HDZ on the removal of the mural at Škurinja: We should have spoken to the defenders and the local community

The Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) in Rijeka has expressed its disapproval over the removal of a mural depicting members of the Home Guard (HOS) on Škurinjama, stating that prior discussions with local communities and veterans' associations were necessary before such decisions were made. The party emphasized that while all forms of totalitarianism should be condemned, the historical context of the Home Guard's role during the Homeland War must be respected. According to the statement issued by the Rijeka branch of HDZ, the decision to remove the mural raises questions about how public spaces should commemorate wartime figures and individuals who contributed to the defense of Croatia. The mural, located on Škurinjama, was dedicated to members of the HOS, a paramilitary organization formed during World War II to resist Axis occupation. The Home Guard played a key role in defending Croatia against enemy forces, particularly during the final stages of the war. The removal of the artwork sparked controversy among local residents and veterans, many of whom viewed the mural as a symbol of national resistance and historical memory. HDZ Rijeka called for transparency regarding the criteria used to justify the removal and urged authorities to engage with veteran organizations, military representatives, and the local community before making such decisions. In its official statement, HDZ Rijeka reiterated its condemnation of fascist, communist, and other totalitarian regimes, while simultaneously advocating for a nuanced approach to commemorating wartime history. The party argued that the legacy of the HOS and similar groups should not be erased or misrepresented, emphasizing instead the importance of preserving their contributions to Croatia’s independence. It stressed that the removal of the mural could be seen as an attempt to erase part of Croatia’s complex wartime narrative, which includes both heroic and controversial elements. The statement also highlighted the need for dialogue between local authorities and stakeholders, including veterans' associations and community leaders. HDZ Rijeka suggested that the mural should be restored to its original form, provided that future decisions involving wartime memorials are made through open discussion rather than unilateral action. The party warned that failing to engage with these groups risks creating ideological divisions within society, undermining the shared goal of honoring Croatia’s past. Local officials have yet to provide detailed explanations for the decision to remove the mural. While some have pointed to concerns about the visual impact of the artwork in the area, others have raised questions about whether the process followed proper procedures. The lack of clarity has led to calls for greater transparency and accountability from city administrators. Meanwhile, veterans and historians continue to argue that the mural represents an important chapter of Croatia’s history and should be preserved as a public monument. As the debate continues, the situation reflects broader tensions around how societies handle wartime legacies. In Croatia, the memory of World War II remains deeply intertwined with national identity, and efforts to preserve or alter historical symbols often provoke strong reactions. The case of the Škurinjama mural highlights the challenges of balancing historical commemoration with contemporary values, as well as the potential consequences of top-down decisions that ignore local perspectives. For now, the focus remains on the need for open dialogue and mutual respect among all parties involved.