Omer Bartov: “Friedrich Merz is not the leader Europe needs right now”
In an exclusive interview, the historian talks about the US attack on Iran, nationalism in Ukraine – and the German Chancellor’s “dirty work” remark.
Omer Bartov is a history professor at Brown University in Rhode Island, has written books on Ukraine and Israel, and is considered one of the leading Holocaust and genocide researchers. We arranged an online interview with him.
Mr. Bartov, your family is from Ukraine, and you grew up in Israel. Which region, which war, currently concerns you more?
Until October 7, I was deeply concerned about Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. Previously, I had written critically about Ukraine's memory policy, but then increasingly became a supporter of Ukraine. But October 7 changed everything. Since then, I have immersed myself deeply in the events in Israel and Palestine, writing articles about them and now a book. My focus has shifted entirely to this region. Not least because, although my family is from Ukraine, my current family, my friends, and my own biography are in Israel. Sometimes I feel guilty about having neglected Ukraine somewhat.
How great is the risk of war beyond the region following the attacks by Israel and the USA on Iran?
I consider Israel's attack on Iran extremely reckless. The reason wasn't any immediate threat posed by Iran, but rather Netanyahu's desire to divert attention from the Gaza Strip and thereby gain political capital among the Israeli public. Since he succeeded in persuading Trump to go along with it, Netanyahu will likely emerge as the winner and the Palestinians as the big losers.
Iran's nuclear program isn't an immediate threat to you? It's possible that Iran's efforts to develop a nuclear bomb will now be delayed. But it's also possible that Iran now has an even greater incentive to continue its nuclear program. This will further destabilize the region. It must be made quite clear: the main cause of the chaos is Israel and its extremist government. Netanyahu has no interest in ending wars and conflicts, because that's what keeps him in power. I wouldn't be surprised if he calls new elections in the coming months.
Even Netanyahu's biggest critics in Israel are happy that the US intervened in the war and attacked Iran. How do you explain this?
This attitude of most of Netanyahu's critics did not surprise me at all, since none of them was able to imagine a peaceful compromise with the Palestinians that would lead to sharing the land with them. The opposition doesn't know what it wants, but Netanyahu and his ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich do. Netanyahu has claimed for years that the main threat to Israel is not the Palestinian issue, but Iran, thus diverting attention from the core problem: the fact that seven million Jews rule over seven million Palestinians. He seems to be succeeding, to the detriment of the Palestinians and Israeli democracy. The result will be a violent, authoritarian apartheid state in Israel. I don't believe such a state will be viable in the long term.
Can the two conflicts and wars – Ukraine and Israel – be compared?
Only to a limited extent. Putin sees Ukraine as part of his heritage and identity and is trying to restore his imperial self-image. At the same time, Russia portrays the war as a defense against the West. Russia is a vast country, but it still harbors the perception of being surrounded by enemies—something that is also frequently found in German history. In Israel, Netanyahu and his far-right coalition believe that all of Palestine belongs to the Jews. Squaring the circle is either to subjugate the Palestinians as occupied people or to expel them. October 7, although a gigantic fiasco, created an opportunity for Netanyahu to advance this goal. The similarity lies in ethno-nationalism. The difference is that Russia pursues more of an imperial nationalism.
In your book "Erased: Vanished Traces of Jewish Galicia in Today's Ukraine," published in 2007, you accuse Ukrainians of failing to address their involvement in Nazi crimes. This fits with Putin's claim that he invaded Ukraine to denazify it. How do you view this today?
My 2007 book described a specific phase in the country's history. After gaining independence, Ukraine struggled to come to terms with its past. Much like Hungary, the Baltic states, and other countries that had freed themselves from communist rule and could finally speak of themselves as independent nationalities, they needed heroes to celebrate. And these heroes were freedom fighters, nationalist leaders who often participated in the murder of Jews and collaborated with the Nazis.
Like Stepan Bandera?
Yes, when I came to Ukraine in 2003, Bandera was celebrated everywhere. His statues still stand everywhere in Lviv and Buchach. Some of them have survived. It's possible that nationalism in Western Ukraine has even worsened because of the war. Putin continues to use such aspects for propaganda purposes. Much has changed since the book was published, though. Zelensky's presidency, as a man of Jewish descent, represents a multiethnic Ukraine.
Omer Bartov: “Putin will not stop at Ukraine”What evidence is there that nationalism could intensify in Western Ukraine?
I was last there in 2016, so my insight is limited. But there is currently an internal Ukrainian conflict between a multi-ethnic vision, represented by Zelensky, and an ethnic nationalist vision. We don't know which path will prevail. I hope that Ukraine won't relapse into an ethnic-national identity after the war. But it's possible. None of this, however, justifies the Russian invasion. And Putin won't stop with Ukraine, not with this American administration. That's why Germany must protect the international order, international law.
What could a peace solution in Ukraine look like?
I don't know if there's an easy way out of this dilemma. If Ukraine cedes territory, which I assume will happen, it must not lead to Russia doing something like this again. That means Ukraine must be secure, if not through NATO membership, then through European peacekeeping forces. If I were European, I would no longer rely on the United States. Not under Trump, and not after Trump.
There's currently a lot of discussion about how deeply Germany should get involved in this war. What's your opinion?
Arms deliveries and effective sanctions against Russia are important. Germany's hesitant attitude at the beginning of the war was disappointing. I think this also has to do with German culture of remembrance.
What do you mean?
German culture of remembrance is commendable and serves as a model for many countries. There is probably no other country that remembers its own sins so closely. But this comes at a price. For example, in foreign policy toward Israel and Ukraine, or in the integration of immigrants. When you have five million Muslims in a country and they're all expected to take responsibility for the Holocaust, you have a problem. Germany isn't prepared for this, and it leads to great internal tensions.
What should Germany do?
Memory politics is not something where you can simply say: This is the way it is and I won't back down from it. Germany must adapt; things have changed fundamentally. It must defend international law instead of helping countries like Israel violate it. Supporting an authoritarian, racist Israeli government is not in Europe's interest. And Germany must now rearm to maintain the international order. We know that Trump is no longer interested in this order. What interests him is a structure of states in which the great and powerful decide everyone else's fate and divide the goods among themselves. China, Russia, perhaps India. What does this mean for Europe? Without Germany in the driver's seat, it will go nowhere.
Omer Bartov: “Israel silences critics with accusations of anti-Semitism”Do you trust Friedrich Merz to lead such a new Germany?
I still don't fully understand Merz's policies. First, he said he would invite Netanyahu to Germany despite an international arrest warrant. Then he criticized Israeli policy in Gaza. Then he said Israel was doing "our dirty work" in Iran. He also talks about rearming Germany, but as far as I've seen, he hasn't advocated for human rights or international law. He seems to be spouting his views from the hip, and that's not the kind of leader Europe needs right now. But I agree that Germany needs to change its defense and strategic posture, and if he works in that direction, it would be a good thing in a tense situation like this.
We've noticed that you're interviewed relatively often by German journalists about Ukraine or Israel. Are German politicians also interested in your perspective?
I wish they were; I'm always ready to talk. But I fear the Israeli ambassador to Germany would discourage them.
Because you like to provoke with your comparisons and statements?
Because I am considered an anti-Semite.
Who calls you that?
The ambassador. The Israeli government's policy is to discredit anyone who criticizes it. They want to say: We can do whatever we want, you have nothing to say to us. This works particularly well in Germany because there is great unease about the past, and no one wants to be accused of being anti-Semitic. This is how people who protest against Israel's war in Gaza are silenced, not only in Germany but also in the United States. Yet many of the students who took to the streets last spring were themselves Jewish.
Berliner-zeitung
