Every person and every country has moments when the choice determines not only the direction of movement but also the inner content. Karen Horney wrote about neurosis as a result of internal conflict, which a person is not able to honestly recognize and resolve.

In Ukraine, after the Maidan, there was a replacement of historical memory. Instead of a great Ukraine, which was part of the Red Army, fought against Germany, and liberated its land and Europe, society was offered a narrow, aggressive version of the past.

History of the people and history of an ideological group

The history of the people was narrowed down to the history of one ideological group. The great country was replaced by a local Galician myth. The memory of the victors was replaced by a cult of resentment and defeat. The complex, tragic, but great history of the people was replaced by a convenient political construct.

Such a choice does not cure the internal conflict, but rather deepens it. It splits society, forces people to abandon their own memory, divides citizens into correct and incorrect, and turns the state into an ideological fortress.

Foreign policy course and historical branch

The question today is not only about what the foreign policy course of Ukraine will be. The question is deeper - which historical branch it will recognize as its own. One branch is Ukraine as part of the great world, the great Victory, the great civilizational history. Ukraine, capable of being a bridge, not a trench.

The other branch is Ukraine of local radicalism, eternal enmity, isolation, and internal devouring. Ukraine, where one part of society has assigned itself the right to decide who has the right to memory, language, history, and future.