The teaching of World War II in history textbooks highlights significant ideological and pedagogical differences between the USSR and the Republic of Moldova. In the USSR, the war was framed as the Great Patriotic War, emphasizing the heroism of the Red Army and the cult of Stalin. Controversial aspects, such as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, were omitted, and history was used as a propaganda tool. Textbooks highlighted the Soviet Union’s sole contribution to defeating Nazi Germany, downplaying the role of Western Allies. After gaining independence, Moldova revised its historical approach, focusing on the local impact of the war, such as the annexation of Bessarabia, Stalinist repressions, and deportations. Modern textbooks promote multiperspectivity, presenting diverse contributions and the complex causes of the war. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is critically analyzed, integrated into the context of the war’s origins. These differences reflect a transition from a totalitarian ideology to a democratic approach centered on critical thinking, source analysis, and understanding historical diversity. While Soviet textbooks glorified the Red Army, contemporary Moldovan materials promote democratic values such as peace, tolerance, and respect for human rights. This transformation underscores the role of historical education in shaping national identity and preventing the manipulation of the past for ideological purposes. The study of World War II in Moldova now adopts a balanced chronology, analyzing both the Allies’ contributions and the moral lessons of the conflict.
Maria STEPANYANTS (Wed,) studied this question.