Tweet
ACADEMIC CONFERENCE TO DISCUSS RESTITUTION AND REPARATION
AZG DAILY
27-10-2011
The Strassler Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Clark
University is sponsoring an interdisciplinary conference, "Beyond
The Armenian Genocide: The Question of Restitution and Reparation in
Comparative Review," organized by Taner Akçam, the Robert Aram ~R52
and Marianne Kaloosdian and Stephen and Marian Mugar Professor of
Armenian Genocide Studies. The conference is presented in partnership
with the Belmont-based National Association for Armenian Studies and
Research (NAASR) and Eric Weitz, the Arsham and Charlotte Ohanessian
Professor at the University of Minnesota. NAASR~Rs participation is
supported by the Ethel Jafarian Duffett Fund.
According to the Armenian Mirror Spectator, the conference opens on
Thursday, October 27 at 7:30 p.m. with a public keynote address in
Tilton Hall on the Clark University campus. John Torpey, professor of
sociology at the Graduate Center, CUNY, will give the opening address,
"A Comparative Perspective on Reparations for Historical Injustices."
Torpey is the author of Making Whole What Has Been Smashed: On
Reparations Politic (Harvard University Press, 2006). "Reparations,"
says Torpey, "can be symbolic, such as apologies or the creation of
memorials and museums. They can also be economic, such as financial
compensation to individuals or collectivities, or material redress,
such as settlement of the land claims of indigenous peoples. These
measures can reflect cultural or legal claims to reparations or both."
The conference continues throughout the day on Friday, October 28,
with a series of panels for participants and invited guests. Leading
scholars will examine questions of post-conflict justice in a
comparative review of the Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust and the
Native American Genocide. The participants will consider different
aspects of compensation including the return of stolen art and
artifacts; the restitution of personal and communal property and how
post-war agreements and treaties shape discussions about compensation.
The Holocaust case offers a model for restitution and reparation that
has achieved significant success but also frustrating disappointments
and delays. The Native American case provides a valuable example of
the importance of pursuing justice at home and for all peoples.
Discussions about the Armenian case will consider why efforts to
secure compensation emerged so late and the influence of developments
in securing justice for victims of the Holocaust.
Turkish recognition of the Armenian Genocide has been an enduring
goal of Armenian communities at home and internationally. Yet, the
political, financial and legal consequences that might emerge in the
wake of recognition have not been fully articulated. Recently, scholars
and lawyers have pursued concrete efforts to secure reparation,
restitution and compensation; they are proceeding independent of groups
lobbying governments to acknowledge the Genocide. These initiatives
demonstrate that the pursuit of justice through financial means can
progress without necessarily resolving the complicated politics of
Genocide recognition.
Recent court cases against American and French insurance companies
have resulted in reparations and they have given encouragement to
newly-filed lawsuits in the US. These developments demonstrate that
financial redress for the Armenian community may be possible on a
broader scale. New lawsuits addressing theft of artifacts, properties
and bank accounts have been filed against the Turkish government and
private Turkish companies. They seek compensation for both individual
and collective losses suffered during the Genocide.
AZG DAILY
27-10-2011
The Strassler Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Clark
University is sponsoring an interdisciplinary conference, "Beyond
The Armenian Genocide: The Question of Restitution and Reparation in
Comparative Review," organized by Taner Akçam, the Robert Aram ~R52
and Marianne Kaloosdian and Stephen and Marian Mugar Professor of
Armenian Genocide Studies. The conference is presented in partnership
with the Belmont-based National Association for Armenian Studies and
Research (NAASR) and Eric Weitz, the Arsham and Charlotte Ohanessian
Professor at the University of Minnesota. NAASR~Rs participation is
supported by the Ethel Jafarian Duffett Fund.
According to the Armenian Mirror Spectator, the conference opens on
Thursday, October 27 at 7:30 p.m. with a public keynote address in
Tilton Hall on the Clark University campus. John Torpey, professor of
sociology at the Graduate Center, CUNY, will give the opening address,
"A Comparative Perspective on Reparations for Historical Injustices."
Torpey is the author of Making Whole What Has Been Smashed: On
Reparations Politic (Harvard University Press, 2006). "Reparations,"
says Torpey, "can be symbolic, such as apologies or the creation of
memorials and museums. They can also be economic, such as financial
compensation to individuals or collectivities, or material redress,
such as settlement of the land claims of indigenous peoples. These
measures can reflect cultural or legal claims to reparations or both."
The conference continues throughout the day on Friday, October 28,
with a series of panels for participants and invited guests. Leading
scholars will examine questions of post-conflict justice in a
comparative review of the Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust and the
Native American Genocide. The participants will consider different
aspects of compensation including the return of stolen art and
artifacts; the restitution of personal and communal property and how
post-war agreements and treaties shape discussions about compensation.
The Holocaust case offers a model for restitution and reparation that
has achieved significant success but also frustrating disappointments
and delays. The Native American case provides a valuable example of
the importance of pursuing justice at home and for all peoples.
Discussions about the Armenian case will consider why efforts to
secure compensation emerged so late and the influence of developments
in securing justice for victims of the Holocaust.
Turkish recognition of the Armenian Genocide has been an enduring
goal of Armenian communities at home and internationally. Yet, the
political, financial and legal consequences that might emerge in the
wake of recognition have not been fully articulated. Recently, scholars
and lawyers have pursued concrete efforts to secure reparation,
restitution and compensation; they are proceeding independent of groups
lobbying governments to acknowledge the Genocide. These initiatives
demonstrate that the pursuit of justice through financial means can
progress without necessarily resolving the complicated politics of
Genocide recognition.
Recent court cases against American and French insurance companies
have resulted in reparations and they have given encouragement to
newly-filed lawsuits in the US. These developments demonstrate that
financial redress for the Armenian community may be possible on a
broader scale. New lawsuits addressing theft of artifacts, properties
and bank accounts have been filed against the Turkish government and
private Turkish companies. They seek compensation for both individual
and collective losses suffered during the Genocide.