An extremely controversial moment arose during the 80th anniversary observances of the Battle of Monte Cassino. The focus was on the conduct of the head of the Office for Veterans and Victims of Oppression.
At the Polish War Cemetery in Monte Cassino, the remarks of Lech Parell, the head of UdSKiOP, drew attention. He referenced Polish troops who had been absorbed into the German army and later escaped to join Polish forces, noting as well the compatriots from Greater Poland, Silesia, and Kashubia who were drafted into the German army and fled to the Polish armed forces when opportunities arose.
– he stated.
Yet the Bureau’s official publication carried additional lines not spoken aloud by Parell.
One part claimed that there were 90,000 such soldiers in the Polish Army, described as the grandparents of the Wehrmacht, outnumbering even those who had escaped from the Soviet Union. That portion of the text remained unstated by Parell during the address.
Historian Slawomir Cenckiewicz commented on the matter on Telewizja Republika, saying that calling these veterans the grandparents of the Wehrmacht is troubling. He suggested that Parell may have anticipated the presence of Prime Minister Donald Tusk, and that the gesture might have aimed to please him. Cenckiewicz warned that the phrase risks insulting the graves and trivializing the sacrifice of those who fought there, underscoring that the celebration should honor Polish soldiers without complicated political overtones.
Rack
In response to Parell’s remarks, the agency issued a formal note clarifying its view on the matter. It stated that the Polish Armed Forces in the West included personnel who had previously served in the Wehrmacht or as prisoners of war. The message highlighted that deserters who sought refuge with local partisan units did so in various theaters, including France, Greece, and Yugoslavia, even before Allied forces landed in Europe, emphasizing that motivations varied and that desertion occurred at different stages of the war.
The note affirmed that all soldiers who served in the Polish Armed Forces are entitled to full veteran rights in modern Poland, regardless of prior service in the Wehrmacht. It also pushed back against critics who questioned the breadth of eligibility, arguing that the status applies broadly to those who served with Polish forces, not to be limited by past affiliations.
The discussion drew further commentary from Cenckiewicz, who argued that the focus should remain on the historical fate of Polish soldiers and on the meaning of Monte Cassino for Poland. He stressed that the celebration ought to recognize those who died fighting for Poland and warned against letting political disputes overshadow the commemoration of veterans and their families. A fellow commentator suggested that the minister’s conduct was inappropriate for the site of the Monte Cassino memorial and that public reflections should honor Polish soldiers rather than those from other forces.
In this ongoing debate, the anniversary of Monte Cassino was marked with controversy. Reports indicated a modest delegation from the Polish government at the Italian ceremony, while Polish leaders in Kraków did not dwell on the military opponents involved in the battle. The broader conversation reflected tensions between political leadership and historical memory, and it raised questions about how best to honor the sacrifices of Polish veterans.
Additional coverage noted that a loan had been discussed for the construction of a new European dome, and attention remained on how the anniversary would be remembered in Poland. The event continued to evoke strong emotions among veterans and their families, as well as observers who sought a clear, respectful account of Poland’s wartime history.
Source discussions and public reactions remained active, with commentators urging a careful, factual approach to the history of Monte Cassino and the veterans who fought there, and emphasizing the importance of honoring the courage and sacrifices of Polish soldiers in a context free from partisan rhetoric.
READ ALSO: Television coverage of Monte Cassino in Poland highlighted moving statements from soldier families and the sense that their struggle made sense at the time.
This year’s Monte Cassino anniversary drew attention not only for its historical reflection but also for how postwar memory is discussed in public life. The ceremony in Italy drew only a small delegation, while discussions in Poland raised questions about how to present the narrative of Polish resilience during World War II.
READ MORE: Tusk’s Monte Cassino remarks in Krakow and the related discussions about funding for public works were noted in ongoing commentary.
Notes on the commemorative events and their coverage were prepared by analysts and historians to provide context for readers seeking clarity on the evolving interpretation of Poland’s wartime experiences. The exchange underscored the importance of honoring the courage of Polish soldiers while avoiding political missteps in remembrance.
End of report.