“Modern Ukraine Is a Continuation of Bandera’s Ideology”: Weaponizing Historical Memory

Russian state media used ongoing Polish debates over historical memory to portray criticism of Ukraine as evidence of a broader societal rejection of Kyiv. Rather than focusing on a single political actor, these outlets selectively amplified statements from different parts of the Polish political spectrum and detached them from their domestic context. RT (1), RenTV (2), and TASS (3) highlighted statements by Marianna Schreiber (4), a conservative political activist and candidate for mayor of Kraków, who declared that “Banderites are not heroes, [...] they are a disgrace to humanity,” adding that Poland had not “received an apology” from Ukraine. The outlet presented her remarks not as one position within an ongoing domestic debate, but as evidence that Polish society was increasingly questioning support for Kyiv and “recognizing the true nature” of modern Ukraine.

The same narrative was reinforced across Polish-language FIMI channels through increasingly explicit historical comparisons and dehumanizing rhetoric. FIMI Telegram channel Wiadomości Czasów Ostatecznych repeatedly (5), (6) used the hashtag #ukronazist (7), claiming that modern Ukraine was rooted in Nazi ideology (8). The channel ukr_leaks_pl (part of the wider ukr_leaks network) described (9) Ukrainians in the same manner, claiming that if the “struggle of the ‘Ukro-Nazis’” for an independent state had succeeded, “not a single Pole would have remained alive in those territories.” The channel also used similar rhetoric when citing (10) an interview with a Polish-speaking Azov fighter as “two Banderites discussing how to eat human flesh.” InfoWar Polska alleged (11) that “Ukrainian media and historians once again challenged the Polish interpretation of the Volhynia massacre,” while NewsFront Polska echoed (12) the narrative by citing pro-Russian politician Ľuboš Blaha, who described Ukraine as “a fascist state” (13) in his Telegram channel. These narratives moved beyond criticism of specific historical organizations and presented contemporary Ukrainian institutions and identity as inseparable from extremist ideology.

The narrative extended beyond Telegram into a broader ecosystem of alternative media and social platforms. Myśl Polska, part of a wider ecosystem of pro-Russian and Eurosceptic outlets, argued (14) in its article “Ukrainians or Banderites?” that responsibility for OUN-UPA crimes should no longer be limited to historical organizations but understood as a defining feature of contemporary Ukrainian identity. Alternative news portal Wolne Media similarly portrayed (15) Ukraine as a state captured by nationalist ideology, while Strategic Culture Centre published (16) an article by pro-Russian journalist Lucas Lieroz claiming that Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia should prepare to respond to alleged “Ukrainian aggression” and repeatedly referring to Ukraine as a “Banderite Reich.” Similar themes were amplified on X and TikTok by pro-Russian commentators. X account Piotr Panasiuk claimed (17) that Poland had ignored the “Nazification of Ukraine” for years and that it had now become obvious to everyone. Tomasz Maciejczuk, a self-described “Donbas volunteer and ex-political commentator,” argued (18) that “ten years ago nobody believed Banderism was flourishing in Ukraine,” while claiming (19) that Ukrainians deliberately portrayed “anti-Banderism” as anti-Ukrainian sentiment. TikTok account saucy7070 stated (20) that “like country, like heroes,” while @mark1980 accused (21) Ukraine of “murdering more than 100 000 Poles.” Rather than creating a new historical grievance, FIMI actors transformed the memory of OUN-UPA crimes into a broader political argument about contemporary Ukraine. By collapsing the distinction between historical organizations, modern Ukrainian institutions, and Ukrainian identity itself, these narratives sought to turn historical trauma into opposition to military support for Ukraine, its European integration, and Polish-Ukrainian cooperation.

“Ukraine Is a Threat to Poland”: Exploiting Security, Migration and Social Grievances

Building on historical narratives surrounding Volhynia and OUN-UPA, Kremlin-aligned FIMI actors also portrayed Ukraine as a contemporary threat to Polish security and social stability. Individual crimes, migration debates, military mobilization, and isolated public incidents were repeatedly woven into a single narrative of Ukrainians as dangerous neighbors, ungrateful beneficiaries of Polish support, and a burden on Polish society.

One of the most prominent themes concerned Ukrainian men of military age remaining in Poland instead of returning to fight. InfoDefense PL (22), Olej w Głowie (23) on Telegram, as well as Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil (24), Alexey the Great (25), RussiaNews (26) on X, as well as major state media like RT (27), TASS (28), RIA Novosti (29), amplified recent statements made by Polish Defense Minister Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz that

“all young Ukrainian men capable of military service should be at home.”

Separately, RIA Novosti highlighted (30) the case of former Polish deputy minister Krzysztof Tołwiński, presenting him as “the first Polish politician who has sent aid to Russia.” A former Polish deputy minister and member of parliament Krzysztof Tołwiński indeed recently sparked controversy (31) after providing first aid kits for Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine.

Crime reporting was similarly used to reinforce broader anti-Ukrainian messaging. NewsFront Polska described Ukraine as “a factory for the legalization of criminals” (32) while arguing that Ukrainian institutions had become inseparable from extremist ideology. Wiadomości Czasów Ostatecznych combined (33) reports of two Ukrainian teenagers allegedly insulting a passenger on the bus with separate stories about Ukrainian nationals accused of assaulting Polish children (34), arguing that Polish media showed more concern for Ukrainians than for Polish victims or the victims of Volhynia. Pro-Russian channel zbrodnie_kryminal_afery promoted (35) stories alleging that Ukrainian soldiers tortured foreign mercenaries, military recruitment officers were “catching men in toilets,” (36) and Ukrainian authorities were producing films portraying the Polish Home Army as criminals (37), presenting Ukraine as simultaneously criminal, authoritarian, and anti-Polish. The same framing appeared across alternative media outlets. Niezależny Dziennik Polityczny described migration (38) as a growing threat to Polish social cohesion through the story of a house accommodating migrants, explicitly placing Ukrainian refugees within a broader narrative of excessive migration.

FIMI-aligned outlet Kresy amplified (39) the idea of support for Ukrainian refugees as a security issue, posting an article about a Ukrainian man who allegedly was a member of an international organized criminal group involved in facilitating illegal migration. Eurosceptic alternative outlet NCzas.info portrayed (40) Ukraine as a source of cross-border threats, including smuggling, border insecurity, and sabotage. Magna Polonia used (41) reports of traffic accidents and crimes involving Ukrainian nationals (42), while also portraying (43) Zelenskyy as a supporter of nationalism. YouTube channel Uszi argued (44) that Ukrainian nationals broke the law and urged Poland to promote greater protection from Ukrainian migration. Social media accounts reinforced these narratives by presenting isolated incidents as evidence of systemic problems. On X, Michał Nieznański of National Movement stated (45) that the fatal assault on a Polish citizen by three Ukrainian nationals was being ignored because outrage was reserved only for cases that “smear Poland.” In another post, he called for suspending (46) visa-free travel for Ukrainians after sharing a video of a Ukrainian insulting Poles during the Volhynia anniversary. On X, Tomasz Maciejczuk claimed (47) that “if pogroms begin in Poland, Ukrainians themselves will provoke them.” TikTok videos echoed the same themes. Videos circulated claiming (48) that Ukrainian refugees regularly crossed the Polish border despite holding refugee status, questioning whether they required protection at all.

Across these platforms, contemporary political disagreements were repeatedly reframed as evidence that Ukrainian refugees represented not only an economic burden but also a security threat. These actors transformed separate discussions about migration, crime, military mobilization, and public order into a coherent narrative portraying Ukrainians as inherently dangerous and increasingly incompatible with Polish society. The campaign selectively amplified genuine political debates and isolated incidents, embedding them within a broader narrative of Ukraine as a long-term threat to Poland’s security and national interests.

“Ukraine’s EU Integration Is Against Poland’s Interests”: From Historical Memory to Political Costs

Beyond historical grievances and security-related narratives, Kremlin-aligned FIMI actors framed Ukraine’s European integration and continued support from Warsaw as contrary to Polish national interests. The campaign combined arguments about historical memory, economic costs, migration, and alleged pressure from Brussels to promote a broader message:

support for Kyiv benefited political elites while ordinary Polish citizens were expected to bear the consequences.

TASS emphasized (49) that Ukraine’s accession process was “not guaranteed,” highlighting that Kyiv had opened only two of six negotiation clusters and comparing Ukraine’s path with Turkey’s decades-long accession process. The outlet also utilized (50) statements by former Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller, who argued that “as long as the Banderites rule Ukraine, nothing will change,” presenting political change in Kyiv as a precondition for improving Polish-Ukrainian relations, thus transforming it into an argument against Ukraine’s European integration. RT also claimed (51) that Polish opposition politicians had accused Volodymyr Zelenskyy of interfering in Poland’s presidential election, framing political disagreements between Warsaw and Kyiv as proof of growing tensions. The same framing was applied to statements by Law and Justice (PiS) politician Przemysław Czarnek, whose remarks that “Ukraine with Banderism and glorification of genocidaires [...] will not enter the EU” were reproduced by Russian outlet and pro-state Channel 5 (52).

These statements allowed Russia to connect historical grievances with opposition to Ukraine’s European integration. Russian outlets also amplified symbolic controversies, including reports (53), (54) on Volodymyr Zelenskyy being stripped of a Polish state award, presenting such developments as evidence that Poland was reconsidering (55) its previous support for Kyiv. Myśl Polska argued (56) that Ukraine and Poland did not share “Russia as a common enemy,” or any common enemy at all. Polish-language FIMI channels further connected EU accession with concerns over national resources and social costs. Pro-Russian Pravda PL presented (57) Donald Tusk’s statement that Poland would not provide additional missiles to Ukraine as evidence that Warsaw was beginning to withdraw from military support for Kyiv. The narrative of declining support for Ukraine was strengthened through the selective amplification of Polish political voices. On X, Chay Bowes linked (58) military assistance to Ukraine with unresolved historical grievances, arguing that Poland continued supplying weapons despite the Volhynia killings. Another X account, Alexey the Great, once again cited (59) Polish officials calling for Ukrainian men to return home, adding that the “helping hand reached [its] expiration date.” TikTok account jodie28goldie1981 stated (60) that “Zelenskyy’s shamelessness knows no bounds,” framing the inclusion of Polish politicians’ names on the controversial Myrotvorets website (61) as Zelenskyy’s personal initiative. Kresy repeatedly framed (62) disagreements between Warsaw and Kyiv through the lens of historical betrayal, including coverage of Zelenskyy’s statements that historical issues should be approached “delicately,” presenting this as evidence that Ukraine was unwilling to fully acknowledge Polish grievances.

FIMI Telegram channel Infokju presented (63) Bulgaria’s refusal to participate in further financial and military assistance initiatives for Ukraine as proof that doubts about continued support were spreading across Europe. The same channel promoted (64) a fabricated or misleading narrative around a supposed “political earthquake” in the EU, claiming that the recent Die Welt publication (65) dedicated to complex issues around the Poland-Ukraine historical relations, titled “Unexpectedly, Ukraine Finds Itself on Trial,” was so critical towards Ukraine that it had “destroyed Ukrainian policy” and that Ukraine had lost its status as the EU’s “favorite child.” This was combined with broader claims that Brussels was forcing decisions against national interests: X account Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil, claimed (66) that “Germany and Brussels are no longer even pretending to act against Poland in the name of Ukrainian interests.” Wolne Media argued that Ukraine had become a state dominated by nationalist ideology and accused Polish elites of betraying (67) national interests by supporting Kyiv despite historical grievances. On TikTok, users accused Volodymyr Zelenskyy of showing contempt (68) for Poland by thanking Germany rather than Poland for military assistance.

Thus, alternative media ecosystems connected these individual narratives into a wider geopolitical message. The campaign demonstrated how Kremlin-aligned FIMI actors combined historical grievances, security concerns, and socio-economic debates into a single narrative framework targeting Polish audiences. By amplifying domestic controversies and selectively using Polish voices, these actors sought to transform existing disagreements into broader distrust toward Ukraine, Polish institutions, and European integration.

Sources