Ukrainian political and military efforts during World War II. The activist Banderites formed military units (Nachtigall and Roland) that fought with the German Army against the Soviets, and when Germany took over Galicia, Banderite leaders declared the existence of a Ukrainian National Government in L’viv on June 30, 1941. The German government was displeased by such an act and it put Bandera and some of his associates under house arrest in Berlin. The interned Banderite leaders were still able to maintain contact with Galicia, where in the spring of 1943 the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (Ukrains’ka Povstans’ka Armiia-UPA) was established.
The UPA, led by Roman Shukevych (Chuprynka), fought against the Germans and, following the rapid disintegration of the eastern front in 1944, against the Red Army as well. As for Mel’nyk, who like Bandera was confined to Berlin until 1944, some of his supporters also conducted partisan warfare, although most were arrested by the Germans or eliminated by their Banderite rivals.The literature on the OUN reflects strongly Melnykite and Banderite partisanship. On the Melnykite side, there exists a collection of essays on that faction’s activity,[587] histories and memoirs by participants in the movement,[588] and studies on the life and work of Andrii Mel’nyk.[589] On the Banderite side, there is a collection of decrees issued by that OUN faction,[590] an extensive work by laroslav Stets’ko on the June 30, 1941 declaration of an independent state for which he was prime minister,[591] and a biography by Petro Mirchuk of Stepan Bandera.[592] Both Polish and Soviet writers have provided extensive histories of the OUN, which they view simply as the most treacherous of all bourgeois-fascist elements and which they argue did irreparable harm to the Ukrainian people of Galicia.[593] An exception to such an approach has been put forth by the Polish scholar Ryszard Torzecki, who has provided relatively objective accounts of the split between the Melnykites and the Banderites as well as of German policy toward Ukrainians during the war years.[594]