Summary:
Recent diplomatic exchanges between Poland and Ukraine have underscored persistent historical sensitivities amid ongoing security cooperation against Russian aggression. On 26 May 2026, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed Decree No. 440/2026 granting the honorary title “Heroes of the UPA” to the Separate Northern Special Operations Center within Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces, with the stated aim of reviving national military traditions and recognizing the unit’s role in defending territorial integrity. The decision prompted sharp condemnation in Poland, where the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) is viewed primarily as responsible for mass killings of ethnic Poles during the Volhynia massacres of 1943-1945. On 19 June 2026, Polish President Karol Nawrocki announced the revocation of the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest state honor, previously awarded to Zelensky in 2023. Zelensky subsequently returned the insignia. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha described the Polish response as a strategic mistake and called for de-escalation, urging that historical matters be left to historians. These events have coincided with delays in Poland’s planned transfer of additional MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine. Polish officials cited unresolved issues regarding aircraft modernization costs and reciprocal Ukrainian drone technology cooperation, while noting reduced Ukrainian interest in advancing the alliance amid the controversy, though they denied any direct linkage to pressure over the unit name. A Polish poll indicated that over half of respondents reported worsened attitudes toward Ukraine. Both governments have reaffirmed commitment to core support for Ukraine’s defense while calling for dialogue to manage tensions.
Detailed Report
1. Zelensky Names Military Unit After Historical Group, Sparking Polish Criticism
On 26 May 2026, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky issued Decree No. 440/2026 conferring the honorary designation “Heroes of the UPA” upon the Separate Northern Special Operations Center, an elite component of Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces. The decree, issued to mark the anniversary of the Special Operations Forces, explicitly aimed to restore historical traditions of the national army and to honor the unit’s contributions to the defense of Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity. Ukrainian authorities later clarified that the proposal for the naming originated with the military personnel themselves rather than as a top-down political initiative. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army, known in Ukrainian as the Ukrainska Povstanska Armiia (UPA), was active primarily during the 1940s and 1950s as the armed formation associated with Ukrainian nationalist organizations. Within Ukrainian national narratives, many of its members are commemorated for their resistance against Soviet forces and, in certain phases, against Nazi German occupation in pursuit of an independent Ukrainian state. Elements of UPA symbolism, including the red-and-black flag, have been observed among Ukrainian troops in the current conflict. The measure aligned with broader Ukrainian efforts to integrate historical armed formations into contemporary military identity. However, the decree rapidly elicited strong objections from Poland, one of Ukraine’s staunchest supporters since the onset of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. Polish President Karol Nawrocki responded on 29 May 2026 by characterizing the decision as providing material for Russian propaganda and signalling intent to review Zelensky’s Polish state honors.
2. Polish President Revokes Order of the White Eagle from Zelensky
On 19 June 2026, Polish President Karol Nawrocki formally announced, following consultations with the Chapter of the Order, the revocation of the Order of the White Eagle from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The decoration, Poland’s oldest and most prestigious state honor, had been bestowed upon Zelensky in 2023 by then-President Andrzej Duda in recognition of his leadership in security matters, national resilience, and the defense of human rights amid the Russian invasion. In a detailed public statement, Nawrocki asserted that for the majority of Polish society the UPA remains indelibly linked to cruel crimes committed against Polish citizens during World War II. He described the Ukrainian decree as “outrageous,” “incomprehensible,” and “deeply disappointing,” emphasizing its significance beyond Ukraine’s internal affairs. The announcement underscored that the revocation did not imply any diminution of Poland’s strategic support for Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression. In direct response, President Zelensky arranged for the return of the physical insignia to Polish authorities, observing in public remarks that the Order had in the past been awarded to controversial historical figures including Catherine II and Benito Mussolini, and affirming Ukraine’s continued gratitude for Polish solidarity without contesting the symbolic decision. Several other Ukrainian figures, including former presidents and officials such as Kyrylo Budanov, also returned Polish honors. Coverage by the Associated Press, BBC, and official Polish presidential communications highlighted the move as a significant escalation in bilateral tensions, even as practical cooperation in security and reconstruction planning continued. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk advocated for frank direct talks between the leaders, cautioning that unresolved conflict over the past would serve only Moscow’s interests.
3. Historical Divergences and National Narratives on the UPA
The controversy revives long-standing divergences in Polish and Ukrainian interpretations of mid-20th-century events in the territories of present-day western Ukraine. Polish historical accounts and parliamentary resolutions focus on the Volhynia massacres (Volyn tragedy) of 1943-1945, during which the UPA and associated forces are held responsible for the systematic killing of tens of thousands to as many as 100,000 ethnic Polish civilians in regions then under Nazi occupation. In 2016, the Polish Sejm recognized these events as genocide. Polish officials, including President Nawrocki—a historian specializing in crimes against Poles—have consistently framed glorification of the UPA as incompatible with reconciliation and respect for Polish victims. Ukrainian national historiography, by contrast, highlights the UPA’s armed struggle for independence against both Soviet reoccupation and, at various stages, Nazi Germany, positioning many of its fighters as national heroes who contributed to the anti-totalitarian resistance. Ukrainian statements have acknowledged the complexity of wartime interactions, noting mutual violence involving Polish underground forces and civilian casualties on both sides, while maintaining that the recent unit naming carried no intent to diminish Polish suffering. Limited progress toward historical dialogue had occurred, including a December 2025 presidential meeting in Warsaw addressing exhumations of Polish remains. The May 2026 decree has nevertheless reignited public and political sensitivities. A survey reported by Rzeczpospolita on 11 June 2026 found that approximately 51.9 percent of Poles indicated their attitudes toward Ukraine and Ukrainians had deteriorated as a result of the naming decision. Outlets such as the BBC and Kyiv Independent documented how the episode has overshadowed positive aspects of bilateral ties, including Poland’s hosting of nearly one million Ukrainian refugees and sustained military assistance.
4. Ukrainian Responses and Calls for De-escalation
Ukrainian officials responded to the Polish measures with appeals for restraint and continued partnership. Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, in statements around 3 June 2026, characterized Warsaw’s reaction as a strategic mistake that served neither nation and urged both sides to lower emotional tensions while deferring sensitive historical chapters to professional historians. He reiterated that the unit naming was an internal military matter without anti-Polish motivation. Ukrainian positions have emphasized the shared imperative of confronting Russian aggression and warned against actions that could benefit Moscow through division. President Zelensky’s return of the Order of the White Eagle was framed as recognition of the award’s symbolic weight without conceding on the underlying historical interpretation. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry stressed no intent to cause offense. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk similarly called for direct, honest conversation between the presidents, noting that diplomacy had not yet fully resolved the matter but that cooperation remained in the vital interest of both states. While some Polish opposition voices advocated more punitive steps, including potential reviews of specific support programs, the government has maintained that fundamental military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine continues uninterrupted.
5. Delays in Polish MiG-29 Fighter Jet Transfers to Ukraine
Parallel to the diplomatic dispute, Poland has not yet executed the transfer of additional MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine despite earlier indications of intent. Toward the end of 2025, Polish authorities signaled plans to provide up to nine or six-to-eight remaining Soviet-era aircraft—gradually being phased out in favor of FA-50, F-16, and F-35 platforms—as part of a reciprocal arrangement involving Ukrainian drone and anti-drone technologies. On 15 June 2026, Deputy Defence Minister Cezary Tomczyk confirmed in media interviews that the aircraft had not been transferred and that dialogue continued, with delivery contingent upon finalizing the technology cooperation agreement. Poland seeks Ukrainian expertise in unmanned aerial systems to bolster its own capabilities. Deputy Defence Minister Paweł Zalewski, in a 17 June 2026 interview, elaborated two primary factors for the delay: Ukrainian interest in receiving aircraft already adapted to contemporary combat conditions, for which Poland was unprepared to assume the associated costs; and the incomplete status of negotiations on the reciprocal drone technology exchange. Zalewski observed that Ukraine was not currently demonstrating active pursuit of the jets or deeper alliance engagement, particularly in light of the UPA naming controversy, but he explicitly rejected any interpretation of the delays as leverage intended to force a reversal of the unit designation. He characterized the matter as primarily industrial rather than a core defence ministry issue. Previous Polish MiG-29 deliveries had occurred in earlier stages of the conflict. Officials from both sides have framed the situation within the context of sustained overall security partnership, with no indication of broader suspension of military aid.
Conclusion
The recent developments reflect deep-seated historical differences that continue to challenge Polish-Ukrainian relations even as both nations confront a common security threat from Russia. Official communications on both sides have stressed the value of direct dialogue and the imperative of maintaining practical cooperation. Core elements of bilateral support, including military assistance and refugee hosting, remain intact.