"Studying the Holocaust changed the way I make decisions." - Student

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

How many Jewish partisans were there?

What is a Jewish partisan and how many were there?

A partisan is a member of an organized body of fighters who attack or harass an enemy, especially within occupied territory; a guerrilla.


Approximately 20,000 to 30,000 Jews, many of whom were teenagers, managed to escape to form or join organized resistance groups. They are known as the Jewish partisans, who, along with hundreds of thousands of non-Jewish partisans, fought against their common enemy across much of Europe.


Faye with her CameraPhotographer: Moishe Lazebnik, Toronto, Canada, 1999

“I want people to know that there was resistance. Jewish people didn’t go like sheep to the slaughter. If they had the slightest opportunity to fight back, they did and took revenge. Many lost their lives heroically.


“I was a photographer. I have pictures. I have proof.”


See Faye Schulman's photos in the exhibit "Pictures of Resistance" coming to Hillel in January. For information on the exhibit and programming, click here.

Monday, November 29, 2010

Questions on Genocide

A college student writing a paper on genocide and governmental policies for prevention and response emailed us with a few questions.

We turned to Marie Berry, a PhD candidate in Sociology with a focus on genocide in UCLA's prestigious program. Marie, a graduate of the University of Washington, spent several years working at the Holocaust Center.


Do you think any changes should be made to the UN structure to try and help responses to genocides?
Most debates about the UN’s treatment genocide are concerned with altering the definition of genocide, rather than changing the mandated responses to genocide. In general, this is because the UN’s responses to genocide have yet to successfully materialize. Thus, scholars and policy makers debate the definition in an attempt to pressure the signatories of the convention to refine the definition and thus make it more feasible for action to stop genocides that are underway.

The process of drafting the 1948 Genocide Convention was extremely political; in particular, the involvement of the Soviet Union complicated the process, given that they (and affiliated countries like Belarus) wouldn’t sign a document that criminalized something Stalin had been doing for years. What resulted was a definition that includes “national, ethnic, racial, or religious” groups, but excludes political or economic ones. And, as a result, the historical episodes of violence that are commonly accepted as genocides exclude mass murders in Ethiopia, and often Guatemala. The problem with this is that in most analyses of genocide, the real causes are obscured—instead, it is easier to explain away genocide in terms of ethnic, racial, or religious groups that “hate” each other. Of course, in every case of genocide in history, the “ethnic” or “racial” groups that end up being targeted for extermination have been integrated in the societies that they live in for centuries (or more). Jews in Europe, Tutsis in Rwanda, and Bosniaks in Bosnia weren’t simply targeted one day because of their ethno-religious identify, but rather because of a series of political power struggles that escalated and were ultimately framed as ethno-religious.

The UN’s definition of genocide, therefore, is problematic in several ways. First, it serves to reify the ethno/racial/religious aspects of a brewing conflict while obscuring the political and economic ones. In the case of Rwanda, this allowed the international media and foreign governments to dismiss the violence as “tribal” and neglect acknowledging the power struggle at play in Kigali that was in part facilitated by the international community’s attempts to negotiate a peace process between the current Hutu regime and the Tutsi-dominated Rwandan Patriotic Front invading from Uganda. Moreover, it obscured the significance of the colonial era, recent crop shortages and resulting famines, and intra-ethnic conflicts between a powerful family from the North and other powerful families from the South.

Second, the definition revolves around the idea of “intent”; a group must have the intent to destroy a group for mass violence to be considered genocide. This eliminates some of the most massive deaths in human history, such as Mao’s “Great Leap Forward,” where it is difficult to argue that Mao intended to kill 20 million+ of his countrymen (but easy to argue that his policies had that effect). The very concept of “intent” is almost always subjectively determined; barring the leak of some sort of internal government memo explicitly stating the goal of eliminating a group within its population, intent is usually agreed upon after amassing mounds of evidence that point that direction. This is much easier in retrospect, after genocide is over, when the true intent of a perpetrating group is revealed. Intent is much more difficult to determine during the actual genocide itself—especially in cases like Rwanda, where the genocide happened rapidly over merely 100 days.

Last, the narrowness of this definition and the exclusion of political or economic (i.e. class) groups, is conducive to disagreement and debate over whether violence counts as a genocide or not. This leads, ultimately, to inaction, as we’ve seen in basically every case that ultimately resulted in genocide (with the possible exception of East Timor: See Geoffrey Robinson’s book If You Leave Us Here We Will Die, 2009). For the UN’s definition of genocide to be more effective at invoking action from the international community, I believe it needs to be centered on the degree of devastation being caused to civilians, rather than on the subject concept of intent and restrictive classifications like race and religion.


How much does politics complicate responses to genocide?
I think that politics complicates responses to genocide a lot, but self-interest complicates responses even more. Military interventions generally carry tremendous costs in terms of human lives and financial resources. If a given country has little strategic or economic relevance to an intervening state, the risks of intervening are high while the potential gains are low. Politics also factors in, particularly when strategic alliances are strained over an ally engaging in genocide. We’ve seen this most recently with US involvement in Darfur, where at the initial stages of the conflict the US was hesitant to shame Sudanese President Bashir publicly given his cooperation about eliminating al-Qaeda training cells in his country. The US-led 1995 Dayton Accords after the wars in the Balkans were also influenced by politics, and as a result we watched as the Serbian aggressors (and perpetrators of egregious crimes against humanity) were given control over 49% of Bosnian territory – a higher percentage than before the war. So we see that politics can not only influence decisions to intervene in genocides, but also the peace-process afterward.


What are some of the best tactics in stopping/preventing genocide? What is your feeling on military interference versus peaceful interventions?

The best tactics for stopping and preventing genocide are unique in each situation and at each stage in the conflict. In my opinion, however, the first and most important things to consider are the real roots of the conflict. Dismissing violence in Rwanda as merely tribal warfare between Hutus and Tutsis gives policy makers little leverage to negotiate a cessation of violence or to design a plan to physically intervene. Instead, understanding the historical processes that led to the evening of April 6, 1994, when the genocide began, are absolutely essential if we are going to be able to conceive of bringing the violence to a halt. Furthermore, understanding the “repertoires of violence” that people in a given region draw from based on historical experiences of violence can give us a better knowledge of where the violence might be heading and thus how we could potentially confront it. The brutal treatment of Serbs in UstaĊĦa concentration campus in former Yugoslavia during WWII provided a historical memory that was adopted by Serbs several decades later against Bosniaks—had the “west” understood many of the historical roots of the types of violence being used in the war in the Balkans, intervention might have been more carefully designed and carried out. Once the history of a conflict is understood from all perspectives, the best tactics of intervention can be more successfully determined. And, in my opinion, sometimes peaceful interventions are the best option, while at other times the situation has gotten so out of control that the only possible options are military. In the case of Rwanda, for example, a military intervention really was the only option. However, I tend to believe in the cyclical nature of violence, and thus would only endorse an armed intervention as a very last resort.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Free book for our Facebook friends!

The Holocaust Chronicle - a hardcover copy could be yours!



To enter: Become a friend of the Holocaust Center's Facebook page and make a comment under the book-give-away announcement!


Monday, November 15, 2010

Nazis Given 'Safe Haven' in US, Report Says


Nazis Given 'Safe Haven' in US, Report Says

By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: November 13, 2010
New York Times


WASHINGTON — A secret history of the United States government’s Nazi-hunting operation concludes that American intelligence officials created a “safe haven” in the United States for Nazis and their collaborators after World War II, and it details decades of clashes, often hidden, with other nations over war criminals here and abroad.

The 600-page report, which the Justice Department has tried to keep secret for four years, provides new evidence about more than two dozen of the most notorious Nazi cases of the last three decades.

It describes the government’s posthumous pursuit of Dr. Josef Mengele, the so-called Angel of Death at Auschwitz, part of whose scalp was kept in a Justice Department official’s drawer; the vigilante killing of a former Waffen SS soldier in New Jersey; and the government’s mistaken identification of the Treblinka concentration camp guard known as Ivan the Terrible. Read article...

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Veterans' Day - Holocaust Survivor & US Soldier on KIRO


















Holocaust survivor and US soldier remember liberation

To commemorate Veteran's Day, KIRO radio interviewed Holocaust survivor and speaker Magda Schaloum and WWII Veteran and liberator Ralph Dicecco:

"It's Veteran's Day, a day we remember what members of our armed services have done to make us free. Two Seattle area residents can never forget..."

Click here to listen to or read this short, moving interview, which aired this morning.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

72 Years After Kristallnacht


Kristallnacht -- literally, "Night of Crystal," is often referred to as the "Night of Broken Glass." The name refers to the wave of violent anti-Jewish pogroms which took place on November 9 and 10, 1938 throughout Germany, annexed Austria, and in areas of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia recently occupied by German troops.


Instigated primarily by Nazi Party officials and members of the SA (Sturmabteilungen: literally Assault Detachments, but commonly known as Storm Troopers) and Hitler Youth, Kristallnacht owes its name to the shards of shattered glass that lined German streets in the wake of the pogrom-broken glass from the windows of synagogues, homes, and Jewish-owned businesses plundered and destroyed during the violence. (USHMM - read more)
How did religious leaders in the US respond?
The events of November 9, 1938 pogrom sparked a wave of outrage among U.S. religious leaders. In the weeks following November 9, 1938, there were numerous editorials, radio broadcasts, and sermons. In a few cases – like the historic Church of the Pilgrimage in Plymouth, Massachusetts – local Christian clergy invited their Jewish colleagues to address their congregations for the first time. (USHMM - read more)

Photos:
Top: Photographer unknown. Synagogue Burning in Siegen, Germany. 1938. Photograph. The Pictorial History of the Holocaust, New York.
Middle: Photographer unknown. Bystanders view the smashed windows of a Jewish shop. 1938. Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team, Germany. Kristallnacht. Web. 9 Nov. 2010.
Bottom: Photographer unknown. Destruction of the Synagogue in Memel . 1938. Holocaust Education & Archive Research Team, Memel. Kristallnacht. Web. 9 Nov. 2010.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Working in a Trap: Drawings from the Theresienstadt Ghetto 1941-1942

Paraphrased from a discussion with Susie S., local Holocaust survivor and member of the Holocaust Center's Speaker's Bureau:




My cousin, Ruth Perry, is about my age and lives in Ramat Gan, Israel. Other than my sister and I, she is the only remaining direct relative of our generation. Ruth comes to visit us now and then ... recently she spoke of some very special pictures that her family and others in Israel were trying to put together for a limited printing. She said that these paintings were to honor an important Jewish "Elder" of Terezin. My own dear family, on my mother and father's side, was dragged to Terezin in 1942. I thought that I knew the names of the "Elders of the Jews" in Terezin, but the name she used was not familiar to me and I became curious. As it turns out, I did not understand the Hebrew version of Jacob Edelstein's name. Edelstein was an influential leader chosen and used by the Germans to aid in carrying out their horrible plans.
There has been much written about the "Jewish Elders," those people who had to pass down the edicts of the Germans. The Nazis tried to turn the inmates against the Elders and were successful in some instances. While many writings are critical of some of the elders, this album shows that Edelstein had a good, courageous heart and did the best he could.

My cousin, Ruth, was a friend of "Dittle." As it turns out, "Dittle" was Dr. Edith Ornstein, one of the creators and signatories of the album. Ruth told me of a time when Dittle had to sit on the paintings when Adolf Eichmann came into her living area. The paintings, by Leo Haas, were presented to Jacob Edelstein on the occasion of the first anniversary of the Nazi-established ghetto.

The timetable of Theresienstadt and the Final Solution is so organized and easy to read that one can get a clear understanding of the timetable behind the horrific main events from 1933 to 1945. The pictures and writings in the album record the efforts of the labor center and serve as an empowering and sensitive text, giving a new and deeper understanding of the Holocaust. In particular, it gives me a newer understanding and feeling of the horror that was Terezin. The album also gives information on the German use of propaganda using the "Jewish Town."


This album shows the positive relationship that Edelstein had with his staff, who recognized his efforts as leader towards helping those inmates of Terezin as much as he could. I am honored on behalf of my family to loan this very special and poignant album to the Center for one year.

Monday, November 1, 2010

Reflections from a teacher on "Flight from the Reich"

Reflections on the October 13 program - "Flight from the Reich: Refugee Jews, 1933-1946"
(See our original posting with reflections and information on the program here.)

By Cory C., Teacher at Mt. Rainier High School

Robert Jan van Pelt spoke on the topic of his new book Flight From The Reich: Refugee Jews, 1933-1946 this evening at Temple De Hirsch Sinai in Seattle. He began his talk by pointing out that the common definition of a victim of the Holocaust typically does not include Jewish refugees. His book is in part an argument for expanding our definition. Jews were affected in myriad ways by the Holocaust, and not only those Jews who went to concentration camps.

This was an unfamiliar topic for me, although I had very recently attended a teacher workshop in which a Jewish refugee shared his story, so I had some minimal background knowledge. What struck me most was van Pelt’s understanding of the concept of the passport. He asked the audience to state the purpose of a passport. Many people gave the most obvious answers: to allow you to leave your country, to be accepted into a country, to have a record of who comes in and who leaves. None of these are wrong per se, but van Pelt sees the passport in a different way. When a country issues a passport to a citizen, that country is saying it will take that person back. If I travel to China, and China decides later that it does not want me, I can be sent back home. This was a crucial issue for Jewish refugees as they were fleeing Germany.

Van Pelt’s discussion this evening was fascinating, and even prompted some discussion among the audience members, including one elderly woman whose relatives were all affected in various ways by the Holocaust. I look forward to reading the book, and incorporating these stories into my unit on the Holocaust.

An American's Diary of the Concentration Camp Experience


350 American soldiers were captured by the Nazis and sent to the concentration camp Berga in Feb. 1945. They endured terrible conditions, starvation, abuse and finally a death march in April 1945. One of the survivors donated his diary to the USHMM this past month.


'You don't forget': Medic's Holocaust diary tells story of hellBy Wayne Drash, CNN
October 28, 2010

Washington (CNN) -- The tattered journal, its pages yellow with age, contains the painful memories of a U.S. medic, a man who recorded the deaths of soldiers who survived one of World War II's bloodiest battles yet met their end as slaves in Nazi Germany.

32. Hamilton 4-5-45
33. Young 4-5-45
34. Smith 4-9-45
35. Vogel 4-9-45
36. Wagner 4-9-45

"Some were dying," said its author, Tony Acevedo, now 86. "Some died, and I made a notation of that."

Flipping through the pages, you encounter a horrific part of world history through the eyes of a 20-year-old inside a slave labor camp. Amid the horror, the journal captures extraordinary human moments of war. Acevedo sketched beautiful women in the back pages, pinups whose eyes provided comfort amid hell.

Acevedo kept the diary hidden in his pants. He feared death if the commanders saw it. Yet he believed it was his duty as an Army medic to catalog the deaths and the atrocities against the 350 U.S. soldiers at the camp known as Berga, a subcamp of the notorious Buchenwald compound. Read full article...