As researchers dedicated to studying the destruction of European and North African Jewry, antisemitism, and genocide, we are increasingly concerned over the growing tendency of academics to politicize the Holocaust and to use that tragedy as a weapon with which to attack Israel—the Jewish State. The statement in the Open Letter on the Misuse of Holocaust Memory (with similar pieces such as this and this) suggesting that "the memory of the Holocaust obscures our understanding of the antisemitism that Jews face today, and dangerously misrepresents the causes of violence in Israel-Palestine," is at best a half truth. Scholars should refrain from willfully ignoring relevant documentation and contexts, and where such disregard occurs, it is essential to identify and unequivocally reject this approach.
History does not repeat itself, and we would agree that the events of October 7, however horrific, are distinct from the Holocaust. Hamas, whatever its murderous ideology and the unimaginable atrocities it has committed, should not be seen as a modern-day reincarnation of the Nazis. In contrast to the popular tendency to view the Holocaust and that Black Shabbat as almost equivalent, comparative analysis in history entails the recognition of both similarities and differences. While the two terrible events share certain similarities, such as the chilling brutality of the killings, the underlying ideological hatred, and even the voices that deny these crimes, fundamental differences between the two events are immense.
Presenting utterances of certain Israelis as somehow indicative of all of Israeli society while knowingly ignoring statements by Israel’s detractors that minimize, "contextualize" or altogether deny the horrific crimes committed on October 7, and even advocate mass murder, does not constitute an objective account of history and could be understood as tolerating Hamas's calls for the destruction of the Jewish people. This is especially so when the diametrically opposed approaches of Israel and Hamas with regard to the preservation of civilian life are deliberately ignored or falsified. One side intentionally targets civilians, while the other seeks to minimize civilian casualties, although its efforts – to our regret – have not always been successful. We deeply regret the civilian casualties in Gaza, but fair-minded observers should also blame Hamas for its cynical use of ordinary Gazans as human shields. Historians are entitled to personal political opinions; but polemics are no substitute for a reasoned consideration of the facts at hand.
Internationally respected scholars of the Holocaust may excel in their field, but that does not necessarily make them experts on the complex history and intricacies of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The present crisis highlights the stark contrast between a country striving, however imperfectly, to uphold democratic and humanist values and a terrorist organization fostering an ideology that unabashedly seeks to quash them, rejecting religious tolerance, gender equality, and open discourse. Understanding the long-standing Israeli–Palestinian conflict calls for more nuance than is present in the open letter.
As historians, our job is to scrutinize historical events from diverse perspectives and to analyze the varied narratives surrounding them. That means taking into account both the starting and ending points of any historical narrative. Can singularly framing the events of October 7 through the prism of Israel's 75-year existence while overlooking the preceding 2,000 years of historical context, the Palestinian leadership's rejection of the partition plan, Israel's complete withdrawal from Gaza, and the suicide bombings meant to derail the Oslo Accords and many other events be ignored and written out of the story? While Israel might indeed have made many mistakes in the history of the conflict, it is a distortion of the record to argue that Palestinians have only been innocent victims without agency or responsibility. While we respect the understandable and laudable concern of the signers of the open letter about the suffering of the Palestinian people, any argument that sees the establishment of Israel as the root cause of the conflict is problematic. Even if this is not the intention of the signers, such an assertion can undermine Israel's legitimacy and encourage genocidal calls for its destruction.
Vague phrases like "Israeli–Palestinian violence" are not helpful and might contribute to an unsettling political correctness. Such phrasing downplays, contextualizes, and even legitimizes the numerous rapes and premeditated mass murders committed by one side only—Hamas. The selective compassion of international organizations entrusted with protecting human rights is evident in their deafening silence on, or denial of, atrocities inflicted upon Jews and poses a serious threat to the fundamental principles of human morality.
In the face of the worldwide resurgence of antisemitism, it is imperative to steer clear of relativism, which tends to equate all forms of discrimination and persecution. While addressing other types of prejudice and hatred is important, insisting that every condemnation of antisemitism must be accompanied by statements about other issues is counterproductive. The battle against antisemitism, especially within Islamicist, white supremacist, and “progressive” circles, is a distinct and pressing struggle that merits its own dedicated focus and attention.
We call on our academic community to avoid politicizing the Holocaust, firmly stand against instances of antisemitism, and recognize the horrendous attack on Israel on October 7th within its complex historical contexts.
Yehuda Bauer, Professor Emeritus, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Yad Vashem
Jochen Böhler, Adjunct Professor, Vienna Wiesenthal Institute for Holocaust Studies
Havi Dreifuss, Professor, Tel Aviv University and Yad Vashem
Barbara Engelking, Professor, Polish Center for Holocaust Research
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology at the Polish Academy of Sciences
Michael Fleming, Professor, Polish University Abroad, London
Stephen Fritz, Professor of History, East Tennessee State University
Norman JW Goda, Norman and Irma Braman Professor of Holocaust Studies, University of Florida
Jan Grabowski, Distinguished University Professor, University of Ottawa
Jeffrey Herf, Distinguished University Professor, Emeritus, University of Maryland, College Park
Samuel Kassow, Northam Professor of History, Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut
Steven T. Katz, Alvin J. and Shirley Slater Professor of Jewish and Holocaust Studies, Boston University
Joel Kotek, Professor (Emeritus) of Political Science, Université libre de Bruxelles
Stephan Lehnstaedt, Professor of Holocaust Studies and Jewish Studies, Touro University, Berlin
Dariusz Libionka, Professor, Polish Center for Holocaust Research, Institute of Philosophy and Sociology at the Polish Academy of Sciences
Meir Litvak, Professor, Tel Aviv University.
Avinoam Patt, Professor, University of Connecticut
David Silberklang, Senior Historian, Yad Vashem; adjunct professor, University of Haifa and Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Laurence Weinbaum, Chief Editor, The Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs
