Armenian Genocide: Statement by Scholars

The French intellectual, Bernard-Henri Levi, has a intriguing piece in The New Republic calling for institutions of laws against genocide denial. He refers in the main to Holocaust and the Armenian genocide.

His article is prompted, in part, by the recent online petition of 200 Turkish writers, academics, and intellectuals apologizing for the massacre. According to Internet sources over 800 Turks have since added their name to the petition.

I do not agree with Levi's stance as I have frequently stated. However, his article raises some interesting issues.

At one point he makes reference to Irving v. Penguin UK and Lipstadt.

Take France's Gayssot law, which criminalized the denial of crimes against humanity, and which as yet has been applied only to denial of the Jewish Holocaust. This is a law that reins in the fringe and extremist politicians who engage in lightly cloaked anti-Semitism and who may be tempted to advocate Holocaust denial. This is a law that prevents masquerades like that of historian David Irving's trial in London in 2000.

Irving brought a libel case against Deborah Lipstadt, author of "Denying the Holocaust," who had labeled him a spokesman for Holocaust deniers. Though the judge ruled in notably strong language that Irving was indeed a Holocaust denier, in the absence of laws penalizing this offense, Irving walked free.

In fact, had there been a UK law against Holocaust denial Irving could never have brought his case. Before the trial I might have thought this was a good thing.

But as a result of the case, not only was Irving declared by the court to be a denier, racist, and antisemite but as a result of excellent research by our historical team we exposed the lies, distortions, falsifications, and inventions upon which Irving relied in each and every one of his comments about the Holocaust.

It was costly, time consuming, and, at times, overwhelming. But there is now a official court record attesting to the fact that denial is naught but a pack of lies. But more important that the court record is the work down by the historians. But for the trial it is highly doubtful that anyone would have devoted their time to showing how he lied and invented regarding the Holocaust.

Armenian University gives award to Ahmadinejad: A double standard???

Seems that Yerevan University [Yerevan is the capital of Armenia] has given a gold medal and an honorary doctorate to Iran's Ahmadinejad.

Armenian Americans have condemned the university for this action because of Ahmadinejad's record of Holocaust denial. This is the correct stance for them to take.

An Armenian run Web site, No Place For Denial, continues to accuse the ADL of genocide denial, alleging that its statements on the subject have been ambiguous, a charge the ADL denies. The continuing momentum has led several communities in the Boston area to end their partnerships with a highly regarded anti-bigotry program sponsored by the ADL.

Here's what perplexes me. Dikran Kaligian, chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America's Eastern Region, and Sevag Arzoumanian, "No Place for Denial" have told the JTA that,

while they disagree with the notion of giving Ahmadinejad an award, agree that it was appropriate for Ahmadinejad to be invited to Armenia, a landlocked country that depends on good relations with its neighbors for trade and energy.

This, they seem to be saying, is a matter of realpolitik.

Why then don't they understand when Jews worry about the fate of the Turkish Jewish community or Turkey's relations with Israel? That too is realpolitik.

Seems to me there is a real double standard here. Maybe someone can explain the difference to me...

Turkey Blames the Jews

If it were not so serious it would actually be amusing.

Who has Turkey singled out as being responsible for the passage of the Armenian genocide resolution? The Jews.

According to a sobering story in the JTA , Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan said he told American Jewish leaders that a genocide bill would strengthen the public perception in Turkey that “Armenian and Jewish lobbies unite forces against Turks.”

Babacan added, “We have told them that we cannot explain it to the public in Turkey if a road accident happens. We have told them that we cannot keep the Jewish people out of this.”

The Turkish public seems to have absorbed that message.

An online survey by Zaman’s English-language edition asking why Turks believed the bill succeeded showed at one point that 22 percent of respondents had chosen “Jews’ having legitimized the genocide claims” -- second only to “Turkey’s negligence.”

The Turks are livid with the ADL for reversing its position on the genocide and declaring that what happened was “indeed tantamount to genocide.”

According to the JTA,

Mustafa Akyol, an Istanbul-based political commentator who frequently writes about religious issues, says the strong reaction to the ADL’s policy switch and the perception that it somehow legitimized the Armenians’ claims are based on an “inflated sense” of American Jewish power among the Turkish public.

“There is a belief that [the resolution] couldn't have happened without Jewish support,” Akyol said. Now where are all those self-righteous critics who have been attacking the ADL for what it did? They have fallen prey to the same stereotype as the Turks. It's all the fault of the Jews.

Well at long last there is something both sides can agree on: the Jews did it.... but they knew that already.

Armenian Genocide: Beating up on the ADL

The passion with which some people are attacking the ADL for its position on the Armenian genocide leaves me wondering if they are not using this as an excuse to beat up on the organization.

As I wondered in a previous post, will there be the same passion against Jimmy Carter when he comes to Lexington as there against the ADL? Take a look at this clip from Lexington , Mass town meeting. Why not criticize Carter, who after all, says quite explicitly that neither what happened in Armenia nor what is going on in Darfur are genocides.

Or will anyone complain about the sneering way in which NPR's Senior News Analyst, Dan Schorr, referred to the genocide on his weekly news analysis on Weekend Edition this past Saturday?

Schorr, his voice dripping with criticism, referred to "this business of people who want to please the Armenians in California coming up with a resolution calling the 1915 massacre of Armenians genocide" which will antagonize a "once very loyal ally, Turkey."

Will these people criticize Carter, stop supporting NPR, or go after the politicians who are changing their positions on this matter? Will John Murtha, who has so severely condemned the war in Iraq, stop being their hero as a result of his call for the defeat of this resolution?

I don't think they will do any of these things. They will go after the ADL which has done important work in the field of prejudice reduction.

Without falling prey to conspiracy theories -- something I abhor -- I have to wonder what is these ADL critic's unspoken agenda? Why are they singling it out?

The Washington Post, Jimmy Carter, Senator Lindsey Graham speak out against the Armenian Genocide Resolution: Yet all the attention is on Abe Foxman

The Washington Post has severely condemned the Armenian Genocide resolution, as has Jimmy Carter [this a.m. on CNN], Senator Lindsey Graham, Juan Cole, and Zbigniew Brzezinski.

This represents people from the far left, the blatantly anti-Israel, the Republican right, and the left of center.

Why then all the attention to Abe Foxman's position??? I have been inundated with emails critical of Abe Foxman and the ADL. So many of them are so overtly antisemitic that I have not posted them.

Various towns in Massachusetts want to drop the ADL's anti-prejudice programs because of its stand on the Armenian genocide. Are they also going to condemn Jimmy Carter when he comes to town???? Why does he get a free pass?

By the way, Carter also refuses to call what is happening in Darfur a genocide. But Israel practices apartheid? What am I missing here?

And why all the talk about the Jewish Lobby controlling foreign policy when 7 of the 8 Jewish members of the House Foreign Relation Committee voted FOR the resolution? Did these Representatives not get the message? Were they missing the day the Lobby handed out its marching orders?

Something is out of whack here.... seriously so.

House Foreign Affairs Committee passes Armenian Genocide resolution

A short while ago the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed the resolution condemning the mass killings of Armenians in Turkey in World War I as an act of genocide.

Turkey is very upset and is threatening to reconsider supporting the American war effort, which includes permission to ship essential supplies through Turkey and northern Iraq.

So here's my question: if the "Jewish lobby" controls American foreign policy and many Jewish organizations, especially Abe Foxman and the ADL, opposed this resolution because of their fears about the welfare of the Turkish Jewish community and their appreciation of Turkey's relations with Israel... HOW COME THIS PASSED????

Maybe Jimmy Carter can explain.... Must have been a mistake....Or the Foreign Affairs Committee did not get its marching orders right... And if Jimmy can't explain maybe Professors Walt or Mearsheimer can....♠

Armenian Genocide: op-ed by Deborah Lipstadt and Peter Balakian

An op-ed written by my friend Peter Balakian and me appears in this week's New York Jewish Week

Turkey Must Acknowledge its Past
by Peter Balakian and Deborah Lipstadt

Turkey’s ambassador to Israel, Namik Tan, told The Jerusalem Post (Aug. 27) that Israel must force the ADL to retract its acknowledgement of the Armenian genocide, that failure to do this would be a stab in the heart of the Turkish people and that the Turkish people do not distinguish between Israeli Jews and Diaspora Jews on this issue. Tan also said that recognizing the Armenian genocide will mean that “my ancestors have done something inconceivable,” and it will set off “a campaign against Turkey and the Turkish people.” Though he subsequently tempered his language, this was a very harsh attack with overtones of classic views of Jewish power.

Turkey has told Israel and various Jewish organizations that if they favor a congressional resolution acknowledging the genocide it will not bode well for Israel’s relationship with Turkey or for Turkish Jews.

It is true that Turkey is the only Muslim nation willing to maintain a close diplomatic relationship with Israel and remains the only Muslim country that allows a small Jewish community to live in relative freedom.

We know that Turkey is pressured by internal factions and by other Muslim nations to sever ties with Israel. And it is also clear how fragile and tenuous, despite seeming quite comfortable, Jewish life in Turkey is.

Nevertheless, it is equally crucial that historical denial of genocide be addressed in an uncompromising fashion. While historians are taught to be skeptical, it is absurd to be skeptical or neutral about events of the magnitude of the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust, which are attested to by reams of documents and material evidence as well as testimonies by victims, perpetrators and bystanders.

Neutrality or skepticism in the case of these two tragedies constitutes denial, which is the final stage of genocide in that it seeks to demonize the victims and rehabilitate the perpetrators.

The broad and international record on the Armenian genocide has been created by an international body of dispassionate scholarship for decades, and notably, affirmed by The International Association of Genocide Scholars in repeated statements that note that this history is not controversial anywhere in the world but in Turkey.

Raphael Lemkin, the noted legal scholar who lost 49 members of his family in the Holocaust, invented the concept of genocide, in part, on the basis of what happened to the Armenians in 1915.

The main actor here, however, is Turkey. It is time for Turkey to end its nine-decade campaign to erase the Armenian genocide. It is time to stop bullying and attempting to coerce states and organizations that engage history honestly. Such a campaign is immoral.

By passing the resolution (H.R. 106) before it, Congress must make it clear to Turkey that, even as we welcome its alliance with the United States in so many arenas, the time for this denial is over.

Turkey’s calls for a commission of historians to resolve this issue are disingenuous, especially for a country that has a law that makes it a crime to “insult Turkishness,” under which scholars and publishers who have spoken about the Armenian genocide have been prosecuted and even killed.

It is wrong and unbecoming for the Jewish community to participate in what can best be described as a charade, i.e. the notion that the jury of historians is “still out” on this issue. Imagine if Germany had taken a similar stance with the Holocaust. While hindsight may be 20/20, it is regrettable that the Jewish community telegraphed a message to Turkey that this is a matter of debate and negotiation.

We understand Turkey’s difficulty in acknowledging these dark episodes in its past. However, acknowledging this crime would, rather than spawn a campaign against Turkey, as ambassador Tan claims, prompt applause from the international community.

It will be a sign that Turkey can critique its past honestly. The most effective way for a country to resolve its criminal past is to acknowledge the criminal act, try to make some form of recompense and become a force in trying to prevent the repetition of such events.

Germany has, with varying degrees of success, achieved that. It is time for Turkey to do the same with the Armenian genocide. And it is time to stop threatening a small vulnerable Jewish community or the one other parliamentary democracy in the Middle East for acknowledging historical truth.

The time has come for the U.S. Congress to join more than 20 other countries, the Vatican, the European Parliament and other world organizations, in affirming the Armenian genocide. Given that H.R. 106 is a nonbinding resolution with no “teeth in it,” the hysteria over the resolution has reached a point of absurdity. It is time for Turkey to acknowledge the moral perspective of other countries, and time to move on.

Peter Balakian is professor of the humanities at Colgate University and the author of The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America’s Response, which won the Raphael Lemkin Prize. Deborah Lipstadt is professor of Holocaust studies at Emory University and author of History on Trial: My Day in Court with David Irving, which won the National Jewish Book Award.

Armenian Genocide: Turkey's Ambassador to Israel raises the ante

Yet another post about the Armenian Genocide. In a compelling and frightening interview given to the Jerusalem Post, Turkey's Ambassador to Israel has made it crystal clear that he expects Israel to "deliver" the ADL and other Jewish organization on the Armenian Genocide issue.

Turkey expects Israel and the organization to ensure that the US Congress does not pass the resolution characterizing as genocide the massacre of Armenians during World War I.

The Ambassador said:

"Israel should not let the [US] Jewish community change its position. This is our expectation and this is highly important, highly important.... If you want to touch and hurt the hearts of the people in Turkey, this is the issue... This is the No. 1 issue. You cannot easily explain to them any change in this."

He also told the Post that "in the eyes of the Turkish people, Tan said, his country's strategic relationship with Israel was not with Israel alone, but with the whole Jewish world. 'They [the Turkish people] cannot make that differentiation,'"

This is simply mind boggling. Let me enumerate what leaves me speechless here:
1. Turkey resolute fight against acknowledging the genocide. Doesn't Turkey realize that the world is upset less by the genocide [it's used to those things] than by Turkey's denial. [It's weird but true.]

2. Turkey's assumption that Israel can determine whether the resolution passes or not.

3. How in Turkey's mind Israel says jump and American Jews will jump. It just does not work that way. [I hate to disappoint the antisemites who see as all organized in one giant conspiracy but it just ain't so]

4. While Turkey threatened to cut off French investments in Turkey when it passed a law outlawing Armenian genocide denial, it did not raise the stakes the way it is doing now.

And, as I have said before, who says history does not have contemporary relevance???

Armenian Genocide: Turkey pressures Israel to pressure ADL

Seems that, according to the JTA, the Turks are pressuing Israel to get the ADL to reverse its reversal on the Armenian genocide. I hope that this will not happen.

It would be nice if the Turks recognized that the best way for them to deal with this is to admit that it happened and declare this fight over. Oh, could they learn from Germany's behavior.

Armenian Genocide: Statement by Scholars

A few years ago, in the face of the Turkish government's efforts to set up chairs at American universities -- such as it did at Princeton for Heath Lowry -- a group of scholars signed a statement regarding the Armenian genocide.

It's worth reading.

Armenian genocide: Ambassador John Evans [who lost his job because he spoke of the genocide] makes statement

I heard from my new friend, Ambassador John Evans, who was fired by the State Department from his position as American Ambassador to Armenia because he referred to the Armenian genocide.

Ambassador Evans has issued the following statement regarding the ADL and American Jewish Committee's change of position regarding the Armenian genocide.

The American Jewish Committee and the Anti-Defamation League have done the right thing to describe the 1915 massacres of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire using the historically accurate term, which is "genocide." And AJC Director David Harris is also right to say that "engagement, not avoidance, is the best strategy." Treating the issue of the Armenian Genocide as a taboo does not get us -- Armenians, Turks or Americans -- anywhere, but only perpetuates a long-standing stalemate and generates further bitterness. The issue needs to be faced squarely and honestly for the good of all, and for the future stability of the region.

John M. Evans
U.S. Ambassador to Armenia
2004-2006

Hats off to him for doing so.

Armenian genocide: ADL reverses its stand

So this morning I posted something about the ADL-Watertown, Ma.- Armenian controversy. I posted it in great sadness because I thought the position taken by the ADL was so wrong.

And a few hours later, the JTA reports that, in a sign that people and organizations sometimes still do the right thing, the ADL has issued a statement acknowledging that what was done to the Armenians constitutes a genocide and there is no need for historians to determine that fact.

The organization still opposes a resolution, a position with which I disagree. On that reasonable people can take different positions. On the tragedy that was perpetrated against the Armenians there is far less room for that.

This was the right thing to do and it is only too bad that it had to happen in the first place.

BTW, I am not suggesting that my posting is what changed Abe Foxman's mind. My guess is that it was, in the main, his conversation with Elie Wiesel and the chorus of criticisms that came from so many people in the field, myself included.

The statement, which was issued by Abe Foxman, says:

In light of the heated controversy that has surrounded the Turkish-Armenian issue in recent weeks, and because of our concern for the unity of the Jewish community at a time of increased threats against the Jewish people, ADL has decided to revisit the tragedy that befell the Armenians.

We have never negated but have always described the painful events of 1915-1918 perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians as massacres and atrocities. On reflection, we have come to share the view of Henry Morgenthau, Sr. that the consequences of those actions were indeed tantamount to genocide. If the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it genocide.

Who says history belongs to the past?: Armenian genocide, the ADL, and Watertown, Mass.

I have been a bit slow in posting about a controversy that is roiling Watertown Mass. and parts beyond. Seems that ADL wanted to bring its highly praised program "No Room for Hate" to Watertown. [For more background see the JTA article by Ben Harris.]

Watertown is also the home to a very large Armenian population and they are understandably upset -- to put it mildly -- about the Congress' failure to pass a bill which recognizes the Armenian genocide.

Not surprisingly, Turkey is vehemently opposed to this resolution. And, as I have discussed before, some of the leading American Jewish organizations are not supporting it either. They seem to be echoing the Turkish argument that this is a matter for the historians not the politicians.

It hurts to see the Jewish organizations take this stance. My guess -- and it's really more than a guess -- that the Turks have made it quite clear that if they value Turkey's relationship with Israel and the well being of the Turkish Jewish community they should not support the bill. There is also growing concern in the Jewish community that, as Turkey becomes more overtly Muslim, Turkish Jews and the relationship with Israel will suffer. So many folks are on edge.]

[I had a small encounter of this nature a couple of years ago in Australia when I was there for Limmud. I was scheduled to participate in a panel on genocide denial. The other presenter was Professor Ronald Grigor Suny of the University of Chicago. He was to present on Armenian genocide denial. Both the Limmud organizers and the Armenian community were excited about this event. The Turkish consulate in Sydney tried to quietly shut the program down with some heavy handed insinuations to the organizers about "Turkey's support of Israel" and questions such as, "has Israel's policy towards Turkey changed?" The Limmud organizers did not bend.]

I regret the fact that Watertown will not bring the ADL program but I understand their decision. Some people in the Jewish community have argued that the program is so valuable bring it anyway. Separate the two issues.

Yet in the Jewish community there have been those who have refused to do this when it concerns antisemitism. Ironically, it was the ADL which turned down an alliance with Russell Simmons, who has spoken out forcefully against antisemitism, because of his support of Louis Farrakhan, an avowed antisemite.

Regarding the Armenian genocide, in a less than fortuitous choice of phrasing, Abe Foxman, National Director of the ADL, told the JTA:

"This is not an issue where we take a position one way or the other. This is an issue that needs to be resolved by the parties, not by us. We are neither historians nor arbiters."

When asked by the JTA to comment on the Armenian genocide, I said:

"It's not a matter of debate. There is an overwhelming consensus among historians that work in this area that there is no question that this is a genocide. You can't deny this history."

The issue has been further complicated by the recent firing of the ADL Boston office director for his criticism of the ADL national office for its position on the Armenian genocide. He called the stance of the national office "morally indefensible."

I hope the ADL leadership can sit down with the Armenian community and listen to them on this issue. A good start would be to read this week's op-ed by Alan Dershowitz and Massachusetts State Representative Ruth Kaprielian.

If you want to feel the Armenian community's reaction just change "Armenian genocide" to "Holocaust" in the some of the statements which have been made. We would have been -- and rightfully so -- livid.

Can we expect anything else from the Armenians?

Of course, as Jews and Armenians go at each other the Turks sit by and watch [after having played their hand behind the scene.]

What a tragedy.

The Armenian Genocide: a shameful Congressional retreat

For a detailed article on how the Turkish government is using former members of Congress [e.g. Gephardt, Livingston, and Solarz] to further its attacks on the historicity of the Armenian genocide see Michael Crowley's article in the New Republic, K Street Cashes in on the Armenian Genocide.

Turkey is engaged in a full court press to try to stop a resolution acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. I was sad to read that Jewish organizations seem to have backed down from taking a stand. I assume that they are sensitive to the fact that Turkey is the only Muslim nation with such close relations with Israel.

They are also strongly aware of the presence in Turkey of a Jewish community which could well be endangered should the government not protect it.

Nonetheless, it does not feel good to see this genocide become a political football...... I wonder what Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, who was responsible for bringing this to the world's and certainly America's attention would say now???

On this matter Hitler may actually have been right [I never thought I would write that] when he said: Who today remembers [or speaks of] the annihilation of the Armenians?

Maybe if more people had spoken of it then, subsequent histories would have been different.

And, who knows, if the Turks are successful in denying this genocide, who knows what other denial efforts will yet be successful....

Now there's a scary thought...

And who said history was not relevant?

From Sarajevo: A Kurdistani and a Turk

Ragip Zarakolu, the wonderfully sweet and incredibly brave Turkish publisher, [who publishes books on the Armenian genocide] with Choman Hardi, the talented and passionate Kurdistani [who reminded me of something so important]

It happened here... If only it could happen elsewhere.

From Sarajevo: On meeting an exceptionally brave man who puts his life on the line in the name of truth and memory

Ragip Zarakolu is a Turkish publisher whose company, Belge Publishing, has published books on the Armenian genocide. It was an honor to meet him and one prays for his welfare.

People with views such as his have not fared well in Turkey in recent years.

Among the books he translates and publishes are those by Peter Balakian of Colgate College, who is known for his work on the Armenian genocide. I strongly recommend his work to you.

From Sarajevo: On meeting a real hero who put his job on the line and lost or... won

One of the participants in this conference is a man named John Evans. A long time State Department employee who served in many important posts including American Ambassador to Armenia.

Apparently he was much beloved in this country and went everywhere without a guard or entourage.

Then, about six months after taking up his post, he went to a conference in Berkeley and spoke about the "genocide of the Armenians." Despite the fact that President Reagan has used the same term, Evans had contradicted current State Department policy.

He told the State Department what he did and lost his job as a result [not immediately but clearly as a result]. He is now writing a book about this.

I hope it sees the light of day in the near future.

More on the Armenian genocide and laws against denial

I want to elaborate on my previous post. What if a scholar said: the Turks set out to murder in as brutal a fashion as many Armenians they could lay their hands on in Turkey. What they did was immoral and a crime of major proportions. Furthermore, their failure to acknowledge their terrible wrongdoing and, even more so, their denial of it further compounds their crime.

So far so good.

What then if the scholar went on to say "but I don't think it should be termed a genocide"?

Now we have a problem. Should that person be prosecuted? According to this Swiss court it seems yes. What happens then to academic debate?

This situation reminds me of the debate that once prevailed among scholars of the Holocaust about its uniqueness. More on that later.

Swiss convict Turkish politician for denying Armenian genocide

According to today's New York Times, the Swiss have convicted a Turkish politician of denying the Armenian genocide. I am pretty sure that, given that the guy was a Turkish politician, he was a traditional Armenian genocide denier. These folks are not much different than Holocaust deniers.

However, what if the person had been an historian who, while not denying the barbarity of the Turks towards their Armenian victims, questioned whether it should be termed a genocide? [I, by the way, believe it should be.] The person might take this position because Armenians in other places in the world were safe from the Turks.

Would that person be sentenced as well? What kind of chill does this put on academic discourse? This is a dangerous Pandora's Box.

Tragedy in Turkey

Today's New York Times reports that a prominent newspaper editor, columnist and voice for Turkey’s ethnic Armenians who was prosecuted for challenging the official Turkish version of the 1915 Armenian genocide, was shot dead as he left his office on a busy street in central Istanbul on Friday.

Mr. Dink, a Turk of Armenian descent, had provoked anger in Turkey for his regarding the Armenian genocide, which, of course, Turkey denies.

It is interesting to note that he opposed the condition many people, wanted to impose on Turkey for entry into the EU. The condition was that Turkey recognize the genocide. Mr. Dink argued that entry into the EU would strengthen Turkish democracy and this, in itself, would lead to a more open acknowledgment of the genocide.

I was one of those who thought this pre-condition on entry into the EU was correct. I had spoken about it when I was last in Berlin. Mr. Dink's position gave me reason to reconsider my views. It is akin to those of us who believe that the best way to end communist tyranny in Cuba would be to let Americans travel their en mass.

Mr. Dink was convicted under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, for his comments about the Armenian genocide. This article has been used to silence those who wish to discuss the Armenian tragedy.

[I oppose this law in the same fashion that I oppose laws outlawing Holocaust denial. Ironically, of course, the Turkish law makes it impossible to speak about truth and the proposed EU law makes it impossible to speak about fiction. In both cases, law is not the way to proceed.]

In any case, Dink's assassination is a tragedy on so many accounts.