The Russo-Ukrainian war is - among other horrors - also a war of memory policies. And it has itself already been memorialised. Each February, the anniversary of the invasion, is an occasion for officials addresses, exhibitions, conferences. The anniversaries of recapturing Kherson and other towns and cities in Ukraine are celebrated as milestones. New days of celebration or mourning are added to the calendar. Media continue to update their timelines of the war daily.
Yesterday 1000 days passed since the start of the war. Newspapers dedicated historical recaps to this date, politicians used as an occasion to repeat slogans, people post this number on their social media accounts, sometimes adding personal reflections. Historian Hayden White once remarked that Europeans of the XVII c did not know they were fighting an 80 years' war until it was over*. Now people seem to look for comfort in counting days and months in anticipation of the day when they can formulate the name of the war.
1000 days is almost half of the duration of the Second World War (2190), nearly 60% of the First World War (1747) and over 3/4 of the days Nazi-Soviet war lasted (1417). This is also only 1/3 of the Iran-Iraq war, less than 1/3 of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, and 1/5 of the Vietnam war. When and who will be able to name this war, since there should be someone alive to do so? Asking what will be written on monuments and what the anniversaries will be called is too much.
Because it is difficult to live in complete uncertainty, people live in various teleological timelines. Some live in the story of national liberation - and their number is shrinking. Increasingly more started living in the timeline of a ceasefire with an acute awareness that this would not be the end of the story but the end of a chapter. Many live in the timeline of a personal salvation in the form of emigration, getting foreign citizenship, desertion, self-harm and other form of decoupling from 'history.' A few live in the apocalyptic time that remains until the horrible end of themselves personally, of their loved ones, of their aspirations, of their country. For most, these timelines intertwine in a disorderly and non-harmonious counterpoint.
Due to my class background and my psychological setup, I lived in the timeline of a disaster as long as I remember myself. Even when the inescapable temporality of early adulthood instilled the illusion of an upward trajectory, I reinterpreted it as a chain of happy coincidence that punctuate the march towards a catastrophe. This influenced my perception of this war. We will all die in the long run, the question is the comfort of dying.
This temporal perspective informed my participation in the debates about the war. This was purely negative and full of resentment. I fought with the optimists. I chose a favourite enemy and indulged in easy battles. I was condescending towards those who thought the war wouldn't happen. I derided those who were optimistic about Russia or its project of multipolarity. I despised those who hoped for an early end of the war and believed in the myths of the Minsk Accords or the Istanbul deal. I laughed at those who cheered the end of American empire (not being a fan of Ukrainian literature, I recalled the words of 19 c Ukrainian poet: 'Poland fell, but buried us under its rubble').
Negation and boundaries you draw push you on the same side with people whose boundaries may coincide with yours in some sections. Especially in social media. I'm not exactly like this in real life. At the second year of the war I started realising I'm left with no-one to talk to. I was surrounded by optimists from the other camp. I felt uneasy and started questioning their optimism. As time went on, I fell back on resentment and negativity. I started a fight with optimists who count days and live in a teleology of the liberation. I tried to show that the time is relative to motion. That we do not have the power to declare a process an event. Consequently, I entered the economy of a negative exchange, where you exchange gifts of suspicion if not animosity.
This is also a dead end. Can there be a straight path not distorted by emotions and fixations? So much for non lugere, non ridere....
*Citing Hayden White from memory, may be wrong