On Monday, Sept. 16, as the first part of a year-long six-part series called “Conversations on Israel, Palestine, and the War in Gaza,” Brown University Professor of Holocaust and Genocide Studies Omer Bartov, spoke with our own Thomas Fleischman, Associate Professor of History on modern Europe and Germany.
The talk was hosted by the Center for Jewish Studies and the Department of Religion and Classics, and co-sponsored by the Department of History to “foster intellectual growth and enrich the campus community,” Jane and Alan Batkin Professor in Jewish Studies and Department of Religion and Classics Chair Nora Rubel said. Nevertheless, public safety was stationed outside Goergen Hall for the event’s duration due to security concerns.
Bartov began by stating that the Holocaust has once again become a “common currency” in how it is used and abused as “a historical event, a traumatic memory, and a warning to future generations.” He focused on the consequences of using the well-intentioned term “never again,” as well as its role in Israel’s existence and its current conflict with Gaza. Many Jews around the world, including those in Israel, he said, believe that the original meaning of the phrase has been neglected and forgotten as violence erupts against them.
“This is the context in which it has become legitimate to speak about Hamas not only as the equivalent of ISIS or al-Qaeda but also as Nazis — the context in which pro-Palestinian demonstrations are labeled antisemitic. The context in which Jewish and Israeli critics of occupation policies in the West Bank and the destruction of Gaza are called anti-Zionist, self-hating Jews, and accused of being in the pay of Hamas,” Bartov shared.
Bartov claimed that the Holocaust is what sparked Israel’s justification of establishment with self-determination and right of return.
“The recentralization of the Holocaust as the cardinal moment of modern Jewish history has had the effect of both insisting on its singularity and of interpreting it not as a past event, but rather as a clear and present danger of abandonment and destruction,” he announced. Calling for clarification of the term, Bartov reinforced that terminology must not be a political tool to weaponize language and propaganda, but a tool for comprehending the events of our past.
Before both parties take steps towards peace, Bartov outlined the issues that must be resolved. It first must be acknowledged that violence will not resolve the conflict, that the leaders of both sides are morally corrupt and reprehensible, that ignoring the Palestinian plight by sweeping it under the rug cannot be tolerated, and that global intervention is necessary.
Finally, he said, “If we are to take seriously that postwar slogan of ‘never again,’ this is the moment to do so. It is already too late for tens of thousands of innocents. It is time to pull back from the abyss and do all in our power as scholars, students, and citizens, to convince our governments to compel the warring sides to stop the killing and bring peace to their peoples.”
Bartov spoke on the most extreme demands made by both sides, such as the Jewish calls for the establishment of a Halachic state from the river to the sea and Pro-Palestinian demonstrators’ demands, echoing Hamas’ platform calling for the creation of a state on that same territory. Because each side cares solely about its own interests, there is no incentive to compromise, and thus nothing can change or be resolved.
“In other words,” he said, “allegations of genocidal intent by one side appear to legitimize genocidal intent by the other, all in the name of liberation, self-determination, justice, and dignity.”
At the end of the talk, I asked Bartov what he believed was the most rational and “right” solution. He expressed that even though the concept of a bi-national state is wonderful, “full-blown apartheid” will already have taken place by the time we establish one.
Therefore, Bartov mentioned a group he works with called “A Land for All,” founded by Meron Rapoport and Awni Al-Mashni, which envisions a confederation with two sovereign republics sharing the ‘67 borders where it would be possible to be a citizen of one state and a resident of the other.
Although he believes the implementation of a two-state solution to be out of reach, Bartov expressed optimism that two states with open borders, akin to the European Union (EU), will exist one day where Israelis and Palestinians can move freely to enjoy democracy, justice, and security for all.
