Poland's foreign minister has summoned Israel's ambassador after Yad Vashem, Israel's Holocaust memorial, published a social-media post saying "Poland was the first country where Jews were forced to wear a distinctive yellow badge." The post prompted immediate criticism from Polish officials who said the wording could wrongly imply that the Polish state or nation was responsible for Nazi crimes.
Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski urged Yad Vashem to amend the wording to specify "German-occupied Poland," arguing that precision is essential when describing actions carried out by Nazi authorities. Sikorski said he called in Israel's envoy because the post had not been corrected.
"Poland was the first country where Jews were forced to wear a distinctive yellow badge in order to isolate them from the surrounding population." — Yad Vashem post on X
In its post, Yad Vashem described a specific 1939 order by Hans Frank, governor of the Generalgouvernement, saying that on Nov. 23, 1939, German authorities ordered all Jews aged 10 and above to wear a white cloth armband 10 cm wide marked with a blue Star of David on the right arm.
Nazi Germany invaded and occupied Poland in September 1939, an event that marked the beginning of World War II. During the Holocaust six million Jews and millions of others were murdered, including many at Nazi death camps located on territory that was then occupied by Germany.
The episode touches on a long-running sensitivity in Poland about language that could be read as attributing Nazi crimes to the Polish nation. A previous nationalist government even considered criminal penalties for statements seen as suggesting Polish complicity in Nazi-era atrocities. Prime Minister Donald Tusk and other officials also criticized Yad Vashem's phrasing.
Yad Vashem responded on social media to point out that, as noted in the post and linked material, the measure was carried out by order of the German authorities. The disagreement, however, escalated into a diplomatic protest when Polish officials said the memorial had not amended the wording.
This clash underlines the continuing emotional and political sensitivities around how the Holocaust and occupation-era history are described, and shows how wording in historical summaries can have immediate diplomatic consequences.