Tweet
September 09 2007; 09:09AM
A Point of View: Explaining the Armenian genocide controversy
Posted by Abraham H. Foxman | Comments: 16
A favorite subject for discussion at conferences between Israelis and
American Jews is how little we truly understand each other. While
there is a tendency at times to exaggerate the gap between us,
different perspectives do exist.
One such example has surfaced in the starkly different reactions of
Israelis and American Jews to the recent controversy over events in
the Ottoman Empire during WWI. ADL became ensnared in the controversy
in the New England area about how to describe those events. While we
always acknowledged what befell the Armenians at the hands of the
Ottoman Turks at that time were massacres and atrocities, we did not
use the term genocide. We also do not support a resolution on the
Armenian Genocide currently pending in the US Congress
Armenian Americans in the Boston suburb of Watertown, angered by ADL's
position -- though ADL is just one of many Jewish organizations with
the same position -- targeted us. They threatened to cancel our
anti-bias program, "No Place For Hate," if we didn't change our
position and they engaged in a public campaign accusing us of denial
for not using the term genocide.
In light of the heated controversy and because of our concern for the
unity of the Jewish community at a time of increased threats against
the Jewish people, ADL decided to revisit the issue and came to share
the view of Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel that the consequences of those
actions against the Armenians were indeed tantamount to genocide. If
the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it
genocide.
Some have asked why it took us so long to say so. The answer is
because over the years we had faced a dilemma. For us, there were
competing moral principles at work. The security and wellbeing of Jews
everywhere in the world is a priority for ADL. In this case it was
listening to the views of the leaders of the Turkish Jewish community,
a community that lives well in Turkey but is still a small community
of 20,000 in a country of 65 million Muslims. A guiding principle for
ADL is that when Jewish communities around the world appeal to us on
matters that may have an impact on their lives, we don't act as if we
know better. We pay attention.
There was also our concern for the safety and wellbeing of Israel,
whose relationship with Turkey is very critical. After the United
States, Turkey is Israel's most important ally.
On the other hand, we did not want to ignore the history of the
Armenian tragedy. So, through the years we urged Turkish leaders to
come to grips with the past in a way they had not. And, we referred to
the events as massacres and atrocities. We just did not use the term
genocide.
Our maintaining the equilibrium between two moral imperatives--concern
for the wellbeing of Jewish communities and recognizing human
injustice - was under attack. It wasn't that only Armenians protested
against ADL's non-use of the word genocide, but that they were joined
by some vociferous voices in the Jewish community
To be honest, I understood the passion behind these appeals but I was
frustrated and disheartened that these critics were not taking
seriously the dilemma we faced.
While some in the Armenian American community welcomed our change of
position, they remain publicly critical of our not endorsing the
Congressional Resolution, which we continue to believe is
counterproductive.
This has been coupled with criticism from Turkish government officials
(Prime Minister Erdogan called President Shimon Peres urging him to
"do something" about ADL's decision). Turkish Jews, and many Israeli
officials all wondering how ADL, which has been a leader in promoting
Turkish-Israeli relations and working with the Jewish community in
Turkey could do such a thing.
Therefore, it became apparent to us that at a time when the Jewish
people faces its greatest challenges in decades--the Iranian nuclear
threat, conspiracy theories about alleged Jewish power and disloyalty,
boycott efforts against Israel--we were going to be interminably
bogged down in an internal struggle over the Armenian issue, which
would have had the effect of paralyzing us and making it impossible to
focus on these other monumental challenges.
So we issued our statement. We used the term genocide for a tragedy
that we always acknowledged. We have called on the Turks and Armenians
to create a mechanism so they themselves can reconcile their
differences over the past.
We are not apologetic about the way we have handled this sensitive
subject. At each point of our decision-making we tried to be true to
our principles and priorities.
We will continue to work on behalf of the Jewish people and in the
process to create a more tolerant world for all.
Source: http://blogcentral.jpost.com/index.php?cat_id=7&am p;blog_id=76&blog_post_id=1489
A Point of View: Explaining the Armenian genocide controversy
Posted by Abraham H. Foxman | Comments: 16
A favorite subject for discussion at conferences between Israelis and
American Jews is how little we truly understand each other. While
there is a tendency at times to exaggerate the gap between us,
different perspectives do exist.
One such example has surfaced in the starkly different reactions of
Israelis and American Jews to the recent controversy over events in
the Ottoman Empire during WWI. ADL became ensnared in the controversy
in the New England area about how to describe those events. While we
always acknowledged what befell the Armenians at the hands of the
Ottoman Turks at that time were massacres and atrocities, we did not
use the term genocide. We also do not support a resolution on the
Armenian Genocide currently pending in the US Congress
Armenian Americans in the Boston suburb of Watertown, angered by ADL's
position -- though ADL is just one of many Jewish organizations with
the same position -- targeted us. They threatened to cancel our
anti-bias program, "No Place For Hate," if we didn't change our
position and they engaged in a public campaign accusing us of denial
for not using the term genocide.
In light of the heated controversy and because of our concern for the
unity of the Jewish community at a time of increased threats against
the Jewish people, ADL decided to revisit the issue and came to share
the view of Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel that the consequences of those
actions against the Armenians were indeed tantamount to genocide. If
the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it
genocide.
Some have asked why it took us so long to say so. The answer is
because over the years we had faced a dilemma. For us, there were
competing moral principles at work. The security and wellbeing of Jews
everywhere in the world is a priority for ADL. In this case it was
listening to the views of the leaders of the Turkish Jewish community,
a community that lives well in Turkey but is still a small community
of 20,000 in a country of 65 million Muslims. A guiding principle for
ADL is that when Jewish communities around the world appeal to us on
matters that may have an impact on their lives, we don't act as if we
know better. We pay attention.
There was also our concern for the safety and wellbeing of Israel,
whose relationship with Turkey is very critical. After the United
States, Turkey is Israel's most important ally.
On the other hand, we did not want to ignore the history of the
Armenian tragedy. So, through the years we urged Turkish leaders to
come to grips with the past in a way they had not. And, we referred to
the events as massacres and atrocities. We just did not use the term
genocide.
Our maintaining the equilibrium between two moral imperatives--concern
for the wellbeing of Jewish communities and recognizing human
injustice - was under attack. It wasn't that only Armenians protested
against ADL's non-use of the word genocide, but that they were joined
by some vociferous voices in the Jewish community
To be honest, I understood the passion behind these appeals but I was
frustrated and disheartened that these critics were not taking
seriously the dilemma we faced.
While some in the Armenian American community welcomed our change of
position, they remain publicly critical of our not endorsing the
Congressional Resolution, which we continue to believe is
counterproductive.
This has been coupled with criticism from Turkish government officials
(Prime Minister Erdogan called President Shimon Peres urging him to
"do something" about ADL's decision). Turkish Jews, and many Israeli
officials all wondering how ADL, which has been a leader in promoting
Turkish-Israeli relations and working with the Jewish community in
Turkey could do such a thing.
Therefore, it became apparent to us that at a time when the Jewish
people faces its greatest challenges in decades--the Iranian nuclear
threat, conspiracy theories about alleged Jewish power and disloyalty,
boycott efforts against Israel--we were going to be interminably
bogged down in an internal struggle over the Armenian issue, which
would have had the effect of paralyzing us and making it impossible to
focus on these other monumental challenges.
So we issued our statement. We used the term genocide for a tragedy
that we always acknowledged. We have called on the Turks and Armenians
to create a mechanism so they themselves can reconcile their
differences over the past.
We are not apologetic about the way we have handled this sensitive
subject. At each point of our decision-making we tried to be true to
our principles and priorities.
We will continue to work on behalf of the Jewish people and in the
process to create a more tolerant world for all.
Source: http://blogcentral.jpost.com/index.php?cat_id=7&am p;blog_id=76&blog_post_id=1489