Simon Wiesenthal Center director Efraim Zuroff and those who
agree with him are voicing opposition the declaration
adopted in Prague in 2008, entitled “On the Conscience
of Europe and Communism.” The declaration names Communist
as well as Nazi crimes as crimes against humanity. “Europe
will not be united if it cannot again unite its history,
recognize Communism and Nazism as a shared legacy and
hold conscientious and comprehensive discussion on all
the totalitarian crimes of the century past.”
Critics are categorically speaking out against what in their understanding is
equating Nazi and Soviet crimes. Just as they once spoke
out against the Nazi and Soviet research commission set
up by Valdas Adamkus.
One might think that this opinion
of theirs is supported by every citizen of Jewish origin
in the world, since it is claimed through all possible information
channels that this attempt to equate the crimes of the two
totalitarian regimes is aimed at diminishing the tragedy
of the Holocaust. The most impassioned debates have flared
up in Israel on exactly this question today.
Proponents of this opinion say that
Lithuania especially is trying to deny the crimes of its
citizens against fellow Jewish citizens during World War
II based on the Prague declaration.
The question arises: on what basis
is the director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center interfering
and supporting policy dictated by the leaders of Russia,
attempting at any cost to revise the crimes of Stalinism
and Communism? The stated tasks of the Simon Wiesenthal
Center are to capture criminals who exterminated Jews and
to pressure governments to take active part in bringing
these criminals to trial.
So why have these critics become
defenders of the narrative of the battle of Good against
Evil, where “good” has become Communist dictatorship, which
murdered, robbed and turned into slave labor tens of millions
of people, including Jews?
I understand that for Israel the
holocaust is that other [typo? “is something else entirely”?],
at once uniting and at the same time providing Israelis
a collective narrative. It speaks to the state of Israel
as the only defender of Jews, guaranteeing Jews the holocaust
will not happen again. That’s why the Israeli military leadership
sends its soldiers to Poland or Lithuania annually to visit
Jewish mass murder sites.
It is strange, for example, that
Lithuania is already trying to draw spiritual strength from
its proud history, from its real or imagined heroic deeds,
whereas Israel [is trying to draw strength from] the suffering
of Jews. But that’s a different story.
So anyway, I also understand why an analogous narrative
about the struggle of Good against Evil is directed toward
a portion of Russian society that doesn’t want to remember
the millions of victims of the bolshevik or Stalin era.
Because many of those who participated directly or indirectly
in the mass murder and persecution of their own citizens
have still not died off. That’s why something like the Nuremberg
trial isn’t taking place in Russia.
But, and I repeat, it is not understandable
to me why critics of the Prague declaration of Jewish origin
haven’t thought about the consequences of support for this
counterfeit narrative for survivors of the mass murders
of, persecutions and occupations of Stalinism. Not only
did they suffer the hell of the Nazis, but another ten years
of the hell of Stalinist cummunism [sic], not to mention
the occupation of their fatherlands for about 50 years.
When those who survived the Stalinist
repressions ask why Jews receive greater attention for their
suffering, these questioners are told that in that Evil
there was an even bigger Evil—the holocaust. Therefore the
sufferings they experiences is not comparable, because their
suffering didn’t make it into the narrative of the struggle
of Good and Evil, of the communists against the nazis. One
would have to search for a long time to find a more amoral
[sic] argument. Such an argument has the unpleasant smell
of political demagoguery. A political context wherein one
set of murderers, including of Jewish origin, become good
killers, is amoral [sic] (I’m talking about the entire period
of the domination of bolshevism).
It’s one thing to claim the holocaust
is distinct, to worry with good foundation about the possible
use of the Prague declaration for evil purposes, but it’s
an entirely different matter when based on that distinction
you try to force others to belittle their own suffering
and to ignore historical facts.
This is what Barry Rubin, director
of the Global Research and International Relations Center,
and also the editor of the International Relations and Middle
East Turkish Studies [?], writes about. In his article in
the conservative Israeli newspaper the Jerusalem Post (“Those
Who Ignore the Past Lose the Future”) he says they [?] need
to support the Prague declaration because it is in the interests
of Jews themselves and Israel. The author says “This declaration
seeks discussion, revelation, unmasking and recognition
of communist crimes just as it does those of the nazis.”
The author provides a list which
he thinks proves the error of not supporting the Prague
declaration. He says the result of this position [of non-support]
is the image of Jews defending the totalitarian communist
system that has killed off and tortured millions of people,
including hundreds of thousands of Jews.
Burial of the fact that the soviets
systematically destroyed jewish communities and religion
and the yiddish language.
Comprehension of the entire extent
of Jewish persecution and suffering under the boot of communism
becomes impossible. During the existence of communism, after
1945 it became the primary power encouraging anti-semitism.
[There is] a growing gulf between
Jews who suffered communist oppression and residents of
non-Russian origin, thus increasing mutual tensions. [in
Israel?]
Assurance that the youth of the
West will not learn about crimes committed by the communist
dictatorship. They are being indoctrinated with the belief
that only the political right can be anti-semitic. In this
way the position of extreme left is strengthened as is their
power to influence society, often masquerading as liberal
[the extremist left is pretending to be liberal? not clear].
This is a way to encourage slander and hatred against Israel.
Hindering Jews from understanding
that today the primary doctrine of the anti-jewish forces
in the West is formed by [of?] extremist leftists rather
than rightists, as has been the case over the last 150 years.
In this way the anti-Israeli position of the extremist leftists
is pushed and a divorce from one’s own society [Jewish alienation
is effected?].
Justification of third world pseudo-leftist
regimes and doctrines. They foster the image that they are
the only just ones, and therefore uncorrupted and free from
anti-semitism by definition.
Facilitation for Western radicals
to join with radical islamists based on a common platform:
hatred of Israel. And, often, in everyday life, the slander
of Jewish communities in the West. The Lithuanian Foreign
Ministry ought to thank Mr. Barry Rubin for doing their
work for them: he has explained the Prague declaration wonderfully
in plain language. At the very least his article should
be sent to all the embassies, thus avoiding unnecessary
misunderstandings or the inability to explain in an understandable
way to the global media why Lithuania supports the Prague
declaration. And why shouldn’t one be ashamed? [sic. “Why
should we be ashamed?”]
A Jerusalem Post reporter came to
Vilnius to write about the same topic. The article at first
glance appears objective. But even so, the Jerusalem journalist
managed, by using the words of another Jewish nationalist
living in Vilnius, professor Dovid Katz, to besmirch one
of the initiators of the Prague declaration, chairman of
the Parliament’s foreign affairs committee Emanuelis Zingeris.
He called him, without any documented foundation, an enemy
of Lithuanian Jews, that is, a lackey of the Lithuanians.
This makes an impression on the
average Jewish reader who doesn’t understand anything. Emanuelis
Zingeris as the only Jew to have signed the declaration
was seriously urged to remove his signature more than once.
He has many times counseled Israelis to make more active
investigations of the crimes of communism against the jewish
nation and the world. And, lastly, one should not forget
that the Prague declaration was signed by prominent democrats
of Western Europe including Vaclav Havel [sic], who has
on more than one occasion defended the state of Israel’s
right to exist.
It was also not for nothing that Efraim Zuroff criticized
the Litvak heritage forum created on the initiative of the
Lithuanian prime minister, making noises about similar “incorrect”
intentions. This is indirectly calling the members of the
forum from the jewish community Lithuanian lackeys.
Such statements are also the result
of giving in to dark political games, into which, unfortunately,
Mr. Efraim Zuroff has also descended. Although two Lithuanian
nationals need to be given [beaten?] for one Jewish nationalist
(I’ll talk about that another time), but in the end all
sides need to remember that we are [first of all?] citizens
of Lithuania of Jewish origin. We are not some small community
from a folk museum stetl reservation of unknown loyalty.
Mr. Efraim Zuroff, being an historian, knows perfectly well
that history is not falsified, history is not toyed with.
It is learned from. Critics of the Prague declaration would
do well to understand that they themselves, in Moscow’s
eyes, have become her [Moscow’s] useful idiots, working
against the interests of Jews and Israel.
|