This workshop sought to comparatively address historical commissions in order to identify “lessons learned” that can inform future commissions. Drawing on examples from Central and Eastern Europe and North East Asia, the workshop examined various dimensions of historical commissions, including their mandates, resources, processes, and impact. It also examined key political questions, focusing on the relationship between historical commissions and national, ethnic, religious, political, and other identity groups. For example, how do relationships among identity groups influence the formation, operation, and impact of commissions? How do historical commissions influence these relationships?

March 12-13, 2010
International Affairs Building, Room 1512
420 West 118th St. at Amsterdam Ave

Hosted by the Columbia University Seminar on History, Redress, and Reconciliation, the Center for the Study of Human Rights, and the East Central European Center, Columbia University

Conference Video

Please note: Internet Explorer may have difficulty playing these videos. If you are using Explorer and have difficulty, please try a different browser.

Welcoming Remarks & Ukrainian and Polish Historical Commissions Present and Absent Victims: The Baltic States and Romania Germany: After Guilt North East Asia: Varieties of Denial and Recognition Lessons Learned: Perspectives on the Proposed Armenia-Turkey Commission & Concluding Remarks

Summary Agenda

View the detailed agenda or download the program for more information.

Friday, March 12, 2010

Welcoming Remarks
10:00 – 10:30

Elazar Barkan

Ukrainian and Polish Historical Commissions
10:30 – 12:30

Chaired by John Micgiel
Polish-Ukrainian Reconciliation: Traditional Views and the Roots of Reconciliation from World War II to the Late 1980s, Frank E. Sysyn
The Longest Reconciliation: Polish and Ukrainian Memories on Polish-Ukrainian Military Conflicts in the 20th Century, Yaroslav Hrytsak
Institute of National Remembrance: Polish Model of Dealing with the Totalitarian Past, Krzysztof Persak

Present and Absent Victims: The Baltic States and Romania
1:45 – 3:45

Chaired by Paige Arthur
The Baltic States and Russia: Bilateral Lessons from Unilateral Commissions, Vello Pettai
Aufarbeitung of the Holocaust in the Baltic States: Comparing Baltic History Commissions’ Impact on Jewish-Baltic Reconciliation, Eva-Clarita Pettai
The Wiesel and Tismaneanu Commission: Lessons for Turkish-Armenian Historical Commissions, Lavinia Stan

Germany: After Guilt
4:00 – 6:00

Chaired by Daniel Levy
Germans, Poles, and the Controversy about the “Museum Against ‘Vertreibung’”, Norman M. Naimark
Money, Memory, and Bureaucracy: The Foundation “Remembrance, Responsibility, and Future”, Constantin Goschler
Crimes of the Wehrmacht and the Galician Mystery: Commissions and Obfuscations, Omer Bartov

Saturday, March 13, 2010

North East Asia: Varieties of Denial and Recognition
9:15 – 11:15

Truth and Reconciliation within Korea: “Collaboration” and Colonialism, Charles Armstrong
A History That Opens to the Future: The First Common China-Japan-Korean History Teaching Guide, Soon-Won Park
Remembrance, Reconciliation and Reconstruction – China-Japan Joint History Research Project: Problems and Prospect, Q. Edward Wang
Why Commissions Fail: China and Japan, 2010, Carol Gluck

Lessons Learned: Perspectives on the Proposed Armenia-Turkey Commission
11:30 – 1:15

Chaired by Elazar Barkan
Armenian-Turkish Protocol and Dispute on an Historians Commission, Taner Akçam
Lessons from the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission and Their Applicability to the Protocols on Normalization and Recognition, David L. Phillips

Concluding Remarks
1:15 – 1:30

 

 ISHR ©2014

Historical Commissions: Comparative Perspectives

 
Admin Login




Loading
...

XISHR Search Results

Loading
...