Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil and Bulgaria have
recognized it, but not Belarus.
Arizona, Alaska and Arkansas have recognized it, but not Alabama. Slovakia, Sweden, and Switzerland have
recognized it. Hell, even Syria recently
joined their ranks.
In total, it has been officially recognized by 28
countries and 44 of the 50 United States of America. Famously, it was recognized by Presidential
Candidate Barack Obama but not by President Barack Obama or the government that
he now leads. Nor has it been recognized
by Israel – the nation created largely in response to the atrocities committed
by the Nazis. But most importantly, it
has never been recognized by Turkey. And
because it is not recognized by Turkey, the vast majority of nations similarly
refuse to acknowledge its existence. They
wouldn’t want to antagonize such an important geopolitical player as the land
that lies strategically in between Europe and Asia.
Genocide is a serious charge, one that is not made
lightly. Rape is bad. Murder worse. Mass murder, still worse. But there is no human crime worse than genocide. It refers to the systematic massacre of a
large segment of a particular ethnic, religious, national, or racial
group. It is akin to removing a species
of animal from this earth – only in this case, we are talking about a
sub-species of the human animal. Those
who perpetrate genocide represent evil to the extent that word has any meaning.
And that is precisely why the
descendants of the perpetrators would desperately like to avoid using the word “genocide”
in reference to the conduct at issue.
Ironically, we Jews don’t like to use that word to
refer to the extermination by the Nazis of our own ancestors in the 1940s. We prefer to call that “The Holocaust” –
suggesting that it was one of a kind, not merely genocide, but THE genocide,
one deserving of its own term. And
indeed, I know of no slaughter of a particular ethnic group that compares to
ours from a strict numbers standpoint.
Like most Jews, I reserve a particularly cold place
in my heart for those who deny the Holocaust.
This is one reason for the intensity of the enmity between my people and
the Government of Iran. In 2006, Iran
held a “scientific” conference in which the Holocaust deniers gathered to hear Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad refer to the Nazi extermination of Jews as a “myth.” For all but the most self-hating of Jews,
that conference was viewed as the epitome of depravity.
Jews know what it’s like to live in a world where a
number of people refuse to recognize the genocide that has been perpetrated against
us. Fortunately, the nation most
responsible for our genocide has been willing to recognize it as such. That has proven invaluable in healing our
wounds.
With that in mind, it is hard for me to believe that
the nation known as the “Jewish State” refuses to recognize the genocide
perpetrated by the Turks against the Armenian people beginning in 1915. Nobody in a position of leadership in Tel
Aviv or Jerusalem could seriously doubt the existence of that genocide. Israeli officials have made enough statements
over the years to indicate that they understand what happened to the Armenians
in the final days of the Ottoman Empire.
The Israeli Government simply lacks the courage to identify that
genocide for what it was – the extermination of as many as 1.5 million
Armenians for the crime of simply being Armenian. That, my friends, is known as genocide.
In April 24, 2014, the Times of Israel reported the
following rationalization for Israel’s silence: "Israel is a small country
in a hostile neighborhood that can't afford to antagonize the few friends it
has in the region. Even more powerful states refuse to employ the 'genocide'
term for fear of alienating Turkey...."
I certainly understand the first of those two sentences. But by invoking the point that even more
powerful states are similarly denying this particular genocide, the writer begs
the real questions. Isn’t the raison d’etre
of the Jewish State to ensure that there is a place where Jews are safe to live
as Jews – meaning a place where Jews can practice their faith? And isn’t it imperative for Jews when they
practice their faith to speak out vociferously, passionately, and
uncompromisingly against genocide? And isn’t
it the case that when Jews cite pragmatic parochial considerations to avoid recognizing
a genocide, they start to resemble those Germans during the Holocaust who
closed their eyes to what their countrymen were doing because it wasn’t in
their own personal interest to get involved?
Israel has a term for the non-Jews in Germany and
other nations who risked their own safety to defend the rights of Jews during
the Holocaust: they are known as “righteous
gentiles.” If that is an apt moniker, then
those Israelis who’ve refused to recognize a different genocidal episode in
history merely because of selfish reasons might want to think of themselves as “non-righteous
Jews.” The Jewish State can and must do
better.
Just as Israel has no excuse for burying its head in
the sand, neither does the government of the United States of America. We like to call ourselves the leader of the
free world. By that, we don’t just mean
the supreme economic power or military power, but also the moral leader. We often act as the world’s policeman. And this role is very much at play
today. We’re not willing to put our own
ground troops in harm’s way, but we are willing to use drones to take out
people in foreign lands, and that includes the inevitable “collateral damage”
of innocent victims. It takes a lot of
chutzpah to implement a policy like that one and yet continue to make speeches
about our commitment to democracy, human rights, international law, and all the
other traditional American mantras.
We’re not a small, isolated country like
Israel. We’re the 800-pound
gorilla. We can afford to call a spade a
spade, even if it antagonizes another regime.
If President Obama were to repeat what Candidate Obama said and
recognize the Armenian Genocide, does anyone seriously think that would be an
existential threat to our existence? Or that
it would significantly threaten the security of American civilians? I understand that an alliance with Turkey
offers strategic advantages to our ability to fight wars in the Middle East, and
I don’t want to trivialize those advantages.
But are they really worth our silence?
We call ourselves the land of liberty and free speech. Why then are we so afraid to tell the truth
about what happened to the Armenian people 100 years ago? And if we are ruled by that fear, how can we
possibly claim the moral authority to act as the self-appointed policeman of
the world?
So yes, I am disgusted by the positions of Israel
and the United States when it comes to recognizing the Armenian Genocide. But my deepest disgust is reserved for the government
of Turkey. As Turkey is the nation that bears
the responsibility for the genocide itself, its people are the ones who most
need to come clean. Just imagine what we
all would think of the Germans if their government consistently denied that
their nation perpetrated genocide against the Jewish people. That’s what the Turks are doing to their
national reputation by failing to give a measure of closure to the descendants
of the Armenian victims.
I have seen different dates given for when the
Armenian Genocide ended. But suffice it
to say that we have finally reached a point in history when there likely isn’t
a Turk alive who was personally responsible for slaughtering Armenians. Hopefully, then, contemporary Turkish leaders
can look at this matter with a bit more objectivity than their
predecessors. But this also means that
they have less of an excuse for continuing the whitewash. Those who speak for that nation today have a
fateful decision to make. They can continue
business as usual and treat the Armenians like an invisible people. Or, they can stand up for the principles of
truth, justice, reconciliation, compassion, peace, and human dignity … and turn
the page, as the Germans have done.
Really, all of us have a decision to make. For we have the opportunity to speak out and
attend rallies on this subject, and put pressure on our politicians to do the right
thing and not the expedient thing. The question is simple, really: does protecting
the good name of the perpetrators and currying the favors of their descendants mean
more than protecting the good name of the victims and treating their descendants
with a modicum of respect? I realize that there are pragmatic reasons to
continue to look the other way, but when it comes to denying genocide,
pragmatism should have its limits.
No comments:
Post a Comment