Tweet
DID ISRAEL RESURRECT ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ISSUE ON POLITICAL OR MORAL GROUNDS? OPINION
epress.am
01.16.2012
Was the recent surfacing of the Armenian tragedy in the Israeli Knesset
rooted in political or moral ground? ask Hakan Yavuz and Tal Buenos
in a column published by The Jerusalem Post on Saturday:
"Fully aware that the timing of the public debate on the Armenian
tragedy recently held by the Knesset's Education Committee is political
to an embarrassing degree, Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin set out to
negate this immediate perception by stating, more than once, that the
reopening of the debate on the issue was not a matter of political
or diplomatic considerations, but a moral duty.
"Such rhetoric aims to establish a narrative according to which the
Israel-Turkey plitical relationship held Israel's moral position
hostage. Now that Israel is free from its political commitments to
Turkey, the argument goes, Israel may officially declare that what
happened to the Armenians during WWI was genocide.
"However, to argue that Israel did in fact keep silent on this issue
for the sake of maintaining political ties with Turkey is tantamount
to declaring Israel's moral bankruptcy.
"A state that prides itself on earnestly trying to do the right thing
despite endless and tremendous challenges and unprecedented moral
trials cannot afford to abandon its moral compass in this manner.
"Is Israel prepared to sacrifice the integrity of its current
president, whose position symbolizes Israeli consensus, and say
that when Shimon Peres announced unequivocally in April 2001 that
what happened to the Armenians was tragic but not genocide, he sold
morality for political gain? Tragically, by blurring the differences
between the Holocaust and the massacre of Armenians, Israel is harming
itself by lending a hand to the continued practice of irresponsible
use of the term genocide in other arenas of conflict, such as the
conflict Israel itself has with the Palestinians. In a growing number
of forums, campaigns against Israel's position in its conflict with
the Palestinians are armed with the term genocide as a weapon of mass
political pressure.
"Is it hard to imagine a possible law somewhere in Europe that would
make it illegal to deny the 'genocide' of the Palestinians? Instead
of letting politicians add more fuel to the fire of misuse of the
term genocide, careful scholarly work must be done to investigate the
transition from Holocaust to the modern-day use of the term genocide
and put its politicization in proper academic perspective.
"Every nation has the right to employ whatever means it has to fight
for its survival, and should not have to do so at the expense of its
moral standing in the eyes of other nations. This is a belief both
Israel and Turkey share.
"A common denominator for both might be found in the attempt to rescue
the term genocide from further politicization. With this short essay,
we intend to encourage increased scholarly dialogue on the concept of
genocide: morally, philosophically, historically and legally. It is our
hope that such activity would advance the field of genocide studies
in both countries, and weather the storm between the two governments
until the relations between the two nations know better days."
Professor M. Hakan Yavuz is originally from Turkey and teaches
political science at the Middle East Center at the University of Utah.
Tal Buenos is originally from Israel and is a doctoral student
political science at the University of Utah, focusing on genocide
studies.
epress.am
01.16.2012
Was the recent surfacing of the Armenian tragedy in the Israeli Knesset
rooted in political or moral ground? ask Hakan Yavuz and Tal Buenos
in a column published by The Jerusalem Post on Saturday:
"Fully aware that the timing of the public debate on the Armenian
tragedy recently held by the Knesset's Education Committee is political
to an embarrassing degree, Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin set out to
negate this immediate perception by stating, more than once, that the
reopening of the debate on the issue was not a matter of political
or diplomatic considerations, but a moral duty.
"Such rhetoric aims to establish a narrative according to which the
Israel-Turkey plitical relationship held Israel's moral position
hostage. Now that Israel is free from its political commitments to
Turkey, the argument goes, Israel may officially declare that what
happened to the Armenians during WWI was genocide.
"However, to argue that Israel did in fact keep silent on this issue
for the sake of maintaining political ties with Turkey is tantamount
to declaring Israel's moral bankruptcy.
"A state that prides itself on earnestly trying to do the right thing
despite endless and tremendous challenges and unprecedented moral
trials cannot afford to abandon its moral compass in this manner.
"Is Israel prepared to sacrifice the integrity of its current
president, whose position symbolizes Israeli consensus, and say
that when Shimon Peres announced unequivocally in April 2001 that
what happened to the Armenians was tragic but not genocide, he sold
morality for political gain? Tragically, by blurring the differences
between the Holocaust and the massacre of Armenians, Israel is harming
itself by lending a hand to the continued practice of irresponsible
use of the term genocide in other arenas of conflict, such as the
conflict Israel itself has with the Palestinians. In a growing number
of forums, campaigns against Israel's position in its conflict with
the Palestinians are armed with the term genocide as a weapon of mass
political pressure.
"Is it hard to imagine a possible law somewhere in Europe that would
make it illegal to deny the 'genocide' of the Palestinians? Instead
of letting politicians add more fuel to the fire of misuse of the
term genocide, careful scholarly work must be done to investigate the
transition from Holocaust to the modern-day use of the term genocide
and put its politicization in proper academic perspective.
"Every nation has the right to employ whatever means it has to fight
for its survival, and should not have to do so at the expense of its
moral standing in the eyes of other nations. This is a belief both
Israel and Turkey share.
"A common denominator for both might be found in the attempt to rescue
the term genocide from further politicization. With this short essay,
we intend to encourage increased scholarly dialogue on the concept of
genocide: morally, philosophically, historically and legally. It is our
hope that such activity would advance the field of genocide studies
in both countries, and weather the storm between the two governments
until the relations between the two nations know better days."
Professor M. Hakan Yavuz is originally from Turkey and teaches
political science at the Middle East Center at the University of Utah.
Tal Buenos is originally from Israel and is a doctoral student
political science at the University of Utah, focusing on genocide
studies.