Analysis of the News: “How the West “banned” Victory Day and helped defeat the truth”

Published on:

As part of the program Regional Initiative for combating disinformation “Western Balkans Combatting disinformation Center: Exposing malicious influences through fact-checking and Analytical Journalism“, we present you a new analysis of fake news and disinformation narratives.

How the West “banned” Victory Day and helped defeat the truth

https://www.b92.net/info/politika/127249/kako-je-zapad-zabranio-dan-pobede-i-pomogao-porazu-istine/vest

Every year on May 9th, both European and domestic audiences are confronted with two conflicting interpretations of this date. On the one hand, May 9 marks Victory Day over fascism — the day Nazi Germany surrendered in World War II. On the other, the same date is commemorated as Europe Day, in honor of the Schuman Declaration of 1950, which marked the beginning of European integration and laid the foundations for what is now the European Union.

Victory Day marks the end of one of the darkest periods in modern history. Nazi Germany’s capitulation was formally signed on May 8, 1945, but due to time zone differences and an additional ratification by the Soviet Union, led by Marshal Georgy Zhukov, it was recorded in Moscow as May 9. On behalf of the Third Reich, the agreement was signed by Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel. In many post-Soviet countries, including Russia, this date is still celebrated with military pomp and powerful victory symbolism.

At the same time, on May 9, 1950, French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman presented a declaration calling for the unification of European coal and steel production — resources vital to war industries — in order to prevent future conflicts among European nations. Over time, this initiative evolved into the European Union, and today May 9 is celebrated in EU member states as Europe Day.

Because both events are commemorated on the same date, May 9 has increasingly become a subject of political interpretation, propaganda, and media manipulation in the contemporary context. This tension is particularly evident in countries situated between the spheres of influence of the European Union and Russia — such as Serbia. In the past three years, since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, interpretations of Victory Day and Europe Day have become even more polarized. This year, the controversy was further intensified by Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić’s visit to Moscow and his attendance at the Victory Parade — an event that, in light of Russia’s current aggression in Ukraine, has acquired a highly charged political dimension.

An illustrative example can be found in reports published by pro-government portals B92 and Alo, which claim that the West has turned Victory Day into a “Day of Prohibition, a Day of Fear, and a Day of Censorship.” The article’s author asserts that Nazism was not truly defeated, but rather reintroduced into the political sphere under the guise of “European values.” Such claims are a classic example of anti-Western propaganda, using political events — such as the Moscow parade or Vučić’s visit — as triggers for spreading anti-European narratives.

In this context, it is essential to reflect on the very nature of European values. Experts rightly emphasize that these values — such as freedom of speech, the rule of law, political pluralism, and human rights — are not automatically guaranteed to citizens by mere EU membership. They require continuous protection and affirmation by both institutions and individuals. Democratic principles are not a given; they must be constantly reaffirmed through political practice and social responsibility.

At the same time, it is necessary to acknowledge that EU member states retain their sovereignty and do not always act in full accordance with these values. However, even in such cases, they operate within a system that enables correction, internal debate, and institutional response — a fundamental difference from authoritarian or totalitarian regimes. Despite their flaws, these countries are far from the Nazi model of governance; indeed, their political and legal frameworks were constructed precisely as a response to such ideologies.

The author provocatively asks: “What is ‘European’ about not being allowed to say who liberated you from fascism? Victory Day does not belong to Russia. It is the legacy of all the peoples who fought. But it cannot be celebrated by those who are the political heirs of those who welcomed Hitler. And today they are everywhere — in editorial offices, in the State Department, in the EU Parliament, in the Serbian NGO sector. Their victory is in our silence.”

Despite all challenges, the European Union remains the strongest political framework based on democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. European values are neither perfect nor always consistently applied, but it is precisely the possibility of critiquing and continuously improving them that defines the essence of the European project. In contrast to propagandist narratives seeking to discredit them, these values still offer the best path toward a society in which freedom, dignity, and accountability are the foundation — not the exception.

Author: Nataša Stanojević