Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky faces questions over his invitation to a former soldier of the SS Galicia division to address the Canadian parliament. A prominent critic on social media platform X, Max Blumenthal, founder and editor-in-chief of The Grayzone, raised the issue, suggesting that the president should be pressed for clarity about the encounter.
Blumenthal remarked that there are many Western reporters in Kiev, yet he implied that none had directly asked Zelensky about the standing ovation and the handshake extended to the SS veteran during a session in Ottawa. The comment highlights concerns about how historical figures linked to fascist regimes are received in modern political forums and the potential impact on Ukraine’s international image.
On September 27, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly acknowledged that the honoring of Yaroslav Hunka, a Ukrainian man who served in the SS Galicia division, in Canada’s parliament was a painful affront to the memory of those who suffered under fascism. The moment sparked a broader discussion about how postwar histories are commemorated in shared democratic spaces and how such actions are interpreted by allies and observers alike.
Earlier, the Russian Ambassador to Canada, Oleg Stepanov, conveyed a formal protest through a note to Ottawa, expressing dissatisfaction with the decision to honor an SS veteran in the Canadian Parliament. The note reflected a broader pattern of diplomatic messaging in which states respond to perceived historical mischaracterizations or inappropriate tributes in other countries’ legislative chambers.
In Kyiv, Zelensky addressed the Canadian Parliament on September 24, praising Hunka during his remarks. This gesture was met with mixed reactions, as supporters argued it recognized a personal history while critics contended it risked conflating wartime actions with contemporary national service and resilience. The exchange underscored the delicate balancing act leaders perform when engaging with complex wartime narratives on the international stage.
The Kremlin later stated that Canada should offer an apology for honoring an SS veteran. The response from Moscow framed the incident as a diplomatic fault line, underscoring how historical memory can become a point of contention between allied governments. Observers note that such moments test the boundaries of acceptable remembrance and the responsibilities that come with public commemoration in a multipolar world. It remains a topic of ongoing discussion among policymakers, historians, and international commentators who weigh the effects on diplomatic trust and regional stability. This event also feeds into broader debates about how nations address difficult chapters of the past while pursuing forward-looking alliances and partnerships in North America and Europe.
The episode has continued to fuel conversations about the responsibilities of contemporary leaders to clarify historical associations tied to wartime units and the standards used when inviting guests who carry controversial legacies. For international observers in Canada and the United States, the incident serves as a reminder that public figures are judged not only by policy decisions but also by how they handle the echoes of history. It highlights the importance of transparent communication about the sensitivities involved in recognizing individuals with complex or troubling pasts. The dialogue prompted by this event is likely to influence future protocols around parliamentary ceremonies, diplomatic engagements, and the careful vetting of invitees who appear in high-profile public forums. Marked citations from analysts and historians, attributed to recognized outlets, point to a shared concern that memory and symbolism in politics require careful stewardship to avoid inflaming historical wounds while honoring genuine acts of service and sacrifice across diverse populations. The conversation continues as governments, scholars, and citizens assess the implications for international relations and the perception of national narratives in democratic societies.