News

Piotr Cywiński: Auschwitz Should Not Be a Space for Politics

According to Dr. Piotr M. A. Cywiński, Director of the Auschwitz Memorial, the vast cemetery that Auschwitz represents should not become a space for politics during the anniversary of its liberation. He stated in an interview with the Polish Press Agency (PAP) that without the voices of Survivors, the threat of politicisation would hang over the commemoration. He added that he would like political leaders to stand in silence during the ceremony.

On 27 January next year, we will mark the 81st anniversary of the liberation of the German Nazi concentration and extermination camp Auschwitz.

Polish Press Agency (PAP): Has the Museum already begun preparations for next year’s commemoration?

Piotr Cywiński (PC): Preparations for anniversaries that are not round-numbered usually begin after the summer. For several years now, the Museum has had a dedicated unit coordinating major commemorations, which has significantly professionalised the process.

PAP: The most important participants will be the Survivors. How many of them may be able to attend?

PC: We should not expect a large group of Survivors. Many of those who made the considerable effort to travel from afar for the 80th anniversary emphasised that it might be their last such visit due to their health. Naturally, each Survivor is invited and will be warmly welcomed, but realistically, most of those who attend will come from Poland. In particular, there is still a group in Warsaw of those who were deported to the camp as children among the transports from the capital during the Uprising. For years now, they have been the main participants in many commemoration events.

PAP: What criteria guide the choice of state delegations?

PC: Invitations – usually sent at the end of November – will be addressed to embassies according to a model adopted several years ago: all EU Member States, and also those countries that have demonstrated particular commitment to preserving the authenticity of the Auschwitz Memorial. Russia, of course, is excluded. Other countries must first express their interest in participating. During so-called “smaller anniversaries”, most countries are represented by ambassadors.

PAP: In the past, you stressed that on 27 January it is primarily the voice of the Survivors that should be heard. Should political leaders speak at all, regardless of rank?

PC: During the last round anniversary, there were no speeches by active politicians: heads of state or government, despite the fact that several centres of political power voiced strong dissatisfaction with that decision. Yet we received tremendous applause from the Survivors. Some told me they had waited their whole lives for such a moment. Many voices from around the world also expressed gratitude. In fact, I did not hear a single critical opinion afterwards.

PAP: Will this continue?

PC: I would like this new approach to become a tradition of the 27 January commemorations. It is my hope that there will no longer be speeches delivered solely by virtue of political office. If political leaders attend, let them stand together with the other participants. Survivors, those working to preserve memory, representatives of institutions and organisations committed to this difficult field. This matter will certainly be discussed at the upcoming meeting of the International Auschwitz Council, but I would like the anniversary to stand apart from other commemorations. This largest cemetery in the world should not become a space for politics, and without the voice of the Survivors, that threat would loom over the event. Politicisation would not be a good or sensible direction—at least not on this day, and not in the world we live in today.

PAP: Do you observe a tendency among politicians to instrumentalise the commemoration?

PC: History as a whole is becoming increasingly instrumentalised. Even slogans that ostensibly refer to the present situation in Europe and the world are used in certain contexts to evoke emotions, and sometimes old fears, from decades past. I do not see maturity or wisdom in this, but in politics, where populist tones increasingly dominate, it is hardly surprising that sentiment analysis has overshadowed any meaningful, nation-building analytical effort.

PAP: With the passing of the Survivor generation, who should carry their voice into the future?

PC: I believe that regardless of the form—which will undoubtedly evolve over time—the role of the media should increase. (…) We must focus more on working with the media and view the anniversary through the eyes of those who will follow it through television or online streaming. Under the large tent during the ceremony on 27 January 2025, there were around 3,000 people, while more than 700 million participated via screens. In truth, the media are the key here. Very promising discussions with key partners are already underway.