Sunday, October 14, 2007

Orhan Pamuk: Armenian Genocide is a Moral Issue


By Khatchig Mouradian

The Armenian Weekly
Oct. 12, 2007

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (A.W.)—Answering a question from the audience during his book reading organized by the Harvard Bookstore on Oct. 12, Turkish novelist and Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk said that the Armenian genocide is a moral issue that needs to be discussed freely in Turkey.

The question read, “What do you think about the Armenian Genocide Resolution in the U.S. Congress?” Pamuk said, “I was expecting this question.” Interrupted by laughter from the audience, Pamuk continued, “Don’t worry, I’ll get out of it.”

“For me, it’s a moral issue, it’s a personal issue,” he went on to say. “For me it’s an issue of free speech, which we don’t totally have in Turkey. … The Turkish people should be able to freely discuss [this issue].”

Pamuk added, “I basically think it is upsetting that this issue is getting to be an arm-twisting issue [between states] rather than a moral or free speech issue in Turkey.

Pamuk was in Cambridge to read from his newly published book Other Colors: Essays and a Story (Alfred A. Knopf, 2007). He is the winner of the 2006 Nobel Prize in Literature. In 2005, he was charged with “insulting Turkishness” under Turkey’s notorious Article 301 for saying in an interview with a Swiss magazine that “Thirty thousand Kurds and a million Armenians were killed in these lands and nobody dares to talk about it.” The charges were later dropped.

Saturday, October 6, 2007

‘The Resolution Speaks to the Survival of the Armenian People Today’

Says Congressman Edward Royce
By Khatchig Mouradian

The Armenian Weekly
October 6, 2007

WASHINGTON (A.W.)—The following interview with Congressman Edward R. Royce (R-Calif.) was conducted on Sept. 28 in his office in Washington. The video of the interview can be viewed on www.haireniktv.com.

Khatchig Mouradian—Congressman, where does the Genocide Resolution stand at this point and where do we go from here?

Edward Royce—Well, what we do now is what we did a few years ago when we got the bill out of committee. I’ve served on the Foreign Affairs Committee for a number of years, and I carried in the State Senate of California the first genocide resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide. We got that out of the California State Senate with a little help from our friend George Deukmejian, who was governor at the time.

Also, a few years ago we were able to actually get this very resolution on to the House floor. Now, at that point in time, President [Bill] Clinton contacted Speaker [Dennis] Hastert and they convinced the leadership not to bring it up on the House floor. But where we’re focused right now is explaining to the Members that the French have recognized the genocide, the Germans have recognized it, and for those of us who are Republicans, that Ronald Reagan, as president, recognized the genocide. It is time that we officially, as the Congress of the United States, do this. We’re in the process right now of talking to the members—and I’m working on the Republican side—in order to have the votes there if we can schedule this before committee.

K.M.—And why is it important for the U.S. Congress to recognize the Armenian genocide, an event that took place in a different part of the world 92 years ago?

E.R.—My father was involved during the Second World War with U.S. forces when they went into Dachau, the concentration camp. He actually took photographs, he was an amateur photographer. And ever since, he has been quite outspoken on the way in which the international community can be silent at times about genocide. One of the things he reminds people of is Hitler’s comment back to the chairman of the joint chief of staff in the Reich. And Hitler said, “Who speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”

The reality is that history can repeat itself and will do so especially if we don’t get history right, and if we don’t have it acknowledged. And when you have something as horrific as the genocide in which over one and a half million Armenians perished in Western Anatolia and Turkey, when you have something on that scale and it is not acknowledged, there is the danger that it could be repeated.

This is also important to us because Armenia is struggling today, and here it is in the grips of an embargo imposed by Turkey and by Azerbaijan. They’re in a tough neighborhood and in the last three years we’ve seen Azerbaijan increase its defense budget 638 percent. If we wonder about how Armenia struggles in this environment, I’ll just share with you the index of economic freedom, which measures how much progress different countries make. It lists Turkey at 83rd in the world, while young Armenia is ranked 32nd. So you can see the amount of reform going on in that country, but at the same time you can see the discrimination, and you can see the high tariffs imposed by its neighbors in terms of goods and services getting in and out of the country. So this not only speaks to the past, it speaks to the survival of Armenia and the Armenian people today.

This is one of the reasons that we’ve been involved in efforts to try to champion the Millennium Challenge account, and as you know Armenia will receive over $235 million for its rural areas, for its agriculture, to help rebuild its roads. But at the same time, what we’re also trying to do is knock down that embargo.

And as you know, my friend, Congressman Crowley from New York and myself championed the legislation to explicitly prevent any funding for any rail line that goes through that region and bypasses Armenia. We’re going to continue to speak out for the truth and point out the obvious and use U.S. power and prestige and the fact that this country is based on an ideal—that ideal is freedom—in order not only to try to help Armenia today but to have the record books, the history books, properly record all over the world what happened. And frankly, when Congress speaks, it helps focus people’s attention on what is actually happening in the world.

K.M.—You’ve also been very active in speaking out against the genocide in Darfur. So what parallels do you see there?

E.R.—I took the actor Don Cheadle along with Paul Rusesabagina (who he portrays in the movie “Hotel Rwanda”) and a nightline television camera crew into Darfur, Sudan, and recorded the aftermath of an attack there. We went into the village of Tinei, which was once a vibrant community but now has a population of a handful of people. We talked to survivors of different attacks while we were there, and two documentaries were produced out of it on that genocide. Subsequently we were able to get a genocide resolution through the United Nations and passed it here through Congress. In so doing, we’ve now put enormous pressure on China to quit providing the arms. (Just as China provided the arms used by Rwanda in the genocide in Rwanda, they’re now providing the arms here.) And this kind of pressure, I think, can help mobilize the international community.

And let’s think again about the point President Reagan made when he recognized the Armenian genocide. He spoke of the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide, and then the genocide in Cambodia that took two million lives. And he was making the point that if we don’t speak out, history can repeat itself. Here it is today, repeating itself, with a radical fundamentalism that is driving the Janjaweed, and the Khartoum government is right behind it. The Khartoum government is actually involved in helping fund this. So again, to me, pointing these things out, and trying to educate people around the world and trying to get an admission as to what is happening is very, very important in terms of human rights. If you don’t get the past right, there’s a danger you’re not going to get the future right. And we should call the Armenian genocide for what it is: genocide.

K.M.—Congressman, what is your take on the recent letter signed by eight former Secretaries of State?

E.R.—If President Reagan could speak out, if the French National Assembly could speak out, if historians all around the world can speak out, it’s time for the U.S. Congress to speak out, regardless of what kind of angst that might cause to some in foreign affairs. I just think you try to do the right thing, and that’s what we need to do.

K.M.—Congressman, one of the issues being raised, especially in the Turkish media, is how the Genocide Resolution is being pushed forward by the Democrats. They often ignore the fact that the resolution enjoys bipartisan support. How can we make the case for that?

E.R.—I think people forget that it was under Republican majority that we actually got the resolution out of committee in the past. And it was under a Republican president, President Reagan, that the Armenian genocide was addressed. And so, as one who has labored long and hard on this, I’m well aware of the fact that this is a bipartisan effort. I would think anyone who is trying to claim otherwise is being a little political. And frankly, with these kinds of issues we should keep the partisan politics out of it. We’re talking about human rights, we’re talking about history here, and so I appreciate you asking that question because it’s good to get that history right, too. We passed that resolution out of the committee successfully with the help of Republicans and Democrats, when the Republicans were the majority.

‘Retain Confidence in Speaker Pelosi’

Says Congresswoman Anna Eshoo

By Khatchig Mouradian

The Armenian Weekly
October 6, 2007

WASHINGTON (A.W.)—The following interview with Congresswoman Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) was conducted on Sept. 28 in her office in Washington.

The video of the interview can be viewed on www.haireniktv.com.

Khatchig Mouradian—Congresswoman, now that we have 226 co-sponsors of the Armenian Genocide Resolution, what’s next?

Anna Eshoo—A few very important things need to be done. First, we want to keep getting co-sponsors, so this is not something that has ended. Every week I talk to members on the floor of the House to invite them to come on to the resolution, answer questions, etc. Very importantly, Congressman Tom Lantos from Northern California, who is the chairman of the House International Relations Committee, needs to schedule the bill for mark-up—that means that you write up the bill, it’s accepted by the committee, there’s a vote in the committee, and then it qualifies to come to the floor of the house for action. Now why is 226—and counting—important? Because the majority of the House is 218. We have to keep members on the legislation, not allow people to stray, not allow the Turkish lobby to affect members and peel them off of the legislation.

K.M.—The expectations are high, and it’s up to Speaker Nancy Pelosi to put the resolution to vote. Yet, she’s under a lot of pressure from lobby groups, the Tukish government and the State Department. How do you see this issue developing in the next few weeks?

A.E.—Well, the Armenian-American community should retain their confidence in Speaker Pelosi. She has always been on the resolution since she came to Congress, she’s been committed to the community and what needs to be done. She has spoken every year on it on the floor of the House, and now we are so proud that she is our Speaker. So she hasn’t changed her mind about the issue. It’s up to us to be able to pass it. The Speaker doesn’t tell people how to vote. … And then she likes to win. So we’re going to have to demonstrate that we have the votes on the floor in order to win. And we have all known from the very beginning—no one knows it better than the Armenian-American community—that this has always been tough. The opposition understands our position of strength now and they keep ratcheting up every day.

K.M.—Do you see any difference between the way the opposition operated previously and the way it’s operating now?

A.E.—There’s more money, and there’s more pressure.

K.M.—And what are your thoughts on the letter, signed by eight former Secretaries of State, which urges Speaker Pelosi to keep the resolution off the House floor?

A.E.—I have to tell you I’m not surprised. And the reason I’m not surprised is that each of those Secretaries of State are defending the policy that they implemented. We haven’t had one administration that was with us. This is how high the climb is. So while I would like to have had it be different, it’s not a surprise to me because every single administration has sided the other way. They have not been with us. That’s why we know that it’s up to us to launch this and to move it, and I think their sending this letter shows the power of the [Turkish] lobby. I mean there’s a lot of money in this. There’s a ton of money in this in plain English. So, yes, we’ve always known we have a tough fight. They’ve been successful for 25 years in the Congress, but I believe that we can change it and I believe that we will change it, and the reason for that is because it’s the right thing to do.

K.M.—Why is it important for the United States Congress to recognize a crime against humanity that took place 92 years ago in a different part of the world?

A.E.—The greatest strength that America has is her moral standing in the world. That has been and continues to be the most eloquent statement about who and what we are as a nation. And we have moved away from some of those values—very sadly, I must say—and that has chipped away at the credibility of the United States of America. Make no mistake about it, we are the mightiest in terms of military, we certainly are the most powerful economic force in the world, but without moral standing, you have a house that is essentially built on sand. So this is about who we are and what we stand for. And our human rights record and our recognition to correct not only history around the world, but our very own history. We had to fight to acknowledge that slavery was wrong in our country. So we have a very, very long record on this. And that’s why it is important. What did Hitler say? “Who will remember the Armenians?” We will!

K.M.—Congresswoman, this is a very important human rights issue, but it’s also a very personal issue for you. Can you talk about that?

A.E.—Well, as you know, I’m half Hye (Armenian) and half Assori (Assyrian). That’s a very powerful mixture for me because both sides of my family were persecuted and fled the region. When I saw that full-page ad in the New York Times taken out by the Turkish lobby saying, “Let’s settle this once and for all as to whether there was or was not a genocide, and have a commission...” Excuse me? Did my grandmother lie? I mean, I sat at her knee and she described the slaughter of her own family.

We’re not asking anyone for money. We’re simply stating that this be a fact that is set down and recognized by the American people. And I think the American people are way ahead of us. There isn’t any argument in my Congressional district or across the country as to whether this is something that took place. In fact, constituents are stunned that this is even a battle. And the battle is being waged against denial. I think that it would be a gift for the Turkish people and the Turkish government to get this behind them. This isn’t the present-day Turkey that did it, this was the Ottoman Empire, so yes, this is very, very close to me. It’s my family, it’s who I am, and it’s where I come from.

But this is also very important for our nation to recognize. And when you move from denial to truth, you’re free.

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

My Latest Interviews with Congressmen

Watch interviews I conducted with five members of the US House of Representatives on September 28-29, 2007. the interviews are about the Armenian genocide resolution and related issues:
Congressman Joe Knollenberg:
http://www.hairenik.com/HairenikTV/HA_TV_Clip113.htm
Congresswoman Anna Eshoo:
http://www.hairenik.com/HairenikTV/HA_TV_Clip109.htm
Congressman George Rodanovich:
http://www.hairenik.com/HairenikTV/HA_TV_Clip110.htm
Congresswoman Edward Royce:
http://www.hairenik.com/HairenikTV/HA_TV_Clip111.htm
Congressman Garret Scott:
http://www.hairenik.com/HairenikTV/HA_TV_Clip112.htm

Thursday, September 27, 2007

What would Lemkin do?

By Khatchig Mouradian
The Jewish Advocate
Thursday September 27 2007
http://www.thejewishadvocate.com/this_weeks_issue/opinions/?content_id=3731

When dealing with ethnic cleansing and genocide, it would be useful to ask: What would Lemkin do? Had world leaders and human rights organizations asked that question and acted based on the answer over the past 50 years, several mass murders and genocides could have been prevented or stopped in Europe, Africa and Asia.

Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-Jew, coined the term “genocide” in 1944 based on the planned extermination of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turks in 1915 and the Jews during World War II. He worked tirelessly to have the United Nations pass a law on the prevention and punishment of that crime. Finally, on Dec. 9, 1948, the UN General Assembly ratified the Genocide Convention. Remembering that moment, Lemkin, who lost 49 relatives during the Holocaust, wrote: “Somebody requested a roll call. The first to vote was India. After her ‘yes’ there was an endless number of ‘yeses.’ A storm of applause followed. I felt on my face the flashlight of cameras. … The world was smiling and approving and I had only one word in answer to all that, ‘thanks.’”

Lemkin referred to the Armenian genocide on numerous occasions. In an article in the Hairenik Weekly (later the Armenian Weekly) on Jan. 1, 1959, he wrote that the suffering of the Armenians had paved the way to the ratification of the Genocide Convention: “The sufferings of the Armenian men, women, and children thrown into the Euphrates River or massacred on the way to [the Syrian desert of] Der-el-Zor have prepared the way for the adoption for the Genocide Convention by the United Nations. … This is the reason why the Armenians of the entire world were specifically interested in the Genocide Convention. They filled the galleries of the drafting committee at the third General Assembly of the United Nations in Paris when the Genocide Convention was discussed.”

At the end of the article, Lemkin asserted, “One million Armenians died, but a law against the murder of peoples was written with the ink of their blood and the spirit of their sufferings.”

Fast forward to 2007. The Anti-Defamation league, an organization that has tirelessly spoken out and acted against Holocaust denial, as well as more recent acts of genocide from Eastern Europe to Darfur, continues to speak with ambiguities about the Armenian genocide and oppose Congressional legislation affirming the historical record, considering it “counterproductive.”

Days after the ADL’s national director, Abraham Foxman, was confronted on the issue, he wrote a letter to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan “to express our sorrow over what we have caused for the leadership and people of Turkey in the past few days.”

Countless Jewish organizations, scholars, journalists, bloggers and activists have come out fiercely to criticize the ADL’s hypocrisy. They have all asked the right question – What would Lemkin do? – and have come up with the right answer, thus honoring Lemkin’s legacy.
Perhaps rather than rushing to appease the Turkish government, the ADL would do well to ask the right question, too.

Khatchig Mouradian is an Armenian journalist, poet and translator based in Boston. He is the editor of the Armenian Weekly.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Newton Human Rights Commission Ceases Participation in NPFH

Town Refuses to be ‘In the Same Boat’ with ADL
By Khatchig Mouradian


NEWTON, Mass. (A.W.)—Generations of Americans converged at Newton City Hall on Sept. 11 to make their voices heard to the local Human Rights Commission (NHRC) meeting, which, after deliberations, unanimously voted to cut their ties with the ADL’s No Place for Hate (NPFH) program until the former unequivocally recognizes the Armenian genocide and supports H.R.106 in Congress, thereby affirming the historical record.

Commissioners and Advisory Council Members

In a letter dated Aug. 24, the NHRC had asked the ADL to recognize the Armenian genocide, actively support H.R.106 and rehire the ADL’s New England regional director Andrew Tarsy.
During the Sept. 11 meeting, commissioner Marianne Ferguson noted that although Tarsy has since been rehired, unequivocal recognition and support for the Genocide Resolution had not been achieved.

Advisory Council member Dianne Chilingerian expressed concern about the ADL’s position on the Genocide Resolution, which she considered inconsistent with its mission. She said that she is bothered by the ADL’s position as a human rights activist, and that this is not just an Armenian issue. Student Advisory council member David Fisher asked how we expect to end genocide campaigns today “when we still can’t recognize what happened 92 years ago.”

ADL Regional Board Members

Emphasizing that he was not speaking on behalf of the ADL, the organization’s NE Regional Board member Gerry Tishler said, “I have studied, thought and written about the Armenian genocide and it wasn’t ‘tantamount to genocide’ it was genocide. … I am also in favor of the U.S. government acknowledging and commemorating the Armenian genocide.” He noted that the meeting of the ADL’s national commissioners will discuss the issue in November, though said that continuing with the NPFH should not be based on that outcome. “If you make it conditional, you are making a bad mistake,” he said, noting how much the ADL has added to the town’s programs.

NE Regional Board member Beth Tishler also argued the importance of not dissociating from the NPFH, adding, “We have stood up and gone against our national leadership. We have heard you. The National ADL has heard you.”

ADL National commissioner David Apel said that ADL national director Abe Foxman “is not empowered” to support the Genocide Resolution, and that “your message will be brought forth to the national commissioners in November.” In response, members of the audience pointed out that while Foxman seems to be able to change his position daily on the Armenian issue, he needs the green light from the commissioners to properly acknowledge the truth about 1915.

“I reject the notion that we are misguided citizens,” continued Apel. He said the last few months had been a learning experience for him and many others, and that everyone in the room was in the same boat. “Give us time till November,” he added.

Members of the Audience

Newton residents, university professors, human rights activists, students, descendents of Armenian genocide and Holocaust survivors, spoke about the need to send the right message by severing ties with the ADL.

Newton resident David Boyajian, whose letter to the Watertown Tab sparked the ADL controversy, said that the “ADL’s [genocide] acknowledgement was thinly disguised denial,” and that its “verbal gymnastics show bad faith.” He stressed that the ADL will not change its position without pressure from the towns, and asked that Newton sever its ties immediately.
Newton resident Sonya Merian, whose mother was on one of the earliest Newton Human Rights commissions, read a letter by the ANC of Eastern Massachusetts addressed to the NHRC members and Newton mayor David Cohen. “Foxman apologized to the Prime Minister of Turkey for having put his government ‘in a difficult position,’ expressing his ‘sorrow over what we have caused for the leadership and people of Turkey.’ No apology to the heirs of Armenian Genocide survivors has been issued to date,” she said.

Prof. Jack Nusan Porter, treasurer of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), stressed the importance of severing ties with the ADL until Foxman resigns or changes course. “Turkey cannot harm a single hair of a single Jew,” he said, referring to Foxman’s stated concern that supporting the Genocide Resolution would harm the Turkish-Jewish community. “Is Israel, with its army, afraid of Turkey?” he asked.

Newton resident Nancy Akanian said she was startled that the NPFH has an annual re-certification process for all participating towns, and said the ADL was hardly in a position to grade anyone on their human rights performance.

“The ADL lacks the moral leadership and courage and any program sponsored by the ADL cannot be accepted,” said Newton resident Michael Mensoyan.

Newton resident and Armenian Youth federation (AYF) member Nora Kaleshian said, “My family and I are deeply hurt [by ADL’s practices],” expressing hope that it promotes the Human Rights of all people.

Prominent human rights activist and author of Our Bodies, Ourselves, Judy Norsigian, also from Newton, noted that “the time is ripe to make this a national issue.” She underlined the position and authority of Newton to send a strong message to the ADL by severing ties.

Newton resident Bethel Charkoudian introduced her father, a genocide survivor and thanked the NHRC for their stance. “My father survived the genocide and came here because he knew people understood his suffering,” she said.

Associate professor of philosophy at Worcester State College Henry Theriault said that while people were used to the denial of the Armenian genocide by Turkey, it was shocking to see a human rights organization engaging in the denial, adopting similar hate speech and lobbying against genocide recognition.

“There is no such thing as ‘degree of genocide,’” said Newton resident Salpi Sarafian. “The ADL has spoken in absolute clarity against Sudan, Bosnia and Afghanistan. They need to do the same regarding the Armenian genocide.”

In a poignant speech, activist Berge Jololian underscored the importance of realizing that recognizing the Armenian genocide is a moral issue and not a political one. “ADL was established in 1913, the Armenian genocide occured in 1915. ADL had 92 years to acknowledge this crime,” he said.

Activist Narini Badalian recounted her experience at a recent lecture by Foxman in New York. Badalian had confronted Foxman to say whether ADL’s position is consistent with that of a Human Rights organization. Foxman had responded, “It is up to you to decide.” Badalian urged, “It is time for us to decide.”

Activist Luder Sahagian made strong points about the failure of the ADL to “rigorously uphold settled history.” He said, “The ADL has yet to subscribe to the wisdom of the esteemed Rabbi Hillel, who many, many years ago advised, ‘What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor…That is the entire law. All the rest is commentary.’”

Visiting professor of Armenian Genocide Studies at Clark University Dikran Kaligian said, “The ADL has made itself complicit in [Turkey’s] multi-million dollar denial campaign.” When the ADL controversy first broke, he explained, the ADL’s first reaction was not to approach the Armenian community but to hire a leading PR company. “Foxman does not see this as a moral issue, but a PR problem,” Kaligian said, adding, “We need to take the necessary steps for them to get the message.”

In an emotional speech, activist Alik Arzoumanian responded to the numerous calls on the NHRC and on Armenians to wait until the November meeting before deciding to sever ties. “We have been waiting all our lives,” she said, and explained how offended she was by Foxman’s claim that a Genocide Resolution was “counter-productive.” Foxman considers “our struggle to recover our dignity” to be counterproductive, she added. “I don’t want to give National ADL one more day.”

Mayor Cohen

Newton mayor David Cohen spoke next, and said that “there is a tremendous amount of common ground here.” He called the ADL National’s failure to “make a forthright statement” recognizing the genocide and supporting the resolution as “an ongoing injustice.”

“The resolution that we have in the U.S. Congress is one of the best pieces of legislation that deserves passage,” he said, referring to H.R.106. “It is incumbent on the ADL” to support it, he added.

In the same boat?

ADL Regional Board members emphasized several times during the meeting that everyone in the room was “on the same boat,” though they went on to say that suspending ties with the NPFH and ADL was not the answer. Asked to comment near the end of the meeting, however, Student Advisory Council member Fisher said, “Hearing the voices of the Armenian community and my own Jewish conscience, I cannot be in the same boat with you.”

The NHRC voted unanimously to cease participation in the NPFH, pending the ADL’s unambiguous recognition of the Armenian genocide and support of HR106.

Tuesday, September 4, 2007

Bedford Violence Prevention Coalition Demands Explanation from ADL

By Khatchig Mouradian

The Armenian Weekly
September 4, 2007

BEDFORD, Mass. (A.W.)—On Sept. 4 at 7:30 a.m., the Bedford Violence Prevention Coalition (VPC) held its monthly meeting at the First Church of Christ Congregational with members of the Bedford Armenian community and activists from neighboring towns. The committee discussed the ADL’s ambiguous position on the Armenian genocide and decided to officially demand an explanation from the ADL. The committee agreed that it would then proceed accordingly, yet maintained that severing its ties with the ADL was still very much on the table.
During the meeting, members of the committee were briefed on the recent developments in the controversy surrounding the ADL. Armenian activists were then given the floor to speak.

Armenian Activists
Bedford resident Stephen Dulgarian spoke about the ADL’s opposition to the Armenian Genocide Resolution in the U.S. Congress and expressed his hope that Bedford would follow in the footsteps of Watertown, Newton and Newburyport by sending a strong message to the ADL. “We ask this committee to send a letter to the ADL demanding the unambiguous recognition for the Armenian genocide and support for the Genocide Resolution,” he said.

“I just lost a great uncle who was a survivor of the Armenian genocide,” said Bedford resident Mike Bahtiarian. He went on to criticize the ADL’s position on the genocide, underlining how its use of expressions like “tantamount to genocide” were deliberately unclear. Not supporting genocide recognition, he said, is “like not recognizing [the Holocaust during] World War II.”

“We would like to see this No Place for Hate committee continue its work independently of the ADL,” said activist Berge Jololian. “The ADL has lost its moral authority to lecture us on human rights. Denying any genocide is an act of hate and this community should have zero tolerance to it.” He noted that statement after statement, the ADL’s “hypocrisy is multiplying.” He rejected the ADL’s talk of a joint Turkish-Armenian commission to look into the history of 1915. “It is like saying that Elie Wiesel and David Irving should sit and discuss the history of the Holocaust. It’s outrageous!” he exclaimed.

Talking about ADL national director Abraham Foxman, Jololian said, “ADL has not apologized to the Armenian community or addressed any Armenian, however, Foxman offered an apology to the Turkish government for ADL’s statement recognizing the Armenian genocide.” Jololian was referring to a letter Foxman sent to Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan in which he said, “I feel deeply sorry over discussions that erupted after the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) changed its stance on the incidents of 1915.”

Petitto Devaney
Watertown councilor-at-large Marilyn Petitto Devaney spoke about the proclamation she introduced at the Watertown Town Council meeting. “I look at the proclamation as an act of lighting a candle instead of cursing the darkness,” she said. Pettito Devaney recounted how the ADL had asked the Watertown Town Council for 90 days before making a decision about severing ties with the No Place for Hate program. “I wouldn’t even give them 90 seconds,” she said. Underlining that the Armenian genocide is not merely an Armenian issue, Petitto Devaney called on Bedford to sever its ties with the NPFH.

Police Chief
Police chief James Hicks said that long before coming to Bedford, he had worked with the ADL on several programs. “This summer has been quite eye-opening,” he said. “I feel embarrassed.”
“If the facts are facts, the ADL should state the facts clearly and back its statement with words and actions,” Hicks noted. “I have some serious reservations with the ADL. They need to explain their position,” he added.

Hicks and other members of the VPC noted that their committee was functioning years before its association with the NPFH and that good work can be done with—and if need be without—that association.

“We have some serious concerns and I would like to have the ADL here before taking action,” Hicks said. “But I have to say,” he added, “the present state of affairs jeopardizes NPFH’s position.”