Author: Tim

Posted on

Auschwitz-Birkenau museum denies artist

The New York Times recently reported that a group of comic book legends — Neal Adams, Joe Kubert and Stan Lee – have teamed up to support Dina Gottliebova Babbitt’s claim to the artwork she painted which is currently held by the Auschwitz-Birkenau Memorial and Museum. During the Holocaust, Babbitt and her mother were transported to the death camp where her skills caught the attention of Dr. Josef Mengele.

By February 1944, Mrs. Babbitt had come to the attention of Mengele, who was dissatisfied with the photographs he had taken of the Gypsy, or Romany, prisoners in his effort to prove their genetic inferiority. He asked Mrs. Babbitt to paint their portraits to capture their skin tones better. She agreed, but only after insisting that her mother be spared from death. (The story reproduces five of the portraits.)

After liberation, Babbitt moved to the United States where she worked as an animator for various film studios. Strangely, the museum released a statement seven years ago concerning the sketchy provenance of the paintings, which arrived with no offer to return them to their original owner.

Auschwitz museum officials, in a statement issued in 2001, indicated that they had bought six of Mrs. Babbitt’s watercolors in 1963 from an Auschwitz survivor and acquired a seventh in 1977. In 1973 the museum asked her to verify her work but did not offer to return the items. The museum has argued that the artwork is important evidence of the Nazi genocide and part of the cultural heritage of the world. (The museum did not respond to telephone calls and an e-mail message requesting comment.)

The museum has claimed that returning the paintings to her might encourage other survivors to ask for their property which would cause a decrease in the number of artifacts on display. Piotr Cywinski, the museum’s director, went one step further in defending their position by stating that Babbitt wasn’t the rightful owner, but rather they belonged to Mengele. Such a claim is inherently contrary to the way in which museum’s (of any type) function; provenance, ownership, and credit has become the rule-of-the-day, and when those principles are questioned, objects are returned to their rightful owners.

Even as lawyers and reconciliation groups fight to get “looted” art returned to its rightful pre-war owners (or their heirs), it seems strange that a memorial museum would wind up on the opposite end of such a fight. Furthermore, the museum’s assertions have been both ridiculous and reckless, especially considering that the purpose of such institutions is to promote education of genocide through the lens of personal history and remembrance.

The comic (pdf version): Comics for a Cause

Posted on

Karadzic’s capture

Following closely on the heels of Rwandan genocidaire Callixte Mbarushimana’s arrest, and the announcement that Sudanese President al-Bashir could face an arrest warrant, is news of the capture of Radovan Karadzic. The former Bosnian Serb leader will face charges that include:

Eleven counts of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and other atrocities

Charged over shelling Sarajevo during the city’s siege, in which some 12,000 civilians died

Allegedly organised the massacre of up to 8,000 Bosniak men and youths in Srebrenica

Targeted Bosniak and Croat political leaders, intellectuals and professionals

Unlawfully deported and transferred civilians because of national or religious identity

Destroyed homes, businesses and sacred sites

These actions are being seen by some as the first positive signs that the international community is taking war crimes seriously. Even though it’s unlikely that al-Bashir will stand trial while in power, the arrests do provide a positive spin on what’s traditionally been a fairly murky and unsatisfying justice process.

Posted on

al-Bashir’s warrant fallout?

As the International Criminal Court continues to move towards a possible warrant for Sudan’s President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, analysts are worried that this may actually increase tensions in the region. The New York Times stated:

The indictment of a sitting head of state in a war-torn country would not be unprecedented: Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia and Charles Taylor of Liberia were both charged by international war crimes courts while in office.

But the complexity and fragility of Sudan’s multiple conflicts have led many diplomats, analysts and aid workers to worry that the Sudanese government could lash out at the prosecutor’s move by expelling Western diplomats and relief workers who provide aid to millions of people displaced by the fighting, provoking a vast crisis and shutting the door to vital diplomatic efforts to bring lasting peace.

The dueling objectives have exposed a growing tension: between justice and peace, that is, between the prosecution of war criminals and the compromises of diplomacy.

This might be an acceptable argument, if the outcome in Darfur might be swayed by a show of diplomacy. As situations stand now, the negotiations for peace have been all but ineffective with the Sudanese government, and the only compromises being made are to exerting real pressure on the current administration.

“I think it is absolutely imperative to go straight to the top,” said John Prendergast, a former Clinton administration official who co-founded Enough, a group that seeks to end genocide. He argued that concerted pressure by the international community had changed Sudan’s behavior at times.

Economic sanctions have traditionally motivated Khartoum, even when western diplomats have loathed recommending them. While it’s difficult to tell if issuing a warrant against al-Bashir would inflame or dampen the current crisis in Darfur, it’s equally difficult to make an argument against the relevance of such a move when viewed through the lens of creating a precedent to actively promote genocide intervention.

Posted on

Human Rights First G8 petition

HRF-G8-btn-125x125In two weeks, world leaders from G8 countries — U.S., Canada, Japan, the U.K., Germany, France, Italy, and Russia — meet for their annual Summit in Japan to debate action on issues of global concern.

If the violence in Darfur — that has left more than 300,000 people dead and caused more than 2 million to flee their homes — is not a matter of global concern, then what is?

The G8 Summit comes at a perilous time for both Darfur and the whole of Sudan. Intensified violence in Darfur has resulted in more death and displacement, and recent fighting in the Abyei region of Sudan suggests the unraveling of the fragile North/South peace agreement.

The government of Sudan and the world will be watching the G-8 Summit closely. Last week, over 40 non-governmental organizations, representing all G8 states and Sudan, sent an Open Letter to all G8 Leaders and Foreign Ministers, calling on them to demand:

    An immediate stop to violence in Darfur

    A halt to arms transfers, directly or indirectly, to Darfur in violation of the U.N. arms embargo

    Rapid deployment of the peacekeeping force in Darfur, UNAMID

    A reinvigorated peace process

    Justice and accountability for atrocities committed

Click here to join activists around the world in pressuring G-8 leaders to take a strong stand — include a promise to act — against violence in Darfur and Sudan.