The International Holocaust Remembrance Day, observed annually on 27 January, commemorates the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau in 1945 and serves as the primary global day of Holocaust remembrance, as designated by the United Nations in 2005. The day provides a unified date for nations worldwide to educate about the Holocaust and develop programmes to prevent genocide.
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), an intergovernmental organisation of 35 member countries, works throughout the year to promote Holocaust education and combat antisemitism, with its working definition of antisemitism now widely adopted by governments and institutions globally. Germany and Israel are prominent members of this distinguished club, but they are joined by over 30 other nations.
This diverse group includes countries with varying political stances such as those considered pro-Israel and pro-Palestine. It encompasses a range of cultural and religious backgrounds, including numerous Christian and post-Christian nations, as well as Muslim-majority countries such as Bosnia and Herzegovina. Kosovo appears set to become another Muslim-majority nation to adopt the IHRA framework. The Kosovo Parliament has already endorsed the alliance’s working definition of antisemitism.
The unique nature of Holocaust and its legacy
The Holocaust stands as a unique event in human history, distinguished by several key factors. Firstly, it transpired amid an absence of pre-existing national or ethnic conflict between Jews and Germans. Many Jews considered themselves loyal German citizens, eager to serve their nation, as evidenced by their disproportionate volunteerism in the German military during World War I.
Secondly, the Holocaust was characterised by its systematic and industrialised nature, with the Nazis implementing quotas for the daily extermination of Jews in gas chambers, transforming mass murder into an efficient, bureaucratic process.
Thirdly, the genocide was deeply rooted in a warped scientific and ideological framework. The Nazis, driven by a fanatical belief in racial purity, twisted scientific concepts to justify their monstrous acts, convinced that their actions were based on a scientifically validated hierarchy of races.
The Jewish Holocaust significantly shaped post-1945 perceptions of democracy, extending its understanding beyond mere parliamentary elections to encompass the protection of minority rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 was a direct response to the atrocities of World War II.
Also read: Indians find no shame in Hitler. Bawaal is newest to ‘have fun’ with Nazi references
India’s historical context and the IHRA
India is not a member of the IHRA, which is regrettable. The nation has a distinguished history where Jewish communities have lived in harmony alongside the Hindu majority and the Muslim minority. Indeed, before the Portuguese conquest of Goa in the 16th century, which saw the Catholic Inquisition eliminate many Jewish settlements, India was largely unacquainted with antisemitism. Beyond mere rhetoric and cursory acknowledgements, India has not sufficiently contributed to scholarly knowledge regarding its record of tolerance towards Jews and other minorities.
Moreover, it is evident that joining the IHRA would grant India access to an extensive array of academic resources and educational materials on the Holocaust. These could be thoughtfully incorporated into India’s educational programmes, promoting a comprehensive understanding among future generations of the perils of racism, antisemitism, and other forms of prejudice.
Misuse of ‘genocide’ in contemporary discourse
However, while the Holocaust possesses unique characteristics, its profound lessons transcend the specific circumstances of Jewish history and the threat of antisemitism. The principles of human dignity, the dangers of unchecked state power, and the importance of vigilance against prejudice and discrimination remain universally relevant.
The IHRA’s working definition of antisemitism merits India’s consideration. Subsequent to the significant acclaim of the film The Kashmir Files, I conducted an interview with the film’s actress and producer, Pallavi Joshi, for a Hebrew publication. In our discussion, she made frequent reference to the term ‘genocide’ with respect to the situation in Kashmir. When I sought clarification on her use of ‘genocide’ to describe the injustices against the Kashmiri Pandits, she said that there existed an orchestrated and systematic effort to eradicate an entire ethnic group, contending that the displacement of the Kashmiri Pandits met various criteria for genocide.
It wouldn’t surprise anyone that the term ‘genocide’ has been used in the context of Kashmir, often from the opposite perspective. Mozammel Haque, a Research Scholar at the Muslim World League in Saudi Arabia, made such claims as early as 1991. Similarly, Binish Ahmed from Toronto Metropolitan University echoed these sentiments thirty years later. I have heard this term used by Kashmiri separatists during my visits there. In a parallel regional narrative, some observers have attributed attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh under the interim government as “potential ethnic cleansing”, even as The Economist named Bangladesh its 2024 Country of the Year—a Rashomon-like tableau of competing interpretations.
Also read: Amnesty report says Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza
Double standards in addressing discrimination
Concerning Israel and Palestine’s dialogue of the deaf, allegations of genocide are voiced by both sides, yet there appears to be little interest in engaging in a substantive discussion to establish agreed-upon criteria for such claims. The overuse of terms such as ‘genocide’ and ‘ethnic cleansing’ highlights the urgent need for clearly defined distinctions between various forms of xenophobia.
In the case of anti-Semitism, one such IHRA definition is “applying double standards by demanding behaviour from Israel that is not expected or required of any other democratic nation.” This reflects a situation in which the typical Judeophobe recognises that overt anti-semitism is both illegal and socially unacceptable, and as a result, they criticise the Jewish state, Israel, by imposing standards that apply solely to it.
The delegitimisation of the 35-nation coalition, for those who uphold a double standard toward Jews and the state of Israel, can also support India’s fight against those who defame the country and its culture. A notable example of this is the issue of caste, which entered US politics in 2023, with California becoming the first American state to ban caste discrimination.
No one is claiming that the caste system or Indian society at large is without its faults. The crux of the matter is the inconsistency within the so-called ‘woke’ movement, which endeavours to discredit American Hindus on the basis of their high caste, while showing a complete lack of concern for the caste origins of American individuals from Pakistan, be they Ashraaf, Ajlaaf, or Arzaals. Likewise, they would never propose discrimination against a Sri Lankan from the Goyigama-Radala caste, nor do they address the profound caste-based discrimination endured by Dalits within the Catholic Church in South Asia.
Similar to their approach towards Jews, the aim appears to be to target specific communities they disapprove of, thus creating double standards that serve to validate their own prejudiced perspectives.
Challenging global perceptions of India
The fact that India ranks at the top of Pew’s Social Hostilities Index (SHI) is far more reflective of flaws in Pew’s methodology than of the actual state of sectarian and religious violence in India. One of the most striking aspects of India is the prominence of religious worship in the public sphere. The absurdity of India’s SHI ranking in 2020 (as just one example)—worse than neighbouring Pakistan and Afghanistan—highlights not only the mediocrity of the research but also suggests a questionable agenda behind such findings.
India’s potential membership in the IHRA represents a critical opportunity for the world’s largest democracy. By joining the IHRA, India would not only access comprehensive Holocaust educational resources but also reinforce its commitment to combating prejudice and double standards. Such a move would strengthen India’s global stance on minority rights and demonstrate its leadership in promoting a nuanced understanding of historical injustices and contemporary challenges.
Lev Aran is a former coordinator of the Israel-India Parliamentary Friendship League and an Israel-based freelance columnist and journalist. He tweets @LevAranlookeast. Views are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)
Sad as the holocaust was…have you heard of other tragedies like the bengal famine which killed over 3 million people due to starvation? Are the British vilified equally for it? Is the holocaust the only tragedy which should remain on our memories? Are tragedies on a white population more grief worthy than brown population? Instead of drumming up about the holocaust your whole life, please research about other such tragic events and be empathetic to all of them and raise awareness about all of them.