Jews and the Armenian Genocide

[Hovik]

The Jewish Advocate
Thursday December 29 2005
Editorial
Teaching genocide

Last week, members of the Armenian Assembly of America filed to
intervene in a lawsuit brought earlier this year by the Assembly of
Turkish American Associations against the state's Department of
Education for teaching in its history curriculum "one side" on the
Armenian genocide in Turkey in 1915.

Lawyers for the Turkish group have argued that teaching both sides is a
matter of academic freedom and freedom of speech.

These are specious arguments.

We in the Jewish community should be especially concerned with attempts
to deny accounts of historical atrocities that are well documented.

Historians estimate that more than 1.5 million Armenians in Turkey were
killed in 1915 as part of a genocidal campaign, recognition of which has
long been championed by Holocaust survivor and Boston University
professor Elie Wiesel.

Under pressure from the European Union and international historians, the
Turkish government has been urged to reconsider its official account of
the episode: that there never was a systematic campaign to kill
Armenians, and the deaths that occurred were the result of inter-ethnic
strife, disease and famine during the turmoil of World War I.

Teaching about genocide is vital to preventing its reoccurrence. The
Armenian genocide deserves a place alongside the Holocaust and other
historical atrocities in the curriculums of our students.

The lawsuit by the Assembly of Turkish American Associations threatens
to open the door to revisionist historians. Our community has a special
stake in making sure that denial of genocide is not given a voice in our
public schools. Any genocide - whether it be the Holocaust, Darfur or
the Armenian genocide - deserves to be recorded and taught, not only for
the memory of all the victims who suffered, but for our children's
future. Only through education and remembrance can we even attempt to
stem the tide of hatred and violence.

http://www.thejewishadvocate.com/this_weeks_issue/editorial/?content_id=

671

[Gavur]

Myth: Elie Wiesel wants to help all humanity.

Genocide


Myth: Elie Wiesel wants to help all humanity.

While Wiesel's documentation of the Nazi Holocaust has earned him international acclamation and a Nobel Peace Prize, he is not always predisposed to yield the genocide victim's spotlight.

In 1982, a conference on genocide was held in Israel with Wiesel scheduled to be honorary chairman, but the situation became complicated when the Armenians wanted in. Here's how Noam Chomsky told the story in Chronicles of Dissent (Monroe, ME: Common Courage Press, 1992):

"The Israeli government put pressure upon [Wiesel] to drop the Armenian genocide. They allowed the others, but not the Armenian one. He was pressured by the government to withdraw, and being a loyal commissar as he is, he withdrew . . . because the Israeli government had said they didn't want Armenian genocide brought up."

Wiesel went even further, calling up noted Israeli Holocaust historian, Yehuda Bauer, and pleading with him to also boycott the conference. "That gives an indication of the extent to which people like Elie Wiesel were carrying out their usual function of serving Israeli state interests," Chomsky explains, "even to the extent of denying a holocaust, which he regularly does."

Why not welcome the Armenians, you're perhaps wondering? Chalk it up to two conspicuous factors: the need to monopolize the Holocaust image and the geopolitical reality that Turkey (the nation responsible for the Armenian genocide‹no dearth of irony here) is a rare and much-needed Muslim ally for Israel.

These three humans (and hundreds like them) have become little more than comic-book superheroes. However, in "real life", in the world we all actually live in, we cannot expect one person to change anything in any significant manner and we can't wait for a singular individual to lead the way.

In real life, there are no heroes.
Just people.

http://www.disinfo.com/archive/pages/article/id966/pg1/

[Gavur]

Historian: Removing Anti-revisionist Laws Is Arrogant

By Shirli Sitbon in Paris Updated: 24/Jan/2006 16:45

European Jewish Press, Belgium
Jan 24 2006

Historian denounces legal row in France

French historian and genocide specialist Yves Ternon tells EJP why
over 400 historians are demanding the removal of anti-revisionist laws.

EJP: Over 400 historians have signed a petition demanding the removal
of four "historical laws". One of these texts, voted on February
2005, includes a controversial article on the "positive aspect
of colonialism", but the other three prohibit genocide denial and
discrimination. Why would historians want these anti-revisionist laws
to disappear?

Yves Ternon (YT): They are putting together three essential laws and
a fourth one which is completely incoherent. I think their initiative
is wrong and that's why I've signed a second petition denouncing it.

Before I explain their motives let's go over the laws we're talking
about.

The most recent law of the three is the Taubira law* on slavery. It
asks school teachers to mention the slave trade in their programmes.

However, the law only asks them to teach about slavery after the
15th century, even though it existed before that period. I think this
limitation in time is neither justified nor normal. There shouldn't
be a distinction in periods. All of the slavery phenomenon ought to
be studied.

The second law concerns the Armenian genocide. It simply says that
France recognises the genocide. The law involves no sanctions against
revisionists.

Finally, the Gayssot law prohibits discrimination and revisionism. It
can lead to sanctions. Genocide denial can also be penalised by a
prior legislation, article 1882 from the Penal code, which sanctions
those who offend victims.

All three laws are essential. There is no reason to examine their
removal.

The fourth law, from February 2005, is very different. It asks teachers
to talk about the "positive aspect" of colonialism. I think this law
makes no sense and is incoherent. It does not justify the removal of
the three other laws.

EJP: Why do you think these respected historians made their request?

YT: They consider that only they are entitled to give their opinion
on history. There is arrogance on the behalf of university professors
who consider they belong to a different cast and that politicians and
legislators can't express themselves on these matters. They claim that
these laws are interfering with their research, but that's wrong. No
historian has ever been penalised by these three laws. No historian
has ever been threatened in his research work.

Some historians are just settling scores with legislators who dared
to intervene in the past on historic issues. They have been marked
by the Bernard Lewis affair.

Mr. Lewis was condemned by a civil court because he denied the murder
of Armenians was a genocide. The penal code article that sanctions
those who offend victims made it possible to condemn him.

EJP: If prior laws enable to penalise revisionists, what is the use
of the three laws that you are defending?

YT: They are useful and have a great significance for various
communities. The Gayssot law against revisionism and racist acts was
voted in 1990 after the Jewish cemetery of Carpentras was vandalised.

The law made it easier to penalise the perpetrators of racist acts
and revisionists.

The law recognising the Armenian genocide is a part of a wider
initiative launched by the Armenian community across the world. Its
aim is to fight Turkish revisionism. The Taubira law was essential
for the Caribbean community who insisted on the importance of teaching
about slavery in school...

EJP: This protest is getting public attention, but is it really an
important movement?

YT: Yes, this movement is very significant among historians. The 19
historians who launched the petition represent hundreds of others.

But others disagree. The second petition which denounces the first
was approved by historians who specialise in genocide studies.

There is a friction between those who do research on crimes against
humanity and other historians. Genocide studies are profoundly affected
by revisionism, which can be considered as a virus in research on
mass crimes. It should be considered as a legal offence.

EJP: Will this protest made by prestigious historians have an effect
on the current legislation?

YT: I don't think so. This protest won't get the results it's
seeking. Maybe the laws will be reformulated but they won't be
annulled. These texts are not well formulated and can be improved.

But they won't disappear. Their main quality is their mere existence.

I don't think the legislators will fold to the historians' demands.

They failed to do so in previous cases. They only obtained criticism.

EJP: On the one hand there are those who say these laws are
excessive and on the other there are some controversial, some say
anti-Semitic, figures like the comic Dieudonne that accuse France
of over-commemorating the Holocaust. Do you think that numerous
commemorations encourage anti-Semitism in certain communities?

YT: You could always imagine such schemes. But if you consider the
Armenian community there is absolutely no such reaction. On the
contrary, the Armenian and the Jewish communities see eye to eye in
the memorial policies. The same thing can be said about the Rwandan
community that is very close to the two others. There is no hostility
between the three communities.

We have seen more recently exaggerations and exuberance that
resulted from comparisons between the Shoah and much older events
such as the massacres in the region of Vendee, or Napoleon's crimes,
mainly slavery. There is a certain unease that must be addressed
and explained. You can't deny that such excessive ideas can lead
to anti-Semitism.

Yves Ternon will soon participate in the following conferences: -
"Amnesia International" organised in Marseille by the Armenian
community in March 2006 - A seminar on how to prevent genocide,
organised in Lyon in April 2006 *Taubira law: voted on May 21st 2001
Law recognising the Armenian genocide: January 29, 2001 Gayssot law:
voted on July 13 1990.

http://www.ejpress.org/article/news/5399