Rob Mackinlay asks Richard Ovenden, author of Burning the Books – A History of Knowledge Under Attack, and Bodley’s Librarian in the University of Oxford – to discuss Ukraine and what can be done.

The implications of the invasion of Ukraine are hard to digest. Do we see it on a geopolitical level, feel it on a human level, or understand it on a professional level?

Through his writing, Richard Ovenden has tried to understand the impact of extreme scenarios on libraries. His first point is that we should look past heroic examples. “The most important thing is that human life comes first. I hope that librarians and archivists in the Ukraine are taking care of themselves and their families. That is of paramount importance and that’s my personal view. It’s an important point because although my book is full of accounts of people who risked their lives for the preservation of knowledge of their culture, and part of me would risk everything to save the Bodleian – ultimately libraries and archives exist to serve humanity, not the other way around. That is not to diminish the crucial role they play for communities and for society as a whole – as I tried to convey in Burning the Books.”

Drop in the ocean

As well as researching historical examples of knowledge undetr threat, Richard has also been involved in current examples, most recently Afghanistan which he wrote about in the FT (The battle for Afghanistan’s Libraries) and his role as “a small cog” at “the Oxford end of an international co-operative effort” trying to find safe passage for 120 cultural heritage workers and their families out of Afghanistan.

While it is possible to help people in conflict zones – one example being The Airtime Project which keeps mobile phone accounts topped up and Afghan voices connected – he said the Bodleian’s efforts have been focused on the diaspora groups: “For example, last year we announced an Afghan scholars initiative, part of our existing visiting fellowships programme, so we are funding five Afghan scholars in exile to participate in our visiting fellows programme. It’s a drop in the ocean but it’s something we were able to do.”

But he says the scale is very different in Ukraine: “There weren’t a lot of libraries in Afghanistan. There is a more established and mature library culture in Ukraine. I would hope that any of them fleeing the country would be welcomed in asylum terms in the UK. I was personally involved when it came to Afghanistan and the Home Office was dreadful, terribly slow and ineffective and unhelpful in giving sanctuary to librarians and archivists from Afghanistan. I fear the same is going to be true for our colleagues in Ukraine. I hope I’m proved wrong about that.”

Preservation

“Tanks are rolling into the cities of Ukraine where there are libraries and archives. Physical institutions and people are literally under attack. The most important thing for them is that they are safe.” He said the international library sector has helped to rebuild collections in Bosnia and Iraq but he is concerned about what is at stake: “Just think of Chernobyl. I hope all the documentation around it in the Ukraine is being preserved and that it is available to the international community. It doesn’t just affect Ukraine. That horrific event, decades ago, will still leave an impact for centuries to come.

“The other question that worries me is the state of web archiving. We know cyber warfare is a Russian tactic and I suspect many Ukrainian websites will be suffering. The Internet Archive was active immediately before during and after the war in Afghanistan. In this case we don’t need to be in the Ukraine to help, we can start preserving the Ukrainian web now.”

Where is our front line?

One point Richard has made in all his recent writing is that we shouldn’t be complacent about western societies as bastions of democracy, access to truth and free speech. “If you read the statement from the president of the Ukraine Libraries Association, there is great emphasis on disinformation. What we see is information being weaponised by Vladimir Putin. That is all part of a disdain for democracy and open society. It is my belief that due regard to facts and truth are at the heart of British democracy and open society. We should be able to hold our elected officials to account through the proper keeping of records of the formulation and execution of government policy. But the behaviour of the current members of government and special advisers with regard to the use of WhatsApp and other encrypted messaging systems – defying the 1958 public records act – and the misuse of information in government messaging is a worrying sign that we are moving away from the proper conduct of an open democratic society.”

Header image: Richard Ovenden. Photo © John Cairns