Opinion Forum

Israel and the Holocaust

February 2nd, 2010

by Edith Shaked

Israel and the Holocaust – Is there an authentic historical perspective?

Jacques and Isabelle silently left the compound of Yad Vashem (YV), Israel’s official memorial to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust and the world center for documentation, research, and education about the Holocaust. It was noon and they went for lunch. As per their French custom, they ordered a cappuccino. They talked about the period when defeated France was occupied by Nazi Germany during World War II.

Their stories were very similar, because they were both French Jews. They remembered how the Nazis went door-to-door to count them. They remembered the racist and discriminatory laws enacted to gradually purge the Jews from economic, professional, and educational public life. Jacques’ father couldn’t work as a doctor, and Isabelle’s mother couldn’t work as a lawyer.

Jacques listened to her attentively when she narrated her story. Her father, a member of the Jewish Council or Judenrat, told the family about the frightening meeting at the Kommandantur, with SS Colonel Walter Rauff, to be known later as the brutal and notorious killer involved in the development of death gas-vans. Rauff screamed at them: “Jew dogs! I have taken care of Jews in Poland and Russia. I’m going to show you!”^[1] So, Jews were rounded up on that rainy day of December 9, 1942 for forced labor.

Gilbert, a young cripple, couldn’t walk fast enough, and he was shot in cold blood by a German soldier. That was followed by the yellow star, the fines, and the deportation to the death camps. Isabelle, with some sadness in her voice, mentioned how her brother Robert was deported to Auschwitz but did come back.

Unfortunately, though, in Israel Isabelle’s story will be recorded differently than Jacques’ story. You see, Jacques lived in France, on the continent, and Isabelle lived in Tunisia, a French North African colony (map) (German Occupation of Europe). In Israel, Jacques’s story will be researched, documented and told at Yad Vashem. Israeli school children will learn about this unspeakable crime in a history unit on the Jews of Europe in the Holocaust. However, they will study Robert and Isabelle’s stories in a new and separate chapter, “The Jews of Tunisia under Nazi Occupation”.

The reason seems connected to definitions of YV. In the past, it appears that YV stated that “the Final solution plan aspired to destroy all the Jews of the world.” YV now defines the Final Solution as “the Nazis’ plan to solve the Jewish question by murdering all the Jews in Europe.” So, Robert, who didn’t die in Auschwitz, suffered as a “Jew of Tunisia under Nazi-occupation” and not in the Holocaust. YV appears to ignore the historical fact that France’s colony of Tunisia was considered a European country, as per a German document relevant to the Final Solution to the Jewish question.

More importantly, the author of a historical essay “Old Themes – New Archival Findings” writes about two German historians, Klaus-Michael Mallmann and Martin Cüppers, who uncovered new evidence in 2006. They found a document confirming that indeed the Final Solution was a master plan to kill all the Jews, wherever Hitler’s armies could catch them. After all, SS Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler did say that “Every Jew that we can lay our hands on is to be destroyed now during the war, without exception. …obliterate the biological basis of Jewry.’^[2]

Despite that fact, Isabelle’s story will also be told, but outside Yad Vashem.

A new Israeli one-man project was created outside YV, at the Ben-Zvi Institute for the Studies of Oriental Jewish Communities in the East (deals with history of Sephardim, “Hebrew name for Hispanic Jews; and in Israel, Sephardim are Jews whose origins were in North Africa, the Middle East and Asia;” they usually have dark skin). Its name is “The Center for Information Documentation and Research on North-African Jewry during WWII.” Interestingly, Gilbert, the young cripple who died in Tunisia “perished in the Shoah” (Holocaust in Hebrew), as per the Page of Testimony by Yad Vashem’s project to collect the names of all the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators.

In 2008, Israeli Jews from Tunisia won a lawsuit against the Israeli government and became “eligible for the same Israeli government stipends paid to survivors of the Holocaust of European Jewry.” (Haaretz).

And the historical evidence is very clear. At the infamous Wannsee Conference where Nazi leaders discussed “the preparation for the final solution of the Jewish question in Europe,” when they counted the Jews marked for slaughter, “the figure for ‘unoccupied France, 700,000′ … included the Sephardi Jews in France’s North African possessions, Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia.” (mainland France had only ‘about 300,000 Jews’). This fact is found on page 281 in The Holocaust: A History of the Jews of Europe During the Second World War, a book by Sir Martin Gilbert, a pre-eminent Holocaust historian. This title also shows that Gilbert considered the Jews of French North Africa as “Jews of Europe.”

In December 2009, Sir Martin Gilbert also issued a statement, “The Jews of North Africa in the Holocaust.” In it, Gilbert firmly declares that the story of the persecution of the Jews in French North Africa during World War II is part of the Holocaust in France, which extended its anti-Jewish legislation to its three North African colonies. This statement was issued for the occasion of the ceremony at Yad Vashem to mark the anniversary of the December 9, 1942 round-up of Tunisian Jews for Nazi forced labor.

The historians at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) also understand that according to an authentic historical perspective, Isabelle’s story is part of “The history of the Holocaust in France’s three North African colonies (Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia), [because] it is intrinsically tied to France’s fate during this period.” And unlike Yad Vashem, the USHMM defines the Final Solution as the Nazi “plan to annihilate the Jewish people,” and not to murder the Jews in Europe.

It now looks like Israeli Holocaust scholars and some in the Israeli public are considering the number of the victims. “A total of 2,575 Tunisian Jews died.”^[3]Ironically, though, Denmark with 60 is listed and Tunisia not among the countries in the Concise Encyclopedia of the Holocaust in the website of Yad Vashem.

But, as per the revealing title of the book by Sir Martin Gilbert, the Holocaust was a Jewish tragedy. It took place in World War II, an international conflict. Therefore all the documents are connected and interrelated, and must be researched for education and information in one place.

One cannot separate the stories of the victims, Jacques and Isabelle.

There was one Jewish question, one Jewish problem, and one Final Solution.

There was one Hitler’s war against the Jews. And there was one Holocaust. It is about one story of one master plan and one war against the Jews. It is one chapter in the history of the Jewish people, where all Jews were persecuted by the same perpetrators, and shared the same fate for the same racial ideological reason — because they were Jews.

Consequently, there should be one history unit called “The Holocaust.” And there should be one Israeli resource center and world center for documentation, research, and education about the Holocaust, Yad Vashem.

Yad Vashem is and should remain the unique authentic voice of the Holocaust, as Israel’s only official resource center and the world center for the study of the Holocaust. Its entire mission depends on accurately researching, interpreting, and disseminating all the facts about the Holocaust. The goal is to guarantee that the history researched, documented, and taught only at YV is historically authentic by being fully inclusive and not selective. There shouldn’t be the appearance of manipulating Holocaust history and definitions to deny the realities about North African Jewish victims of the Holocaust.

Every year, thousands of scholars and students come from all over the world to Yad Vashem, to learn all the true facts about the Holocaust.

Truth and accuracy are vital when researching and informing about this tragic event.

“All Jews were victims,” correctly declared Nobel Laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel. Ahdut am, ahdut goral— one people, one destiny, one center: Yad Vashem.

YV will also, truthfully, be fulfilling its mission statement: “As the Jewish people’s living memorial to the Holocaust, Yad Vashem safeguards the memory of the past and imparts its meaning for future generations … maintaining an authentic voice …[which] paves the way for a better future.” And to do that requires maintaining an authentic historical perspective and researching and recording all the facts in one center: Yad Vashem.

^[1]Borgel R., Etoile Jaune et Croix Gammee (Yellow Star and Swastika), Tunis 1944:49

^[2] Commandant of Auschwitz : The Autobiography of Rudolf Hoess

^[3]Haham Dr. Solomon Gaon and Dr. M. Mitchell Serels, ed., Del Fuego: Sephardim and the Holocaust. Sepher-Hermon Press, Inc. New York, 5755-1995. p. 149.

Edith Shaked is a Lecturer who taught at universities in France and the US. She is retired and works as adjunct faculty teaching a course on the Holocaust at Pima Community College, Tucson, AZ. She is a second generation Holocaust survivor. Contact: edith.shaked@gmail.com

Articles written by Guest Author
Tags: Final Solution, Holocaust, Israel, survivors, Tunisia, USHMM, Yad Vashem
Categories: History, Politics | Comments (33) | Home

33 Responses to “Israel and the Holocaust”

Tom | February 4th, 2010 at 3:33 pm

This is an excellent article — thanks for contributing it to Opinion Forum.

I’ve long been aware of the fact that Jews in North Africa, and anywhere else the Germans could extend their reach, were at risk in the Holocaust. I had also assumed that definitions of the Holocaust weren’t limited by geography. To artificially place North African Jews in a separate category of victims truly does diminish the significance of their suffering and deaths, and that shouldn’t be allowed to happen.

Dina | February 6th, 2010 at 3:28 pm

Undeserved arrogance combined with elitist racism, undeserved contempt “justifying” exclusion are contemptible when expressed between different peoples. It is horrifically shameful when the combination is routinely (!) exercised Jew to Jew–and in our Homeland.

Bob Nelson | February 7th, 2010 at 12:33 am

Remarkable. Thank you.

Brian Bagent | February 7th, 2010 at 12:38 pm

The most important lesson to take from the holocaust is not what happened to the Jews, that though that is certainly a horrific thing. Do not forget that along with the 6 million or so Jews, there were about 6 million other people put to death in the concentration camps – Christians, Gypsies, the disabled, etc. This is what can come of a too-powerful government, and that is the lesson that should be driven home with a 20 pound sledge hammer.

Tom | February 7th, 2010 at 1:18 pm

Brian, I understand your point about “a too-powerful government.” However, there’s a unique evil that characterized the Nazi regime (among a few others in history) that far transcends the fact that those regimes were very powerful. Just because a government becomes more powerful that one would wish is no indication whatsoever that it will engage in large-scale genocide or mass murder.

If there is a single most important lesson to take from the Holocaust, I think it would be that widespread mindless bigotry and ignorant prejudice, when institutionalized by a government, can have horrific results.

Edith Shaked | February 8th, 2010 at 9:10 am

Dear Dina,

Thank you for reading my article.
It seems that there is a disturbing issue, that the Israeli establishment and also Yad Vashem is dominated by non-African Jews, called Sephardim, Jews with dark skin.

It’s a fact, that from the 19th century to 1950s, Jews of French North Africa were considered European Jews.

Many French Jews in North Africa died as a French man in WWI, for his country, France.

Thank you again,
Edith Shaked

Edith Shaked | February 8th, 2010 at 9:12 am

Dear Bob,

I appreciate you taking the time reading my article and commenting on it.

Have a great day!
Edith

Edith Shaked | February 8th, 2010 at 9:21 am

Dear Brian,

I would like you to know that my students learn a special definition of the Holocaust:

Holocaust: It was a human and universal tragedy, where million of people were persecuted and murdered, because they were different and acted differently than the Nazi regime, and because the INDIFFERENCE of the bystanders – the sounds of silence in front of a racist dictatorship.

Jehovah’s Witnesses are the only Christian “Aryan” organized group to form a spiritual resistance, and were persecuted and sent to concentration camps.

Shoah: At the center of the Holocaust was the Shoah, Hebrew name for catastrophe. when 6 million Jews (out of the 12 million) died for one reason – being Jews.

I found out that there are different definitions of Holocaust,
Just google, Holocaust definition.

Thank you again Brian for reading my article and commenting on it.

Warm regards,
Edith

Lilli Hawkins | February 8th, 2010 at 9:45 am

What hogwash is this!

Historically, the Holocaust has only one issue and one beginning involving all Jews!

Lilli

Shanna | February 8th, 2010 at 10:23 am

Thank you very much for this very interesting and important article. This seemingly intentional misrepresentation of the Holocaust is shocking, but you have presented your arguments in a very balanced and well-researched way. I sincerely hope that it reaches an open-minded scholar at Yad Vashem who can further research and include the well-documented points you are making.

Brian Bagent | February 9th, 2010 at 9:34 am

Tom, the ONLY governments that can perpetrate these crimes are those with no limits on their power. Not all powerful governments have abused that power (yet), but there are NO limited governments where this sort of thing occurs. Limited governments aren’t perfect, which is kind of my point: the less power a government has, the less opportunity it has to destroy people.

Tom | February 9th, 2010 at 10:28 am

I completely agree with you, Brian. My personal preference is for the least government possible that can adequately deal with its legitimate functions. I realize that “legitimate functions” is often the issue, but in the world we live in, a simple, small government isn’t sufficient. We’re never going to have a small government with very limited powers in the U.S. What we should strive for is a government only as big and powerful as it has to be — and that is efficient and free of corruption. I know, I know…fat chance. But we haven’t done too badly so far.

I really do subscribe to the concept, “That government is best which governs least.” The disagreements center on what “least” means. (And, by the way, the quote comes from neither Jefferson nor Paine; it’s from an essay by Thoreau, and he paraphrased it from other sources.)

Eugene | February 9th, 2010 at 2:44 pm

It is a travesty to separate the Holocaust into two sections: Europe and the rest of the world. I did not know all of this; the Holocaust must cover all of people persecuted by Hilter, not only the people in Europe.
Gene

Daniel | February 9th, 2010 at 2:57 pm

Interesting and well told story.

About what actually? Not so much about the Holocaust as about its definition, and about the attitudes of Jews about Jews about the holocaust.

There is some superiority/inferiority relationship between Ashkenazim and Sephardim, and their sometimes split societies, e.g. in France. The reason might be that some “highly civilized” Ashkenazim are looking down on albeit “highly cultivated” Sephardim, who are not ‘blond and blue eyed’. How about WASP and Hispanos?

I believe Shaked is absolutely right: there is a principle. The Jews in French North Africa were subjected to the same Holocaust because they were Jews. Equal rights.

What’s next? Let’s first correct the Wikipedia story, and in particular expand it with the North African events, a map and figures.

PS: Referring to a prior comment above about Jews defending their country: very many German Jews died on the front in WWI. After 1933, many wanted to ‘remain German’ and serve their country, that is in the Nazi army. Not to forget, some declared Jewish WWI Heroes survived WWII untouched by the Nazis, in Germany, in their homes.

Jasper | February 9th, 2010 at 7:11 pm

A very interesting and well-sourced article. It is remarkable that an institute set-up to document one of the most egregious events of large-scale discrimination (and worse!) in history essentially discriminates the victims based on their country of origin. Thank you for calling that to our attention!

Esther Berlot | February 10th, 2010 at 12:47 pm

The question Who is a Jew still haunts us. Unfortunately a bureacracy that separated Oriental Jews and omitted them from sordid tales of our history is unfortunate. Hopefully Edith Shaked’s well researched article will persuade Yad Vasham to right a wrong for the 2,575 Tunesian Jews that perished.

Kathryn | February 11th, 2010 at 9:01 pm

Everyone is interested in the acuracy of historical facts, inclulding those presented by Edith Shaked, primarily because the dignity of the individual, regardless of origin, is unquestionable.

Gil Shapiro | February 12th, 2010 at 6:34 am

If Hitler had won the war I doubt today there would be any Jews left on this planet. There is no doubt that ALL Jews were in his sights. For historians to make artificial boundaries as to where the Holocaust took place is not only unfair but wrong. It depreciates the scope of the tragedy. Prof. Shaked should be commended for bringing this unacceptable historical bias to light. Those deemed officially responsible to accurately chronicle this most tragic episode must take that responsibility seriously. ALL Jews who were murdered by the Nazis were murdered as part of the Holocaust.

Tom | February 12th, 2010 at 7:08 am

Gil, I completely agree. Many people lose sight of the fact that if Hitler and the Nazis had not been defeated, they would indeed have killed every Jew they could have found anywhere in the world. It’s dangerous to ignore that fact because there are significant numbers of people in the world today who have the same goal. Their first target is Israel and the Jews who live there. Anyone who thinks that is the limit of their ambitions is seriously deluded.

Jan | February 13th, 2010 at 6:06 pm

Very important article that brings up issues that students of the Holocaust must consider. I will assign it to my class. Thank you for your scholarship and dedication, Edith!

Krista C. | February 14th, 2010 at 6:13 pm

I also agree with Gil. Hitler and the Nazis regime would not have stopped with the Jews in Europe. Had they won the war, I am positive that the Nazis would have sought and murdered all Jews and other “undesirables” anywhere their reach would take them. To try and distort history by claiming their goals were for the annihilation of only European Jews is an insult to the memory of every man, woman and child that died during the Holocaust. The hateful prejudice and bigotry was directed towards all Jews everywhere, not just in Europe. Shaked is correct in her arguments. It almost seems a moot point that Tunsia was technically considered Europe during those times. In the end, it does not matter. They were all targeted and made part of that Final Solution. All were murdered by the Nazis and all now share the same history in the Holocaust.

Jorge Garza | February 15th, 2010 at 2:52 pm

This is a great article. While it may seem like a small distinction, control of context and of how issues are reported on many times comes to separate what we call history. Within the separation between the two accounts there is a subtext of other kinds of prejudices and of a conscious decision to separate victims of the terrible happenings of the Holocaust. A more inclusive definition underlies the events teachings towards humanity instead of towards needless distinctions.

Sabrina Petty | February 15th, 2010 at 11:52 pm

This is a wonderful article, very informative. It is a subject that needs to be brought out in the open and discussed. I loved how you brought it all into focus: “There was one Jewish question, one Jewish problem and one Final Solution.” It was powerfully written and drove the message home. There was only one Holocaust and the victims should not be seperated. I hope your voice is heard.

Alisha | February 23rd, 2010 at 3:32 pm

I was very intrigued by this article. It had never occurred to me that only certain stories and partial facts were documented and researched at Yad Vashem based on where the atrocities took place. I assumed that if a Jewish person, or a person considered different by the Nazi’s were murdered, no matter where in the world they were, at least they were counted and learned about as a collective whole. If certain stories and facts are not to be collected with the majority by Yad Vashem based on geography, then the full facts of the Holocaust cannot be examined.

Michelle | February 28th, 2010 at 5:16 pm

This is a remarkable article, by Mrs Edith Shaked. She is to date one of the most extrodinary teacher, lecturer and writter on the holoaust. She gives the information with straight forward and hard hitting facts, she touches on topics that most people would be uncomfortable speaking about all the while doing it with such class and intellegince. She truely is a remarkable woman and a terrific educator.

Stan Nadel | March 7th, 2010 at 11:59 am

A very timely reminder of an important topic, we owe Ms. Shaked a debt for her efforts to bring this to our attention.

Edith Shaked | March 13th, 2010 at 10:38 am

Thank you again, all, for reading the article and taking the time to comment.

We all share the same values of believing in the importance of historical truth without prejudice and politicizing history of the Holocaust.

Edith Shaked, Holocaust educator,
in the pursuit of historical truth and historical justice for the Jews in the European possessions in North Africa IN the Holocaust

Alisa Golan | March 13th, 2010 at 11:22 pm

Edith, thank you for this eye opening article.

Here is another excellent article on the subject of The Tunisian Jews in the Holocaust.

http://isurvived.org/InTheNews/arab-righteous.html

Stefan | March 22nd, 2010 at 5:41 am

I take issue with Brian Bagent’s re-definition of the Holocaust to include the millions of non-Jewish victims of Nazism. It seems to be increasingly common to ‘lump together’ all the victims as if the commonality of death was enought to render them indistinguishable. I in no way wish to belittle the suffering of the many millions of non-Jews under the Nazis and their allies. However, the Holocaust was so-named to describe a peculiarly Jewish tragedy: no other ethno-religious group (except, perhaps, the Roma) was marked for eradication. The single-mindedness of European Fascism/Nazism to destroy the Jews and remove all traces of their culture (bar, perhaps, a museum here and there), coupled with the long history of antisemitism in Europe (and, to a lesser extent, in the Muslim world), renders the need for a name to be put to the Jewish experience between 1933-45. The barbarity experienced by others is not less abhorrent by not being part of ‘the Holocaust’ but future generations’ understanding of it – and of the Jews’ experience – will become confused by the blurred context. I fear that the extension of the Holocaust to include all victims of Nazi bigotry is a symptom of ‘political correctness’. Unfortunately, it also comes at a time when sinister forces of the Left and the Right are redoubling their efforts to belittle historic Jewish victimhood and vulnerability as part of their anti-Israel and historical revisionist agendas. It would be compounding the tragedy of the Holocaust were modern manifestations of antisemitism be bolstered in their efforts by well-meaning people.

Tom | March 22nd, 2010 at 7:43 am

I don’t think Brian was attempting to re-define the Holocaust; rather, he was making the point that too-powerful government must be guarded against because all kinds of abuses are possible.

The Holocaust was of particular significance because of the manner in which the Nazi regime undertook to eradicate Jews in any area they controlled and wherever they could find them. They also killed many other kinds of people wherever and however they could, which serves to underscore the bloody nature of the regime. However, there’s nothing in modern Western history and culture like the highly organized Nazi genocide directed against the Jews. As just one indicator, Jews were the vast majority of people who were murdered in the six specialized death camps run by the SS.

None of this is to diminish the tragedy of the deaths of non-combatants other than Jews murdered by the Nazis for various reasons. But the Nazi genocide against the Jews in the Holocaust was a unique evil in Western history, and it serves as a stark warning of what could happen again if we don’t remain vigilant. Unfortunately, in today’s environment in which many people know little about history and in which anti-Semitism is still present, the danger remains.

Brian Bagent | March 22nd, 2010 at 10:12 am

Stefan, Tom has it right. As the Rev. Niemoller pointed out, a danger to one of us is a danger to all of us. The particular danger of that era was both the NAZIs and the Marxists, opposite ends of the political spectrum I’m sure you’ll agree.

Lenin and Stalin probably murdered nearly as many Jews between 1917 and the mid-30s as Hitler did between 1933 and 1945. We are unlikely to ever know anything definitive, though. While the political philosophies of the NAZIs and communists were different, they both achieved their goals because they were governments without any real limits on their power. In fact, to even call them governments is quite a stretch, since they did not govern but ruled.

What happened to the Jews of Russia and Germany is abhorrent. But, what happened to them was a symptom of a much larger problem, not the problem itself.

Edith Shaked | March 24th, 2010 at 10:00 pm

Tom and Stefan are correct.

Yehuda Bauer, current academic advisor at Yad Vashem, prefers to use the word “unprecedent” rather than unique. Bauer lists some “factors that make the Holocaust unprecedented:

1. The totality of the Holocaust: The Nazis sought to murder all Jews. This effort to eliminate an entire people has not been found in other genocides prior to the Holocaust.

2. The universality of the Holocaust: The Nazis sought to murder Jews everywhere that German interests predominated. Since the Germans intended to extend their control throughout the world, they aimed at a global campaign to murder the Jews.

3. The non-pragmatic nature of National Socialist ideology: Nazism, in contrast to other ideologies of genocidal regimes, was not pragmatic. Even when an action did not serve the Nazis military or economic interests, they pursued a policy of murdering Jews. One graphic example, cited by Bauer, pertains to the thousands of Jewish armament workers in Berlin. At the height of the war when the Nazis needed skilled workers, they sent the Jewish workers to concentration camps. According to Bauer, pragmatic concerns have been prominent in other genocides, but the Nazis only offered pragmatic reasons for actions as a rationalization for what they had done. What came first and foremost was the advancement of Nazi ideals even if this course of action endangered the security and stability of the Reich

4. The centrality of race in the organization of the National Socialist state: The Nazi movement was based on the pseudoscience of raceology or eugenics. For the first time in history, Bauer stresses, the Nazis set out to create a society based on a racial hierarchy this was revolutionary. In fact, Bauer continues, National Socialism was the only real revolutionary movement of the twentieth century.”

Prof. Saul Friedlander agrees with number 4, stating: “National Socialism (Nazism) tried to determine who should and should not inhabit the world.”

Thank you for your very thoughtful comments,
Edith

Edith Shaked | April 7th, 2010 at 11:25 am

One reader wrote: “Undeserved arrogance combined with elitist racism, undeserved contempt “justifying” exclusion are contemptible”

See my relevant comments in a relevant article in the Los Angeles Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2010/03/museum-of-tolerance-premieres-film-about-arabs-who-rescued-jews-from-holocaust.html

“Dr. Satloff said that it was “inexplicable” and smacked “of a double standard”.

My students also complained that some of the definitions and the content at the website of Yad Vashem (YV) are wrong.

Indeed, evidence shows that YV has done so to justify stopping doing research on the Jews from Arab countries in the Holocaust. See my article at
http://opinion-forum.com/index/2010/02/israel-and-the-holocaust/#more-9843

And it is not as if YV has done much. As per Satloff’s book and per YV’s publications, YV has published only one scholarly book on Jews of Arab countries in the Shoah.

Satloff said that it was “inexplicable”, and I think it is discrimination, and political differences at YV. Relevant undisputable facts:

* YV at its website declares, that “The Nazis’ proclaimed goal was the eradication of European Jewry.” But, Yehuda Bauer, current Academic Advisor to YV, differs and stated outside YV, that “the Holocaust … was the intent of the Nazis to exterminate all Jews.

* YV tells about the Holocaust in France’s North African possession in the section on “North Africa and the Middle East” and not in “Western European Jewry.” However, Bauer again differs, and correctly write about it in “chapter 10: Western European Jewry” in his book, A History of the Holocaust.

It seems to me that all the excellent Holocaust scholars at YV are pretending to ignore the correct historical realities of the Holocaust era. The question is why? There are other questions.

Why did Tunisian-born Israelis persecuted in Nazi-occupied Tunisia, had to sue to “win compensation for Holocaust suffering”? (Israeli Newspaper Haaretz, of February 12, 2008.)

Why, since 1953, did YV publish only ONE research book and ONE educational booklet (The Jews of North Africa in the Holocaust) about the Holocaust in North Africa? Why are they both only in Hebrew?

Why are now research and education on North African Jewry in the Holocaust, “supported by Yad Vashem,” done outside YV? Why the different treatment with a new location and a separate budget?

Read more about the above in the DRAFT of a report at:
http://www.u.arizona.edu/~shaked/Yad-Vashem.pdf

Thank you for your kind attention,
Edith Shaked, Holocaust Educator