This article examines the role of intergroup trust and recognition of past sufferings on intergroup attitudes in a situation where the members of a group share a collective memory of victimization. The recurring conflicts between the Dutch- and French speaking communities of Belgium provide an interesting research field to test the assumption that a reconstructive discourse on collective memory (see Ferry, 1996), that is acknowledging the perspectives of the different rival groups on their past, has the potential to improve intergroup relations. We conducted an experiment among Dutch-speaking students (N = 80) in which we manipulated the degree of importance that French-speakers gave to historical episodes of past victimizations in order to test its impact on the Dutch-speakers’ attitudes towards the French-speakers. Results show that intergroup attitudes were most favorable among the high-trusting Dutch-speaking participants when they were led to believe that the French-speakers judged important the events were both communities were considered as victims (Mixed victimization condition), compared to the conditions were only French-speaking sufferings or only Dutch-speaking sufferings were considered important. However, the same Mixed victimization condition elicited less positive attitudes among the low-trusting participants. This suggests that reconsidering the past in a reconciliation perspective could not be effective without paying attention to the level of trust in current group relationships. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published