"SET HISTORY FREE FROM POLITICAL DISTORTIONS" SAYS COMMISSIONER HAMMARBERG

NOYAN TAPAN
MARCH 23, 2010
STRASBURG

"Historical controversies should not hold human rights
hostage. One-sided interpretations or distortions of historical events
have sometimes led to discrimination of minorities, xenophobia and
renewal of conflict. It is crucial to establish an honest search for
the truth",- said Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights,
in his latest Viewpoint published on 22 March.

According to him, "Gross human rights violations in the past continue
to affect relations in today’s Europe. In some cases the right lessons
have been learned; genuine knowledge of history has facilitated
understanding, tolerance and trust between individuals and peoples.

However, some serious atrocities are denied or trivialised, which has
created new tensions. There are also cases where violations in the
past have been exploited in chauvinistic propaganda, causing division
and hatred. Bogus interpretations of history have in fact been used
to justify discrimination, racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia.

There is an understandable urge among all peoples to seek pride in
their own history. Or to focus on previous misdeeds by other peoples.

This tendency is often more dominant in situations of crisis or when
national identity is uncertain or questioned. Experience shows that
strong nationalistic feelings tend to limit the space for an honest
analysis of what one’s forefathers or their neighbours may have done
in the past.

Coming to terms with history is always essential, but particularly
crucial in cases of massive atrocities and human rights violations.

Such crimes cannot be ignored without severe consequences. Prolonged
impunity or lack of acknowledgment over several generations tends
to create bitterness among those who identify themselves with the
victims, which in turn can poison relations between people who were
not even born when the events in question took place.

The former colonial powers in Europe have been reluctant – even long
afterwards – to recognise the full extent of the damage caused by the
ruthless exploitation of human beings and natural resources in Asia,
Africa and Latin America. They strongly opposed an original proposal
at the World Conference against Racism in Durban 2001 that the outcome
document should refer to these historic facts – which resulted in a
bleak compromise formulation. This was rightly criticised.

The Nazi crimes and in particular the Holocaust were denied,
trivialised or ignored by many when the killings were going on.

Afterwards, every sane person has had to recognise this monumental
crime against humanity – which also made the world community adopt the
concept of genocide and an international convention for the prevention
and punishment of such crimes in the future.

It has to be recognised that post-war Germany has made enormous
efforts to expose the Nazi crimes, to compensate surviving victims,
to punish perpetrators when possible and to educate future generations
about the horrors committed in the name of their forefathers. All this
has been absolutely necessary, nothing less would have been acceptable.

Authorities in some other countries have been less open about
co-operation with the Nazis in the executions of Jews which were
committed on their soil. The mass killings of Roma have not been given
sufficient attention, and compensation to survivors has been late
and minimal. The murders of homosexuals and the medical experiments
on and killings of persons with disabilities have also tended to be
pushed aside.

Crimes in the Soviet Union were exposed, not least by the powerful
writings of Alexander Solzhenitsyn. The glasnost during Mikhail
Gorbachev opened the doors for further revelations; Andrei Sakharov
and the organisation "Memorial" contributed massively to revealing
the truth. Still, the full scale of the Stalinist repression seems
not to be recognised by everyone in Russia. The initiated review of
history education in schools should address this problem.

The recent discussion in some European countries about the role of the
Soviet army during World War II was not appreciated in the Russian
Federation. There was a feeling that the sacrifices during what the
Russians call "the Great Patriotic War" were disregarded and – even
worse – that their contribution to fight against Nazism was compared
with the brutalities of Hitler’s army. The exchanges illustrated the
need to make the necessary distinctions when history is discussed –
in this case between Stalin’s dictatorial policy and the efforts by
soldiers and civilians from the same country to defend their nation
and combat Nazism.

Even more controversial has been – and is – the very description of the
enforced mass displacement, the ensuing deaths as well as the outright
killings of ethnic Armenians in 1915 under the Ottoman Empire. Even
though this happened before the creation of the new Turkish republic,
there has been unwillingness there to discuss these crimes. Writers
and journalists who raised the issue were brought to trial. Now,
the first steps towards recognising the facts have at long last been
taken – through academic discussions – but more needs to be done.

One group of people whose history has been grossly neglected in
Europe is the Roma. Not only have the Nazi crimes against them been
largely ignored, the accounts of the brutal repression or systematic
discrimination of them before and after this period in several European
countries have not been recognised. Official apologies have been slow
to come, if at all.

In the Balkans, the different versions of historic events – some of
them going back several hundred years – became a distinct factor in
the conflicts during the 1990s and severely undermined international
peace efforts. During the war new atrocities were committed,
the scope and even the existence of which became disputed. Human
rights organisations all over the former Yugoslavia are asking for a
regional truth commission – which would be an important initiative
to avoid distortions of history becoming the cause of new tensions
in the future.

Not only in the Balkans but also in other previous conflict zones,
there could be more than one single historical narrative to be
discovered. They can all be truthful – though seen from different
perspectives and with emphasis on different aspects. It could be
of paramount importance that different groupings in the community
become aware of such diversity of historical accounts – and accept
that there are differences even when the basic facts are established.

One example of a constructive project to create understanding of this
kind was initiated in Northern Ireland. A dialogue was organised
with the purpose of encouraging the different sides to recognise
the legitimate version of the others. Judgments of the European
Court of Human Rights in relation to unsatisfactory investigations
into sectarian killings in Northern Ireland played a part in this
historical reconstruction.

After the fall of the junta in Greece in 1974 trials were held to
establish accountability. Similar efforts in post-dictatorship Spain
and Portugal focused a lot on the activities of the secret services.

In the former Communist countries in Eastern Europe the so-called
lustration process was used as an instrument to address the past.

Establishing true accounts of previous human rights violations is
indeed essential for building the rule of law in all post-conflict
situations. In the immediate aftermath this is crucial to the efforts
to bring those responsible to justice, to compensate the victims and
to take actions to prevent the recurrence of these crimes.

To establish the truth is also important in a longer-term perspective.

Those killed were human beings, not numbers. Individual survivors
as well as the children and grandchildren of the victims have the
right to know and to grieve in dignity. The possibility to remember
and commemorate must be protected.

Society as a whole must learn from what happened and therefore
continue to document the events, to establish museums and memorial
sites and to give the next generation a chance to understand through
proper education.

The Council of Europe has extensive experience in fostering
multi-perspective history teaching through the provision of interactive
teaching materials and bilateral cooperation. It has developed teaching
kits for key events of the 20th Century and the European dimension of
history. Women’s history has been part of these endeavours. Currently
new materials are being prepared for the portrayal of "the other"
in history teaching to ensure a diversity of perspectives.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Council of Europe coordinated the
preparation of Common Guidelines which led to the drafting of new
history and geography textbooks as well as teaching manuals. Teachers
have taken an active part in the process and demonstrated enthusiasm
about learning multi-perspectivity and new interactive teaching styles.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has also
highlighted the role of history teaching for reconciliation in
post-conflict situations. It has stressed the need to deal with
controversial questions in history teaching without resorting
to a politically expedient approach of representing one single
interpretation of events. It noted that there is now international
acceptance that there may be many views and interpretations – all
based on evidence.

Historical controversies should not hold human rights hostage.

One-sided interpretations or distortions of historical events should
not be allowed to lead to discrimination of minorities, xenophobia
and renewal of conflict. New generations should not be blamed for
what some of their forefathers did.

What is important is an honest search for the truth and a sober,
facts-based discussion about the different versions. Only then can
the right lessons be learned".