No Holds Barred: Elie Wiesel and Kagame of Rwanda discuss genocide
On this one point, I remain unsure, and continue to despise those monsters who would murder a child because of his nationality, religion, or race.
By SHMULEY BOTEACHelie wiesel 521(photo credit: Reuters)
There were several important news items that emerged from the historic discussion on genocide that our organization, This World: The Jewish Values Network, together with NYU Hillel, staged on Sunday night, 29 September, at Cooper Union’s Great Hall in New York City – the venue that brought Abraham Lincoln to national prominence in 1860 – before 1,000 people.The event – introduced by philanthropists Sheldon Adelson and Michael Steinhardt and which I moderated – was historic because it brought together the two biggest names in global genocide remembrance: Prof. Elie Wiesel, the living embodiment of the martyred six million of the Holocaust, and President Paul Kagame of Rwanda, the only man alive who can claim to have stopped a genocide; his RPF forces conquered Rwanda in 1994 and ended the slaughter that had taken the lives of nearly one million Tutsis.As to the discussion of whether president Franklin Roosevelt did enough to stop the murder of Europe’s Jews, Elie Wiesel came down firmly on the side of those who say he failed at this great moral responsibility. He deserves credit for defeating Hitler, Wiesel said, but as a someone who confronted a genocide and did not limit it, he deserves to be severely criticized.I then turned the question to Kagame, adjusted to the Rwandan genocide. Did he harbor anger toward the United States, a moral and righteous superpower that blew it completely in Rwanda, doing next to nothing to stop the genocide and, arguably, even obstructing the efforts of other nations to assist? No, the president said. We’re way past that.It’s not about anger but our conclusion that we alone can protect ourselves and can never rely on a fickle world for our defense. Rwandans can rely on Rwandans for their defense.I pointed out to the president that Israel came to the same conclusion about its defense in general, and is now pondering whether it will apply that principle by striking Iran alone, now that US President Barack Obama has decided to engage the Iranian president even as the latter continues to enrich uranium and fund Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists.I asked Elie Wiesel about Syria. Given the Bible’s commandment “not to stand idly by the blood of your neighbor,” did the United States have a moral obligation to punish Assad for gassing children, even if he surrenders his chemical arsenal? Wiesel was unequivocal: Both the American political and Jewish communal leadership had failed on Syria. Chemical gas was a trigger point for genocide and mass murder.The fact that Assad had paid no price for gassing children was a tremendous moral failure that had to be corrected, and the Jewish community should have been at the forefront of saying so.President Kagame echoed that sentiment.Those who use either chemical, or even conventional weapons to slaughter innocent people must be held accountable or nothing will check further aggression and murder.
Here were the world’s two leading voices on genocide being jointly critical of the American government’s decision to commute the military attack on Assad to simply destroying his arsenal. Even if he did so, he still had to pay a personal price for mass murder, they argued.MY CLOSE friend Rwandan Foreign Minister Louise Mushikiwabo had already announced, at a press conference we convened in October of last year, that Rwanda would be opening an embassy in Israel. I turned to the president and said to him that countries like Rwanda can understand Israel’s security situation in ways that few others could.The similarities between the two countries are striking: They are of similar size and both have terrorist enemies on their borders. Israel has Iran-funded Hezbollah and Hamas and Rwanda the FDLR in Eastern Congo. Both are regularly criticized unfairly by the UN. Both have had frictions with France which has at times assumed a curiously negative posture toward both countries. And, of course, both have experienced genocides of staggering proportions.In light of the unique relationship between the two countries, I asked the president would it not be proper for Rwanda to open its embassy not in Tel Aviv but in Jerusalem, becoming one of the first nations to affirm the holy city as Israel’s eternal and undivided capitol? The president was surprised by the question but answered graciously. Rwanda and Israel indeed share similar histories and security challenges, he said. He was very happy that they were increasing their bilateral relations with Rwanda opening an embassy in Israel, which he said was an important step in an evolving relationship.However, opening an embassy in Jerusalem would be too great a leap for now, he added. He and I both smiled at his response, the president knowing I had put him on the spot and I knowing he had artfully dodged the question.I turned to Professor Wiesel and told him that the full-page advertisements he took out in America’s major publications in March, 2010, mildly rebuking President Obama, with whom he is close, for his pressure on Israel to cease building in parts of Jerusalem, were widely credited with reversing the administration’s policy.Would he be consider taking out similar ads questioning the president’s decision to open diplomatic relations at the highest level of the Iranian leadership without first demanding that Iran cease funding Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists, or enriching uranium? Wiesel said that Iran’s Holocaust denial was dangerous and delusional, and that opening diplomatic relations with the Iranians before they had formally renounced their genocidal aspirations against the Jewish state was unacceptable.He would consider the ads, he said.AT LAST, I asked Professor Wiesel about a subject he and I had discussed many times. Why was it inappropriate to hate those who have committed genocide? Should we not despise the SS who murdered his family, or Hutu genocidaires who hacked children to death with machetes? Wiesel was adamant. Once you start hating, the emotion is internalized and you cannot control its spread and growth. It’s not long before it is directed even at those whom it is inappropriate to hate.I have been close to Wiesel for 25 years. He is my hero and teacher. But on this one point, I remain unsure, and continue to despise those monsters who would murder a child because of his nationality, religion, or race. “Never again” must mean just that.The author, “America’s Rabbi,” is the international best-selling author of 29 books and has just published The Fed-Up Man of Faith: Challenging God in the Face of Tragedy and Suffering. Follow him on Twitter @RabbiShmuley.
