The Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and the case of the Israeli hostages and their medial representations underline the continuing relevance of the issue of ‘war captivity’ and the importance of analysing its ‘representation’ across different media. The conference “Visualisations of War Captivity. Performativity, Reconciliation, Irreconcilability” primarily examined visualisations of war captivity in the 20th and 21st centuries. Visual representations of war captivity from different times, regions and media were linked by the central common research question: How do visual representations of POWs relate to the prospect of 'reconciliation' or 'irreconcilability'?

The conference was organised within the framework of interdisciplinary reconciliation research at the Bonn Centre for Reconciliation Research at the University of Bonn (BCRS) in cooperation with the Bonn Cluster of Excellence 'Beyond Slavery and Freedom': Asymmetrical Dependencies in Pre-Modern Societies’. The BCRS considers ‘reconciliation’ to be a critical, though utopian ideal as well as a controversial concept. The Center is interested in examining the role of reconciliation policies as a factor of propaganda or power strategy. By focusing on visualizations of prisoners of war (POW), this approach has been linked to the concept of strong asymmetrical dependencies: In this framework, the status of a POW can be defined as a state of "intermediacy" and as a case of “strong asymmetrical dependency”: On the one hand, war captivity seems to entail a transformation of former perpetrators into prisoners and victims. Conversely, this state signifies the potential cessation of hostilities. It is not uncommon for war captivity to persist beyond the end of an armed conflict, with the prospect of being released often serving as a prerequisite for reconciliation.

The conference began on Thursday with a presentation by Hans-Georg Soeffner (University of Bonn), who introduced the conference’s underlying approaches from visual sociology and hermeneutics. Soeffner explained that an interpretation of visual representations of war captivity requires considering not only the intention behind the image but also the underlying messages conveyed by the subjects' expressions and the arrangement of objects in the frame. Soeffner noted that historically, especially in pre-modern times, images conveyed traditions and knowledge without the need for text, as evidenced by stained glass and paintings, which were considered reliable sources of truth. However, as society began to rely more on written texts for objectivity and intersubjectivity, scepticism towards images also increased, resulting in a diminished ability to interpret their multiple meanings. Thus, 'communication' and 'visual representations' not only interact with the world, but also shape it by selecting specific elements and assembling them into a new worldview. The difference between 'image hermeneutics' and 'hermeneutics of seeing' is that the former analyses specific image representations, while the latter examines the process of seeing as part of the experience in order to reconstruct visual understanding and aesthetic modes of perception. The aim of the conference was to combine both hermeneutical perspectives. This aim was underlined in the second, more methodological introduction led by Jürgen Raab (University of Konstanz) and Sebastian Hoggenmüller (University of Lucerne). Raab and Hoggenmüller presented their research on the Instagram channel of the Israeli hostage organisation “Bringthemhome”, identifying patterns in the visual representation. Their analysis showed that examining individual image elements reveals deeper intentions, showing professionalism and a clear division between Israelis and their perceived 'enemies'.   The conference featured six thematic panels. In the first panel entitled 'Icons and 'Heroes behind Stacheldraht', Leonard Dorn (GHI Paris) discussed representations of prisoners in the 18th century, focusing on the Seven Years' War, while Rainer Pöppinghege (University of Paderborn) examined how POWs sought to counter social stigma by framing their experiences as morally beneficial. The panel highlighted the complex historical and commemorative contexts that influence the interpretation of visualisations of prisoners, noting that these representations are shaped by both the perspectives of those depicted and their historical circumstances. The second panel, "Visualising Captivity as an Expression of 'Political Appropriation' and 'Incompatibility'", focused on asymmetrical dependencies. John Adrianfer Atienza (University of the Philippines) presented "Colonizer Turned Liberator", examining US imperialist visuality in World War II newsreels and using postcolonial criticism to analyse colonial discourses. Jean Michael Turcotte (Department of National Defence - Directorate of History and Heritage, Ottawa) discussed 'Irreconcilability in Cold War Captivity', focusing on Canadian military photography during the Vietnam War, which aimed to document prisoner exchanges to be used as evidence against North Vietnam and to highlight the conflict between the communist North and 'liberal' South Vietnam. In contrast to the first two panels, the third panel focused on the daily lives of POWs, with three different case studies: Japan, Hungary and Austria during the First World War. Somogyi László (Budapest City Archives, Budapest, Hungary discussed the visual documentation of civilian internees during the war, showing photographs, drawings and paintings from internment camps in Hungary. Dr Takuma Melber (University of Heidelberg) presented "Fotos aus Kurume: Insights into the History of German POW in Japan during the First World War", while Alexander Bonk (University of Giessen) presented his research on the "Visualisation of Prisoners of War in the First World War on the Eastern Front". Melber for example explored the significance of "Daikyū", Beethoven's 9th Symphony, which was performed by German soldiers in Bandō. The Daikyū is deeply embedded in the Japanese memory of the First World War and is recognised as an "Ode to Joy", with its iconic phrase "All men will be brothers" symbolising the almost amicable relationship between German POW and the Japanese Empire in the midst of hostility. To enhance the narrative of German POW in Japan, this presentation examined a photo album of nearly 50 pages and over 200 images belonging to POW Georg Nagel, which provides valuable insights into camp life and the daily routines of prisoners at the Kurume POW camp in Kyūshū, southwestern Japan.
 
The second day of the conference built on the findings of the first day, with a fourth panel dedicated to case studies from Eastern Europe. This session explored visualisations created by POWs in the Soviet Union, Austria and Hungary during World War I. The panel also examined the artworks created by the prisoners, highlighting their efforts to process and communicate their experiences. Lena Radauer (IKGN Lüneburg) presented a paper on "Capturing Captivity - Prisoners of the First World War's Representations of Russia in Art and Photography". During the First World War, Russia held some 2.4 million military prisoners, mainly from the Austro-Hungarian and German empires. Their experience of captivity was further complicated by the Russian Civil War. Despite the wealth of visual material, including photographs and artworks by both professional and amateur artists, these resources are rarely analysed as primary sources. Radauer's examination of these visual representations aimed to evaluate prevailing narratives about the POWs' isolation and their interaction with Russian culture. Zsuzsanna Szegedy-Maszák (Hungarian National Museum, Historical Photography Department) discussed 'Love of the Arts and Beauty'- Scenes from Russian Prisoner of War Camps of the First World War'. Szegedy-Maszák examined magazines from the Austro-Hungarian Empire published after the outbreak of the war, showing how official photographers captured propagandistic images of enemy prisoners of war. After the war, these biased images were complemented by candid photographs of daily life in the camps taken by amateur photographers, often from the personal collections of former prisoners. The fifth panel focused on visualisations of Soviet POWs during the Second World War. During the Second World War and between 1941 and 1945, more than 5.7 million Soviet soldiers were captured by the Nazis, and 3.5 million Soviet soldiers and officers died in German captivity. This means that about 57 per cent of those taken prisoner died in German custody, explained Viktoria Sukovata (Charkiw University, now Fellow, Gerda Henkel Foundation), who focused in her presentation on "Soviet prisoners of war in Soviet state policy and cinematic reflections: from irreconcilability to public solidarity". Sukovata argued that the Soviet policy of commemorating Soviet prisoners of war was controversial during the Soviet period and that the first research works on Soviet prisoners of war were published in Russian and Ukrainian mainly after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Cultural reflections on Soviet POWs in Soviet cinema were also controversial: the best-known Soviet film about the fate of Soviet POWs in Nazi captivity was Sergei Bondarchuk's The Fate of a Man (1959). Sukovata analysed this and other examples of Soviet films about Soviet POWs in the context of public memory, cultural reflection, "state" irreconcilability and public solidarity. Olli Kleemola's (Turku University) paper "Soviet prisoners of war in Finnish war photography of the Second World War (1941-1944)" examined characteristics of Finnish images of Soviet prisoners of war. Finland fought side by side with Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union during the war, but did not have a similar racist ideology as Germany. Using the complete collections of propaganda photographs in Finland, it is possible to reconstruct the official image of the war effort as approved by the war command. The unofficial images of soldiers or snipers are drawn upon for comparison. While photography at the front was officially forbidden in Finland, it was nevertheless very popular. Axel Bangert (Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin) focused on the photographs of Soviet prisoners of war taken at Stalag II B Hammerstein in East Prussia on 9 August 1941 ("From Humanitarian Intervention to Propagandistic Manipulation: The Photographic Staging of Soviet POWs at Stalag Hammerstein on 9 August 1941"). For the first and last time, a delegation from the International Committee of the Red Cross was allowed to visit, albeit unofficially, a Wehrmacht camp for captured Red Army soldiers. In an attempt to disprove reports of serious violations of international law in the treatment of Soviet prisoners of war, the Wehrmacht presented the Red Cross delegates an artificial version of a model camp. On the initiative of the Foreign Office, a series of some two hundred photographs were taken during the visit. These images, all of which have survived, provide a unique opportunity to study the Nazi regime's visualisation of Soviet prisoners of war. At a time when reconciliation between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was unthinkable, and indeed unwanted by the German aggressor, the Red Cross, in keeping with its humanitarian agenda, sought to act as a mediator to improve the fate of prisoners of war on both sides. Nazi Germany sought to exploit this situation in two fundamental ways: First, by simulating acceptable conditions for Soviet prisoners of war, the images were intended to facilitate the fair treatment of German prisoners at the hands of the Red Army - a matter of great concern to the German population. Secondly, and more importantly, the images were intended as a propaganda tool to blame the Red Army for the deplorable conditions of Soviet prisoners of war, portraying its soldiers as poorly equipped, suffering from malnutrition and either too young or too old to fight.

The last panel of the conference provided a special focus on Bosnia. In her paper "Myths, Memories and Cases of 'Irreconcilability'" Selin Schumacher (Bonn) presented the results of her study of film material from the year 1995, more specifically the video of Ramo Osmanović, a famous case of one of the Bosniaks who tried to flee and were caught in the mountains around Srebrenica by Bosnian Serb soldiers. Additionally, Schumacher presented video material she had collected herself: Interviews she conducted with Ms Osmanović and other survivors about the role of visualised war captivity. Empirical research, Schumacher made clear, can also make an indispensable contribution to the investigation of reconciliation/unreconciliation via "colouring" the discourse on the often seemingly black-and-white past. Martin Chung and Marija Todorova (Hong Kong Baptist University) analyzed "Myths of Prisoners of War and Prospects for Reconciliation: Comparing Northern Ireland and Bosnia", comparing the discourse and related debates during the conflicts in Northern Ireland and the Yugoslav wars of succession. Chung and Todorova argued that the myths created around the victimhood of prisoners had served their purposes during the conflict - from justifying acts of violence as a response to injustice suffered to galvanising internal cohesion - but had inadvertently created obstacles to post-conflict reconciliation. In the final presentation of the sixth panel, Aleksandra Miljković (Filmhochschule Babelsberg Konrad Wolf, Potsdam) presented her findings on "Reproducing Jasenovac - The Representations and Contextualisations of the "Children as Prisoners of War". In 2021, the release of two films - Serbia's DARA FROM JASENOVAC and Bosnia's QUO VADIS, AIDA? - sparked a heated debate in the post-Yugoslav region. The film, financed from Serbia's budget and selected as its Oscar entry without public input, faced scepticism about its historical accuracy and national significance. While both films address shared historical traumas, their reception failed to unite regional audiences. Miljković examined how these representations, especially of "children as war prisoners" have been contextualised in post-Yugoslav films, from socialist interpretations to the Yugoslav war era. Finally, contemporary films such as DARA FROM JASENOVAC were examined for their representations of national histories and ethnic identities.

The conference underlined the potential of visual material for understanding 'reconciliation' and 'irreconcilability' as well as the necessity to consider the underlying dependencies. Photographs are often used for propagandistic purposes and are sometimes deliberately arranged in a way that serves this end. It is not always evident what status photographs hold in terms of reconstructing the history of the respective wars and/or the post-war periods. Secondly, the visual representation of POWs may facilitate reconciliation or, conversely, perpetuate enmity. The conference facilitated connections between researchers from diverse backgrounds who have been engaged in this field of study for an extended period within their specific case studies. The conference thus provided a forum for the discussion of the concepts of 'reconciliation' and 'irreconcilability' in relation to empirical data, combining the approach of 'critical reconciliation research' with that of 'strong asymmetrical dependency'.

A joint publication of the papers is planned.