Global Holocaust? Memories of the Destruction of European Jews in Global Context

Global Holocaust? Memories of the tionship between the West and postcolonial Destruction of European Jews in Global societies. The workshop „Global Holocaust?” Context was intended to make a contribution to this field. Steinweis further outlined a series of Veranstalter: Philipp Gassert, Geschichte des questions for the workshop: What have been europäisch-transatlantischen Kulturraums, the central themes of Holocaust memory Universität Augsburg; Alan E. Steinweis, in the nonwestern world? Do nonwestern Carolyn and Leonard Miller Center for Holo- agents see it as a uniquely European event caust Studies, University of Vermont or an event with universal implications? Datum, Ort: 10.06.2011-11.06.2011, Augsburg Which institutions have been in charge of Bericht von: Jacob S. Eder, Department of His- researching and teaching the Holocaust and tory, University of Pennsylvania who has funded these activities? How has the Holocaust been contextualized in the The memory of the victims of the Holocaust history of oppression and genocide, taking is a central element in present-day European, into account examples such as Apartheid, Israeli, and North American historical con- Stalinist crimes, and the Nanking Massacre? sciousness. Recent publications also point to The first panel, chaired by Francis Nicosia its „global“ and „universal“ character. In or- (Vermont), set out to explore the role of Holo- der to test this assessment, the participants caust memory in the Middle East. GILAD of the workshop „Global Holocaust? Mem- MARGALIT (Haifa) analyzed the concept of ories of the Destruction of European Jews in the „uniqueness“ of the Holocaust for histor- Global Context,” which convened at Augs- ical consciousness and political discourse in burg University on June 10 and 11, 2011, Israel. While this concept is still crucial for set out to explore whether it was justified to Israeli identity today, it had become increas- speak of a „globalization of Holocaust mem- ingly contested since the early 1980s. At that ory“ or whether it was not rather a west- time, critical voices in Israel had begun to ern phenomenon. For this purpose, the orga- point to the negative consequences of Holo- nizers invited a number of scholars to speak caust memory, which had lead to an uncom- about the formation and development of promising stance of Israel towards the rights Holocaust memory in the nonwestern world. of Palestinians and could, in a worst-case sce- The Stiftung Deutsch-Amerikanische Wis- nario, even threaten Israel’s existence. Op- senschaftsbeziehungen (SDAW/Foundation ponents of such a line of argument had la- German-American Academic Relations) pro- beled attacks on the concept of the unique- vided financial support for the workshop. ness of the Holocaust as political attacks on Is- In their opening remarks, conveners raeli and Jewish identity. Thus, for the „Zion- Philipp Gassert (Augsburg) and Alan E. ist mainstream,” the uniqueness of the Holo- Steinweis (Vermont) pointed to the universal caust was inextricably linked with the justi- significance of Holocaust memory for histori- fication of Israel’s right of existence. Crit- cal consciousness in the West, defined as the ical voices gained some momentum during United States, Europe, some former British the 1990s, when Jews who had immigrated colonies, and Israel. Steinweis provided the to Israel from Arab countries criticized the historiographical framework for the work- dominant role of Ashkenazi Jews (Jews from shop by outlining three phases of scholarly Central and Western Europe) in Israeli soci- engagement with the history of the Holo- ety. According to Margalit, they argued that caust and its aftermath. The actual study of the Ashkenazis’ claim for the uniqueness of National Socialist extermination policies con- the Holocaust served to silence any kind of stituted a first phase, followed by the study criticism of social injustice in Israel. Despite of Holocaust memory, especially in those such critical voices and very emotional de- countries where the Holocaust had occurred bates, Margalit concluded, the political main- or refugees and survivors had settled. A stream and the educational system in Israel third phase now focuses on the consequences are still dominated by the concept of the Holo- of „Holocaust consciousness“ for the rela- caust’s uniqueness.

© H-Net, Clio-online, and the author, all rights reserved. GÖTZ NORDBRUCH (Odense) shifted the cluded with a critical assessment of the state focus to the Arab world. Nordbruch empha- of Holocaust memorial culture in the Soviet sized that during the Nazi period, sympathy Union, which robbed Jews of their identity, for the suffering of European Jews under the failed to find an appropriate form of memo- Nazi regime and anti-Zionism were not mutu- rialization for Jewish victims, and led to an ally exclusive in the Arab world, but actually equation Zionism with Fascism. existed in tandem. After a long period of non- The next speaker, Holocaust historian engagement with the Holocaust, this earlier WENDY LOWER (Munich), moved the dis- differentiated attitude towards the Holocaust cussion to the largest former Soviet republic and the opposition to the state of Israel gained outside Russia, the Ukraine. Drawing from new popularity in the 1990s. The positive her own research in the Ukraine, Lower stated reception of publications by European Holo- that while local memories of the Holocaust ex- caust deniers in the Arab world in the mid- isted, there was no „collective memory“ of the 1990s caused a critical reaction from Arab in- Holocaust in the Ukraine. As in other former tellectuals from abroad. While they chastised Soviet states, this lack of memory also applied the oppression of the Palestinians, they also to the issue of collaboration with the Nazi demanded that the Holocaust needed to be regime, which was widely ignored. In addi- accepted as a historical reality. Nordbruch ar- tion, Ukrainian memory of World War II was gued that this eventually led to a „new open- overshadowed by the Ukraine’s history of vic- ness“ towards the study of the Holocaust in timization at the hands of the Stalinist regime the Arab world. Even though Holocaust de- during the „Great Famine of 1932-1933,” also nial is still widespread, Arab scholars have be- known as the „Holodomor,” during which gun a serious investigation into the history of millions of Ukrainians died. With regard the Holocaust and its aftermath. In the en- to Holocaust education in Ukrainian schools suing discussion, Nordbruch stated that en- and universities today, a „gap between his- gagement with the history of the Holocaust tory and memory“ is still apparent: while a has actually moved from intellectual circles majority of students had some knowledge of to the societal mainstream, although cooper- the Holocaust, they mostly perceived Ukraini- ation between Arab and Israeli scholars does ans either as fighters for independence or vic- not yet exist. tims of Stalinism. The discussion of both pre- The next panel, chaired by Lutz Kael- sentations mainly focused on the role of com- ber (Vermont), provided an assessment of munist ideology for the formation of Holo- Holocaust memorial culture (and its ab- caust memory in the former Eastern block. sence) in the former Soviet Union and the Yet Lower’s presentation also pointed to the Ukraine. DENISE YOUNGBLOOD (Vermont) lack of awareness in the West for the defining provided an overview of the development of catastrophic event of the Ukraine during the Holocaust memory in the Soviet Union since 20th century, the Holodomor. the beginning of „Operation Barbarossa“ in Leaving the Eurasian continent, a panel 1941. It was characterized, she argued, by a chaired by Jacob S. Eder (Pennsylvania) state-sanctioned „collective amnesia.” In offi- dealt with the memory of the Holocaust in cial Soviet memory of World War II, German Latin America and South Africa. Literary soldiers were characterized as barbaric perpe- scholar AMALIA RAN (Nebraska/Tel-Aviv) trators and the Soviet people as a whole as reminded the participants at the outset of her their victims, but the mass murder of Soviet presentation of the multitude of approaches Jews was not addressed. While no written or- toward the destruction of European Jews in ders about how to deal with Holocaust mem- Latin America. As Latin American soci- ory existed, a number of reasons accounted eties had their own history of violence, mil- for the development: anti-Semitism, an em- itary coups, and civil wars, Holocaust mem- phasis on the unity of the Soviet people, the ory needed to be located in this context. suppression of a specific Jewish conscious- The evolution of such memory has been hin- ness, and the foregrounding of the Slavic role dered, however, by „institutionalized anti- in resistance movements. Youngblood con- Semitism and political racism“ in the region.

Nevertheless, it constituted a crucial part in in India: not only has Mein Kampf been a Latin American societies’ process of coming to bestseller, but also a Bollywood movie about terms with their own history. The Holocaust Hitler’s love life is currently in production, has served as a universal „narration“ that al- entitled „My Dear Friend Hitler“! This devel- lowed recognition of past crimes and created opment clearly demands a thorough scholarly demands to remember. Thus, Ran concluded, analysis. In a second step, Framke shifted the Holocaust memory in Latin America has al- focus to the prewar period and summarized ways „vacillated between the universal and the results of her research about Indian per- the local.” ception of German anti-Semitism up to 1939. SUSANNA B. SCHRAFSTETTER (Ver- She stated that the Indian media had followed mont) stressed the „global“ character of the the fate of the Jews in Nazi Germany closely lessons drawn from the Holocaust in South and with empathy. While early reports were Africa. The country houses three successful often ill-informed and accepted Nazi propa- „Holocaust and Genocide Centres“ and is the ganda as the truth, reports of the late 1930s only Subsaharan country with institutional- were much more critical of the Nazi regime. ized Holocaust education. While research The last speaker, JONATHAN GOLD- about the formation of Holocaust memory STEIN (West Georgia), provided a detailed in South Africa is still a developing field, it overview of the development and the cur- is safe to say that the Holocaust has become rent state of Holocaust studies in communist a „benchmark for assessing past injustices“ China. Goldstein stressed that—in contrast since the end of Apartheid. Holocaust centers to the other societies examined at the con- draw close parallels between Nazi anti- ference—China was still a totalitarian state Semitism up to 1939 and the Apartheid and thus the study of Holocaust education regime, while Germany’s process of coming had to be a study of state policy. Follow- to terms with the Nazi past served as a ing the Soviet example, virtually no engage- precedent for the Truth and Reconciliation ment with the fate of the Jews in the Holo- Commission. The „cosmopolitan“ character caust had occurred in China during the first of Holocaust memory in South Africa is three postwar decades. However, a seminal also apparent in the activities of the centers, change took place with the Sino-Vietnamese which offer excursions to sites of genocide War of 1979, which brought heavy losses for in Rwanda and have invited survivors of the Chinese army. In the aftermath of the the Rwandan genocide to ceremonies in war, China intensified relations with Israel, South Africa. This allowed, according to which it had come to consider as a model for Schrafstetter, different groups of African the modernization of its armed forces. This victims to identify with the victims of the „marriage of convenience“ led to a surprising Holocaust. The ensuing discussion centered change in attitudes towards Israel, the Jews, on the coexistence of Nazi perpetrators and and the Holocaust. Since then—and with victims in South American societies as well as the support of American foundations and Yad the comparability of Nazi anti-Semitism and Vashem—Holocaust education has been an South African racism during the Apartheid expanding field in China. regime. While many important questions were The final panel, chaired by Reinhild Kreis raised and answered, the workshop also put (Augsburg), shifted the focus onto Asia. more questions on the agenda. For exam- MARIA FRAMKE (Bremen) divided her pre- ple, Holocaust education in various national sentation into two parts. In a first step, she contexts demands a more thorough analy- provided an overview of Indian Holocaust sis, as does the attitude toward Holocaust historiography. The Holocaust is not an im- memory among minorities in the West, such portant aspect of historical research in con- as Turkish immigrants in Germany, Arabs temporary India, and Jewish studies mostly in France, or African Americans and Native focus on Jewish communities in India and In- Americans in the United States. It also be- dian-Israeli relations. Framke also pointed came clear that western scholars cannot fully to the bizarre development of a „Hitler cult“ assess the „global“ dimension of Holocaust

© H-Net, Clio-online, and the author, all rights reserved. memory without engaging in conversation The Perception of the Holocaust in India: Pre- with experts on the nonwestern world. Build- liminary Findings ing on previous cooperation among individ- Jonathan Goldstein (University of West Geor- ual participants of the workshop as well as gia): Holocaust and Jewish Studies in Modern on the partnership between the Universities China: Functions of a Political Agenda of Augsburg and Vermont, the workshop thus also served as the inaugural meeting of a Concluding Session transatlantic study group that will continue to Alan E. Steinweis (University of Vermont) and meet to discuss the global dimension of Holo- Philipp Gassert (Augsburg University) caust memory. Tagungsbericht Global Holocaust? Memories of Conference overview: the Destruction of European Jews in Global Con- Opening Session text. 10.06.2011-11.06.2011, Augsburg, in: H- Philipp Gassert (Augsburg University) and Soz-u-Kult 09.07.2011. Alan E. Steinweis (University of Vermont) Panel 1 Chair: Francis Nicosia (University of Ver- mont) Gilad Margalit (University of Haifa): The Concept of the Shoah’s Singularity and the In- tellectual Unease it Evoked: Three Decades of an Israeli Debate Götz Nordbruch (University of Southern Den- mark, Odense): Facing the Enemy’s Sorrow: Arab Responses to the Holocaust Panel 2 Chair: Lutz Kaelber (University of Vermont) Denise Youngblood (University of Vermont): Collective Amnesia? The USSR and the Holo- caust Wendy Lower (Ludwig-Maximilians-Univer- sity, Munich): Is There a Holocaust Memory in Ukraine Today? Recent Political, Cultural and Regional Trends Panel 3 Chair: Jacob S. Eder (University of Pennsylva- nia) Amalia Ran (University of Nebraska/Tel- Aviv University): Nuestra Shoa: Memory and Post-Memory in Latin American Perspectives Susanna B. Schrafstetter (University of Ver- mont): „We learn about the Holocaust so that we can become more compassionate:” Holo- caust Memory in South Africa Panel 4 Chair: Reinhild Kreis (Augsburg University) Maria Framke (Jacobs University, Bremen):