Second debate in the “Berlin in Warsaw” series. Discussion on reparations and compensation [video] - Instytut Pileckiego

“Compensation, damages, reparations: what is realistic, what is symbolic?” This was the title of the second debate in the “Berlin in Warsaw” series. Experts on Polish-German relations presented different perspectives on the difficult relationship between the two nations.

Karol Madaj, Acting Director of the Pilecki Institute, welcomed the guests and referred to the Institute’s latest publication, emphasizing the importance of reliable data in discussions on reparations:

“If we are discussing what is realistic and what is symbolic, we also need a solid academic foundation to understand these economic losses.”

Director Madaj thus introduced the book Dzieje gospodarcze ziem polskich w latach 1939–1945 by Profs. Mirosław Kłusek and Damian Markowski. He noted that it is the first publication to comprehensively compile the history of losses under both German and Soviet occupation, providing a substantive foundation for the debate on compensation.

Participants in the meeting analyzed Polish-German relations in three key areas: politics and law, the human dimension of the tragedy, and cultural memory.

Dispute over memory and responsibility

Prof. Marek Cichocki pointed to differences between the nations in their approach to the Second World War.

“On the Polish side, this debate largely concerns how Poles are treated by Germans. But there are also other aspects: injustice or the sense of having been treated unjustly,” he said.

He added that, from the Polish perspective, it is difficult to understand the position of successive German governments, beginning with the Adenauer administration. “This is perceived as an expression of bad will and a reluctance to resolve the issue, a search for legal loopholes to let the matter become time-barred and remove it from the negotiating table. It is also a matter of a sense of injustice,” he emphasized. In his view, most Poles believe that Germany has not fully come to terms with the Second World War.

“We may disagree on this, but in my opinion there is a profound lack of knowledge in Germany about what the German occupation in Poland was and what the Second World War was. There are individuals who understand this, but the lack of widespread knowledge results in a lack of public support for such initiatives,” he concluded.

Generational differences and differing perspectives

Thomas Urban disagreed with the claim that German society lacks knowledge. “Germans view the Second World War differently from Poles. In Poland, successive generations identify with previous ones – the present generation identifies with the fate of those who experienced the occupation. In Germany, it is different: grandchildren do not identify with the Nazi generation but distance themselves from it,” he said. In his view, these differences stem from differing ways of perceiving the past. “Contemporary Germans say that the wartime generation were the victims, but today’s Poles are no longer victims. Our grandparents were perpetrators, but we are not. It is a different perspective on history,” he added.

Reparations: between politics and realities

Prof. Stanisław Żerko addressed the issue of war reparations and the approach of politicians and public opinion to this matter. He emphasized that it is positive that the topic has returned to public debate, although it has been accompanied by an overly aggressive campaign.

“The Polish side emphasizes the amount of losses presented in the report. However, reparations were never intended to cover the full extent of the losses. At the Yalta Conference, a total of 20 billion dollars at the time was agreed upon, of which 1.5 billion was to go to Poland. This is what we should adhere to,” the historian noted.

The evolving Polish narrative of the war

Kaja Puto pointed to the evolution in how the Second World War has been discussed over the decades. “In the 1950s, young creators rejected the martyrological narrative of their parents. In the 1990s, discussions began about the co-responsibility of Poles for the tragedy of the Jews. Today, a generation of grandchildren is emerging, presenting new perspectives,” she said.

She referred, among others, to reporters and writers who are uncovering complex family histories and questions of identity.

A deficit of knowledge about Eastern Europe

Prof. Jan C. Behrends emphasized that there is still a lack of knowledge in Germany about Poland and the broader region of Eastern Europe. “There is too little knowledge about Poland, and virtually none about Belarus or Ukraine. In school education, the region appears mainly in the context of the Holocaust,” he noted. He added, however, that new generations are emerging that are ready to reflect on the past. “We should ask how much of the past we need for the future and who should teach it,” he added.

Economic consequences and possible gestures

Dr. Ursula Tyler presented the issue of the expropriation of Polish enterprises by the German Main Trustee Office for the East, noting that the economic consequences of the occupation remain insufficiently researched in Germany.

Manuel Sarrazin, in turn, proposed the establishment of a fund for the last surviving victims of Nazism as a humanitarian gesture and a symbolic recognition of their suffering. He also emphasized the need to prepare a reliable historical study that would help to “work through” the blank spots in history.

Participants in the debate:

Thomas Urban – journalist and author of historical books. Long-time correspondent for “Süddeutsche Zeitung” in Warsaw, Moscow, and Kyiv; since 2022, an analyst for “Cicero” magazine and an expert on Polish-German relations.

Prof. Jan C. Behrends – historian at the European University Viadrina in Frankfurt (Oder) and the Leibniz Center for Contemporary History (ZZF) in Potsdam. He specializes in Eastern European history, the history of dictatorships, and post-1989 transformations.

Dr. Ursula Töller (online) – historian and researcher specializing in expropriation, restitution, and post-war property settlements. A lecturer analyzing compensation issues in public debate.

Manuel Sarrazin – historian by training, currently acting president of the Southeast Europe Association in Munich. He served as a member of the Bundestag from 2008 to 2021 and, from 2022 to 2025, as the Federal Government’s Special Envoy for the Western Balkans.

Prof. Marek Cichocki – philosopher, political scientist, and historian of ideas, professor at the Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw. Former advisor to the President of Poland and co-creator of the podcast “Niemcy w ruinie?”

Kaja Puto – editor-in-chief of “Krytyka Polityczna”, journalist specializing in Eastern Europe and migration, laureate of the Polish-German Tadeusz Mazowiecki Journalism Award.

Prof. Stanisław Żerko – historian and German studies scholar affiliated with the Western Institute in Poznań, expert in the history of international relations and the foreign policy of Germany and Poland.

About the Series

“Berlin in Warsaw” is a monthly series of debates, seminars and author meetings held at the Pilecki Institute, featuring Polish and German experts. We bring the most important contemporary German public debates on memory, history, and politics to Warsaw, confronting them with Polish perspectives and experience.

We create a space for conversations that are difficult but crucial for Polish-German relations. In a time of rapid change in Europe and around the world, our goal is to sustain open spaces for dialogue – spaces where differences can exist, and yet sincere conversation can continue.

The media partners for the “Berlin in Warsaw” series are “Rzeczpospolita” and rp.pl.