.jpg)
Guenter Lewy (born 22 August 1923) is a German-born American author andpolitical scientist who is aprofessor emeritus of political science at theUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst. His works span several topics, but he is most often associated with his 1978 book on theVietnam War,America in Vietnam, and several controversial works that deal with the applicability of the termgenocide to various historical events, where Lewy denies both theRomani genocide and theArmenian genocide.
In 1939 he migrated fromGermany toPalestine. AfterWorld War II, he migrated to the United States to reunite with his parents. Lewy earned a BA atCity College in New York City and a MA and PhD atColumbia University. He has been on the faculties of Columbia University,Smith College, and theUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst. He currently lives inWashington, D.C., and was a frequent contributor toCommentary.
Lewy was born in Breslau, Germany, (nowWrocław, Poland) in 1923. At the age of nine he joined a German-Jewish scouts organization calledDie Greifen (lit. "thegriffins"), which he has suggested was important in shaping his desire for an academic career.[1] Described by Lewy as a "quasi-Romantic" group,Die Greifen emphasized music, literature, and song, particularlyLandsknechtlieder, encouraging the youths to avoid becoming "Spiessbürger" ("philistines").[1] By 1938, as persecution of Jews in Germany increased, Lewy began to lobby his family to leave Germany behind.[2] AfterKristallnacht, in November 1938, when his father was interned inBuchenwald for four months and he was beaten, his parents sent him toMandatory Palestine. Later in the war, when Lewy was of fighting age, he voluntarily took up arms against Germany, serving in theJewish Brigade.[3]
First published in 1964, Lewy'sThe Catholic Church and Nazi Germany has proven both controversial and influential.[4]Rolf Hochhuth's playThe Deputy had appeared only a year earlier, indicting the Vatican for failing to act to save the Jews during theHolocaust; amidst the Vatican's outrage with the play, Lewy's text continued in the same vein, "One is inclined to conclude that the Pope and his advisers—influenced by the long tradition of moderateanti-Semitism so widely accepted in Vatican circles—did not view the plight of the Jews with a real sense of urgency and moral outrage. For this assertion no documentation is possible, but it is a conclusion difficult to avoid."[5]
The text received much praise, including that ofAlfred Grosser, who characterized the text as a "terribly precise volume" which demonstrated that "all the documents show the Catholic Church cooperating with the Nazi regime".[6] The Vatican opted to answer the critical allegations by releasing aseries of documents aiming to refute the growing perception of the Vatican having been conniving in theHolocaust. One Jesuit priest answering Lewy's text on behalf of the Vatican suggested that Lewy's conclusions were based "not on the record but on a subjective conviction ... This ready acceptance of a Nazi-inspired wartime legend is a measure of Lewy's inability to plumb the motives ofPius XII ... There is no proof, in this book or anywhere else, that Pius XII thoughtNazism was a 'bulwark' in defense of Christianity."[5]
In the context of other historical works examining the legacy of the Vatican in the era of the Holocaust, Lewy's work has been described as "exceedingly harsh".[7]
Lewy had suggested that hisAmerica in Vietnam, published in 1978, would "clear away the cobwebs of mythology that inhibit the correct understanding of what went on—and what went wrong—in Vietnam."[8] The text, which argues against traditional or "orthodox" interpretations of the war as an unnecessary, unjust, and/or unwinnable war replete with disastrous mistakes and widespread American atrocities, has proven influential for many western scholars that share similar views of the conflict. It predated and influenced other reinterpretations including those ofNorman Podhoretz,[9]Mark Moyar, andMichael Lind.America in Vietnam thus attracted both criticism and support of Lewy for belonging to the "revisionist" school on Vietnam.[10][11][12] Lewy argues,
It is the reasoned conclusion of this study ... that the sense of guilt created by the Vietnam war in the minds of many Americans is not warranted and that the charges ofofficially, condoned illegal and grossly immoral conduct are without substance. Indeed, detailed examination of battlefield practices reveals that the loss civilian life in Vietnam was less great than in World War II and Korea and that concern with minimizing the ravages of the war was strong. To measure and compare the devastation and loss of human life caused by different war will be objectionable to those who repudiate or resort to military force as an instrument of foreign policy and may be construed as callousness. Yet as long as wars do take place at all it remains a moral duty to seek to reduce the agony caused by war, and the fulfillment of this obligation should not be disdained. I hope that this book may help demonstrate that moral convictions are not the exclusive possession of persons in conscience opposed to war, and that those who in certain circumstances accept the necessity and ethical justification of armed conflict also do care about human suffering.[13]
Lewy criticizes what he terms the "war crime industry", and what he perceives to be the double standards of the Western media, which, he alleged, neglected to report equally on the crimes of Vietnamese communists, giving the figure of 36,725 political assassinations perpetrated by theVC/NVA between 1957 and 1972.[14] About the crimes committed by American soldiers, Lewy asserts that "between January 1965 and March 1973, 201 Army personnel in Vietnam were convicted by court-martial of serious offenses against Vietnamese. During the period of March 1965 to August 1971, 77 Marines were convicted of serious crimes against Vietnamese."[15]
In recalling the1971 congressional testimony of some American veterans who were critical of the war, one of whom compared American action in Vietnam togenocide, Lewy suggests that some "witnesses sounded as if they had memorized North Vietnamese propaganda."[16] The book is critical ofdomestic opponents of American participation in the Vietnam War. In using the phrases "peace activists" or "peace demonstrations", Lewy often puts quotation marks around the word "peace", implying alternative motivations for the activism. The author alleges a possible connection between cases of sabotage in theNavy and the anti-war movement: "Between 1965 and 1970, the Navy experienced a growing number of cases of sabotage and arson on its ships, but no evidence could be found that antiwar activists had directly participated in a sabotage attempt on a Navy vessel. Cases offragging and avoidance of combat may well have been instigated at times by antiwar militants, though no hard evidence of organized subversion was ever discovered."[17]
The text was praised by Vietnam veteran and United States SenatorJim Webb, Andrew J. Pierre ofForeign Affairs,[18] and by several newspapers, includingThe Economist, which described it as "in many ways the best history of the war yet to appear".[19] Critics included historians of the "orthodox" school as well as polemical critics such as linguist and Vietnam War opponentNoam Chomsky.[20] Chomsky, after being singled out for criticism by Lewy in the book, wrote that "every state has its Guenter Lewys".[20] According to Chomsky, Lewy's "concept of the writing of moral-historical tracts ... is misrepresentation of documents, uncritical regurgitation of government claims, and dismissal of annoying facts that contradict them, and [his] concept of morality is such as to legitimate virtually any atrocity against civilians once the state has issued its commands."[21]
America in Vietnam, which appeared seven years after the Winter Soldier Investigation, became controversial in the context of the2004 United States presidential election. Presidential hopefulJohn Kerry had been involved with the Winter Soldier Investigation; in the context of the campaign, Lewy's suggestion that the Winter Soldier Investigation was dishonest and politically motivated was frequently cited to impugn John Kerry's reputation.[22]Vietnam Veterans Against the War, the group of which Kerry had been a part, alleged that American war policy and conduct in Vietnam was resulting in war crimes being committed. Lewy suggests that the group used "fake witnesses" in the Winter Soldier hearing in Detroit, and that its allegations were formally investigated.[16]
Government officials have said they have no record of any such Naval Investigative Service report, but that it is possible it could have been lost or destroyed. Lewy later said that he had actually seen the alleged report. "I don't think Lewy is interested in presenting any of [the Winter Soldier testimony] as truthful",University of Richmond history professor Ernest Bolt told theChicago Tribune. "He has an angle on the war as a whole." Bolt said it is impossible to tell whether Lewy fairly characterized the naval investigative report because no other historian had seen it.[23][24][25]
Lewy argues inThe Nazi Persecution of the Gypsies, published in 2000, that theGypsies' overall plight does "not constitute genocide within the meaning of the genocide convention".[26] Lewy concludes that in the case of the Nazi persecution of the Gypsies the "use of the term 'genocide' would seem to involve a dilution of the concept",[26] but that the question is not to determine if the Holocaust is the Nazi's worst crime; to refuse the "genocide" label is not, Lewy argues, a way to minimize the sufferings of Gypsies, Poles, Russians and other non-Jewish victims of Nazism. The introduction is devoted to the long history of violence against Gypsies before the Nazis took power, with a special focus on the laws adopted in Bavaria and some other German Länder at the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, showing the continuity between the last year of theWeimar Republic and the first years of Nazi regime. In a section entitled "Roots of Hostility", Lewy argues that the main reason of the persecution against Gypsies before 1933 was prejudice. Though Gypsies are not a violent people, he adds that prejudice is not always the single reason; the misbehavior of a minority among nomadic Gypsies contributed also to hostility and prejudices.[citation needed]
The book was praised bySaul Friedländer, who called it "a work of great compassion and exemplary scholarship".[27] According to Holocaust historianRaul Hilberg, "Lewy's account of Nazi measures against the powerless Gypsies is unsurpassed in the English language." Henriette Asséo, lecturer at theSchool for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences, specialist of Gypsy history, wrote that Lewy's book "requires humility, giving a new, considerable documentation", adding, however, that the rejection of "genocide" label can be "discussed"[28]Hans Mommsen agreed completely with Lewy, including with the rejection of "genocide" qualification.[29] Peter Black states that "this book is a well-documented history of Nazi persecution of the German and Austrian Gypsies. Yet Lewy wastes considerable intellectual energy in demonstrating that the totality of the disaster that befell the Gypsies cannot be compared to the Jewish Holocaust. This leads him to a few questionable conclusions."[30]
The book was criticized byNorman G. Finkelstein who wrote in theSüddeutsche Zeitung:
Lewy's argument goes like this: Gypsies were as ruthlessly slaughtered by theEinsatzgruppen as the Jews, but only because they were suspected of spying; Gypsies were deported toAuschwitz like the Jews, but only "to get rid of them, not to kill them;" Gypsies were gassed atChelmno like the Jews, but only because they had contracted typhus; most of the few remaining Gypsies were sterilized like the Jews, not however to prevent their propagation but only to "prevent contamination of 'German blood.'"[31]
The book has also been singled out for criticism, particularly by Romani scholars, who believe that it blames the Roma people for their own massacre.[32] Lewy's work has been criticized for being "one-sided"[33] and as a text which "overstates" the differences of the persecution of Jews and the persecution of Roma in the Nazi era,[34][35] in a manner indicative of "the priorities of latter-day scholarship, about the way that the murder of the Jews has been promoted to obscure so much of the rest of the Nazi record of atrocity".[36]
In September 2004, Lewy published an essay inCommentary entitled "Were American Indians the Victims of Genocide?": "[E]ven if some episodes can be considered genocidal—that is, tending toward genocide—they certainly do not justify condemning an entire society."[37] The paper is highly critical ofWard Churchill, particularly in regards to his attributing the word "genocide" to the destruction ofAmerican Indian civilization. Lewy dismissed as bogus Churchill's assertion that the United States Army intentionally spread smallpox among American Indiansby distributing infected blankets in 1837.[37][38]
Lewy's bookThe Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide was published in 2006 byUniversity of Utah Press after it was rejected by eleven publishers.[39][40] In the book, Lewy argues that there is insufficient evidence of theYoung Turk regime organizing the massacres of Armenians in theOttoman Empire.[41] In Lewy's view, they have not been proven to have been governmentally organized.[42] About the number of Armenian victims, Lewy argues that it "can only be estimated, because no death statistics for this period exist"; calculating the total losses of Ottoman Armenians between 1914 and 1919, Lewy uses the figure of 1,750,000 individuals for the pre-war population in the whole Ottoman Empire, figure used by historians likeCharles Dowsett andMalcolm E. Yapp, then estimate the number of survivors in 1919 to around 1,108,000, making an average of several estimations, including the tabulation of George Montgomery (American official in theParis Peace Conference in charge of Near East) and the figure of the Armenian National Council of Constantinople; so, Lewy estimates the total losses for World War I to around 642,000.[43]
Lewy's position that there is insufficient evidence to prove that the Armenians were victims of genocide is in contrast to the view of most historians and genocide scholars.[44] The reception of the book was negative overall, with several scholars criticizing the book for factual errors and cherry-picking sources to fit Lewy's thesis.[45][40][46] The sociologistTaner Akçam published a lengthy review of Lewy's work, criticizing hismethodology and lack of familiarity with the workings of the Ottoman state. He also faulted him for basing his arguments on questionable premises and making select use of sources which conform to his own views and conclusions.[47]
According toJoseph Albert Kechichian, writing in theInternational Journal of Middle East Studies:
Lewy has been amply rewarded by Turkish authorities in Ankara and abroad through the launching of a massive campaign to distribute his book free of charge to libraries and to select groups of diplomats. Equally noteworthy, Lewy has been decorated at a special ceremony in Ankara with, ironically, the İnsanlığa Karşı İşlenen Suçlar Yüksek Ödülü (High Award for Fighting in Opposition to Crimes Against Humanity) ... [by] a well-known organization whose mission includes the systematic denial of the Armenian genocide through propagandistic and partisan research and publications; the organization is sponsored and underwritten by the Turkish government.[48]
Some scholars consider Lewy's book to representArmenian genocide denial, indeed to be one of "the key texts of modern denial".[49][40][39] HistorianA. Dirk Moses states that Lewy attributescollective guilt to all Armenians for the military actions of some. "Thecollective guilt accusation is unacceptable in scholarship, let alone in normal discourse and is, I think, one of the key ingredients in genocidal thinking."[50]
According to Mark Potok, editor of theIntelligence Report journal ofSouthern Poverty Law Center,[51] the facts of the Armenian genocide are quite well known. The ruling party of the day massacred intellectuals, forced hundreds of thousands of Armenians into what amounted to death marches, and systematically despoiled the victims of their property. ProfessorRaphael Lemkin coined the word "genocide" in 1943 with the Armenian slaughter in mind. In 2005, theInternational Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) wrote the Turkish foreign minister to remind him that the massacre of Christian Armenians was indeed "a systematic genocide".[52]
On 17 November 2008 Lewy filed a defamation suit against the Southern Poverty Law Center, Inc., and writer-editor David Holthouse in theUnited States District Court for the District of Columbia.[53] On 28 September 2010 the case was settled when the SPLC agreed to publish a retraction and apologize to Lewy for suggesting that he was "a Turkish agent".[54] In its statement, the SPLC stated that it had erred in assuming that "any scholar who challenges the Armenian genocide narrative necessarily has been financially compromised by the government of Turkey."[54] The settlement with Lewy included an undisclosed monetary payment.[54] Lewy's counsel in the case,David Salzman andBruce Fein, lead theTurkish Coalition of America's Turkish American Legal Defense Fund.[54]
Multiple historians have accused Lewy of having an agenda in his scholarship, to emphasize theuniqueness of the Holocaust and discredit other claims of genocide regardless of the evidence.[55][56]David B. MacDonald states that Lewy "seems unwilling to allow any other genocide to compete with the Holocaust".[57] In theJournal of Genocide Research,David Stannard called Lewy "one of the last of a disappearing breed: the extreme 'uniqueness' advocate determined to assert—in the face of contrary and increasingly overwhelming fact and logic—that, of all the mass killings that have ever occurred in the history of the world, only the Holocaust ... rose to the level of true 'genocide.'"[58]
Lewy responded, stating that he believed theCambodian genocide andRwandan genocide were genocides, and adding: "WithYehuda Bauer I would call the Holocaust unprecedented but not unique, because the term unique suggests that something like the Holocaust can never happen again."[59]
The majority of the postpublication reviews of Lewy's work have identified obvious and egregious errors of fact, interpretation, and omission most of which presumably would have been caught had the text been carefully scrutinized by competent and nonpartisan readers.
This is a telling slip; Lewy is talking about 'the Armenians' as if the defenceless women and children who comprised the deportation columns were vicariously responsible for Armenian rebels in other parts of the country. Thecollective guilt accusation is unacceptable in scholarship, let alone in normal discourse and is, I think, one of the key ingredients in genocidal thinking. It fails to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, on which international humanitarian law has been insisting for over a hundred years now.
