The aim of the article is to review the contemporary scholar discussions which take place in the Russian and foreign historiography about the “turning point” in the Second World War. The use of the “turning point” term by scholars was inevitably linked to the question about the relative contribution made by the countries of the “Grand Alliance” to the victory over the “Axis Powers”. Thus, it was logical that after 1945, during the rise of the Cold War, the academic and media discussions about the “turning point” had not only a historiographical but also political significance. Such disputes continue nowadays. This article analyses one of the recent revisionist conceptions about the “turning point” proposed by the British historian Ph. O’Brien. He tried to revise the widely held thesis that the huge land battles at the Soviet-German front were crucial to the outcome of the whole war. A critical evaluation of O’Brien’s conception is fruitful to the further scholar research on the topic as well as to the understanding of the historiographical process itself.

This article analyzes the portrayal of the Eastern Front of World War II on early American television, specifically the documentary anthology series The Twentieth Century. It explores how most early portrayals of World War II on television excised or minimized the Eastern Front in response to the Second Red Scare. Although The Twentieth Century was one of the first to display the Eastern Front in detail, its portrayal paralleled Cold War propaganda of the Soviet Union and its people. This work analyzes three episodes of the series devoted to the Soviet Union’s role in the war and notes how each utilized certain traits of U.S. anti-communist propaganda. Other matters considered are the mediators in the crafting the display of the war and the way the history was presented to satisfy the interests of the sponsor and the network. It concludes that the presentation of the Soviet people responded to Cold War imperatives with episodes produced in times when tensions were high having sharper criticism, whilst periods of eased relations leading to less propagandistic depictions.

By the time the US formally recognized the Soviet Union in 1933, the American economy was in desperate circumstances. President Roosevelt hoped that the new relationship would generate a prosperous trade between the two countries. When Germany, Italy, and Japan threatened world peace, a vigorous “America First” movement developed to keep the US out of the international conflicts. By the time the Germans invaded Poland in September 1939, this became increasingly difficult. The US, instead, became “the arsenal of democracy” and supported the efforts of the British and, by 1941, the Russians to defeat Nazi aggression, particularly through the Lend-Lease program. Although after the war, the Soviets tended to minimize American, the residual good will from that effort prevailed despite serious conflicts. The Cold War did not become hot, and even produced scientific and cultural cooperation on occasion.

This article explores how the memory of World War II affects contemporary US-China relations. Despite the fact that both of these countries were in the camp of the victorious powers, actively cooperated in the fight against a common enemy - Japan, and seemed to have retained the warmest memories of their “fighting brotherhood”, the study of their memorial practices leads to much less optimistic conclusions. In the PRC, the memory of the Second World War up to the 1990s was deliberately removed from the socio-political discourse. Then, as part of the transition from the communist to the nationalist ideology, the interest in the events of the war years increased, but they were interpreted in a spirit of victimization, with an emphasis on the sufferings endured by the Chinese people as a result of external aggression. Today, the memory of World War II is being used in China to underpin an active foreign policy, which is considered to be aimed at preventing the repetition of the terrible tragedies of the past. For Americans, victory in World War II was originally a symbol of the transformation of the United States into a Pacific power, a rationale for regional leadership. Until China claimed the same role, the memory of US-Chinese military cooperation could be used as a diplomatic tool; it was also possible to talk about the “foundation of friendship” on which bilateral relations were based. Today, this technique no longer works, a common victory does not bring the United States and China closer, but drives them apart dragging the countries to the opposite sides of the barricades.

This article explores the role of negative distrust as applied to the 2020 U.S. presidential election focusing specifically on the campaign and supporters of President Donald J. Trump. I survey negative campaigning rhetoric, the enlistment of far-right militant groups to his cause and the general political discourse of the Trump campaign and its allies and how these elements created a dangerous environment within the United States leading to the 6 January attack on the U.S. Capitol. Furthermore, I examine how the sowing of conspiracy theories, fear and disinformation had led directly to a degradation of the presidential election process and for the first time in U.S. history, there was not a safe and smooth transfer of power from one presidential administration to another. Finally, I conclude how the active employment of negative distrust amongst the electorate contributes to political and national instability that threatens not merely constitutional crisis, but the invalidation of the electoral process in the United States in general.

Since 2014, the Russian-Polish relations have been affected by crisis situations. The disagreements involve a wide range of issues, one of which is the memory of the Second World War. The article presents a quantitative analysis of the events that have taken place for the last 20 years within the framework of the Russian-Polish interaction relating to the subject matter of the Second World War. The author’s hypothesis is that the Russian-Polish official discourse on World War II is conditioned by the foreign policy interests of the leaders of those countries. The willingness of the political elites to engage in dialogue, free from competition for the «historical truth», is the determining factor in resolving the complex issues of the common historical past of both countries.

The article is devoted to the problems of improving the legal regulation of academic interaction between Russia and Germany in the framework of the Bologna process. The work uses methods of retrospective, statistical, comparative research. The author outlines the key areas regulated by the Bologna Declaration, gives the main characteristics of the regulatory framework for the participation of Russian universities in the Bologna process. The role of the Russian-German scientific and educational partnership in reforming the higher education system in Russia is highlightted. The article considers the regulatory legal acts that form the organizational and legal framework of educational cooperation between Russia and Germany in the framework of the Bologna process. Insufficiency of the Russian legislative framework, the lack of legal conditions for active academic mobility of students and academic staff are pointed out as a fundamental problem preventing the expansion of academic cooperation between Russia and Germany within the framework of the Bologna process: (1) high requirements for obtaining a student visa (both for Russian and German students); (2) a limited amount of educational exchange programs for students and teachers; (3) lack of funding for educational trips (conferences, internships) abroad; (4) incorrect interpretation and assessment of the Russian qualification “specialist” in the countries of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA).

In German and Russian historiography, the tragic fate of the Soviet prisoners of war in Germany during the Second World War has not been sufficiently explored. Very few researchers have addressed this topic in recent times. In the contemporary German society, the subject remains obscured. There are attempts to reflect this tragedy in documentary films. The author analyses the destiny of the documentary film “Keine Kameraden”, which was shot in 2011 and has not yet been shown on the German television. It tells the story of the Soviet prisoners of war, most of whom died in the Nazi concentration camps in 19411945. The personal history of some of the Soviet soldiers who died in the German captivity is reflected, their lives before the war are described, and the relatives of the deceased and the surviving prisoners of war are interviewed. The film features the German historians who have written books about the Soviet prisoners. All the attempts taken by the civil society organizations and the historians to influence the German public opinion so that the film could be shown on German television to a wider audience were unsuccessful. The film was seen by the viewers in Italy on the state channel RAI 3. Even earlier, in 2013, the film was shown in Russia on the channel “Kultura” and received the Pushkin Prize.

The article attempts to characterize the state of historical consciousness of the Germans at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21^st century. The article examines what factors influenced the formation of the “sacrificial narrative” in the collective memory of the Germans of the united Germany. The research is based on the publications in the German, Polish and Russian press, autobiographical works, interviews, diaries and memoirs of Gunther Grass, Gerhard Schroeder, etc., analyzes the works of art and filmography released at that time. Memories of the suffering of the German civilian population during the Second World War usually belonged to the individual memory or remained part of the German family history. True, the traumatic past was often used for political purposes, especially in the FRG in the matters related to the theme of exile. In the first decade of the new millennium, thanks to the changes in the cultural agenda - the release of a number of books and feature films, the plot of which was based on the suffering of the Germans, the traumatic past is at the center of public debate. However, the rethinking of the theme of the suffering of the German civilian population was met with a rather wary response in the global context, primarily from Poland and the victor countries.

The article is aimed at examining how the United States Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., preserves the memory of the Holocaust, what educational technologies are recommended for teachers. Transmission of the Holocaust memory is still very important, as even nowadays attempts are made to deny the fact of systematic persecution and destruction ofJews or underrate its scale. The museum communicates, in the historical context, traditional narrative - Hitler’s rise to power, Nazi Jewish policy. Emphasis is put on German ideology and propaganda. Great attention is paid to the historical sources, not only official ones, - to the diaries, letters, memoirs, photographs, interviews with the camp prisoners who have survived, as well as to the artifacts, audio-and video materials. The online exhibition “Americans and the Holocaust” reveals events in Germany as seen through the lens of different U.S. periodicals. Concrete recommendations are made to the educators - to avoid simple answers to complex questions and the comparison of suffering, to show that the Holocaust was not inevitable, to take into consideration an age-appropriate approach, etc. The author shares the views of the researchers who come to the conclusion: the reconstruction of the Holocaust in the museum determines our perception of the past and, therefore, deepens our understanding of the present.