Photo: John Englart
The memory of the Holocaust today stands as one of the cornerstones of modern Jewish identity. This theme has always been present in the self-awareness of Soviet Jewry, despite the USSR authorities’ attempts to obscure the predominantly Jewish nature of this tragedy in public perception. At the same time, there have been efforts by external entities—often hostile to Jews and Israel—to appropriate this widely recognized and collectively internalized theme, using the Holocaust and other Jewish narratives for their own interests. Even more problematic is when such ideas are adopted by organizations that claim to represent the Jewish people. A glaring example of this strategy is the behavior of the so-called Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention (LIPG), established in 2021 in Pennsylvania. The institute, named after Raphael Lemkin—a Jewish jurist, Zionist, and the creator of the term “genocide”—exploits his name in its anti-Israel and antisemitic activities. It is evident that such distortions and appropriations of Jewish experience and memory require a decisive response from the international Jewish community to protect historical heritage from antisemitic manipulation.
The memory of the Holocaust is one of the foundational elements of contemporary Jewish identity. This topic was also a significant part of Soviet Jewry’s self-awareness, despite attempts by Soviet authorities to strip the tragedy of its predominantly Jewish character.[1] A recognized symbol of the Holocaust for Soviet Jewry—and simultaneously, thanks to the efforts of informal Jewish activists, a symbol of national revival—is Babi Yar in Kyiv. During the perestroika years and the subsequent post-Soviet decades, this element of Jewish identity was significantly strengthened through a large-scale memorial movement, which resulted in the establishment of extensive networks of museums, monuments, research centers, and periodicals dedicated to this theme.[2]
The introduction of the Holocaust as a unique example of barbaric and unjustifiable genocide, for which there is no statute of limitations, into international discourse is a major achievement of Jewish organizations, scholars, and human rights advocates. In most civilized countries, the Holocaust is officially recognized as an absolute crime that requires no additional evidence or “context,” and Holocaust denial is acknowledged as a form of antisemitism—in some cases punishable by law.
Examples of Appropriation of Jewish Narratives
This phenomenon, however, has another side: attempts by external entities, often hostile to Jews and Israel, to appropriate this widely recognized theme in order to sever its connection to Jewish identity and history and/or use the Holocaust and other Jewish narratives for their own purposes. The use of Holocaust symbols and themes in propaganda by various states is not new. However, in recent years, antisemitic and anti-Israel activities exploiting Jewish history and tragedy have reached unprecedented levels.
Examples of trivialization, appropriation, or distorted use of Holocaust narratives are not hard to find. For instance, a few years ago, newly elected Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez compared migrants attempting to enter the United States to victims of the European Jewish Holocaust. In response, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham advised her to “visit the Holocaust Museum in Washington” to “understand the difference.” In January 2022, Ontario congressman Warren Davidson compared mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations to the suffering of Jews under the Nazis.
Recently, Russian leaders have also made headlines in this regard. As noted by Alexander Friedman, they have reverted to the Soviet tradition of stigmatizing the Jewish state and invoking the “genocide of the peoples of the USSR” (“Russians are the new Jews”), effectively denying the uniqueness of the Holocaust.
In the fall of 2023, approximately 150 European rabbis signed an open letter to the Armenian president and prime minister, condemning inappropriate parallels between the Holocaust and the situation in Karabakh (an Armenian enclave formerly part of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region of Soviet Azerbaijan). They stated that such comparisons “diminish the horrific suffering of Holocaust victims and the entire Jewish people, who still experience profound pain from the greatest tragedy ever to befall a distinct group of people.”
The term “Nakba” (“catastrophe” in Arabic), used by Palestinian Arabs, leftist circles in Israel, and pro-Palestinian activists worldwide to describe the creation of the Jewish state in 1948—which was immediately attacked by the armies of five Arab countries—is one of the most outrageous examples of propaganda manipulation and historical distortion. According to renowned Israeli political scientist and intellectual Shlomo Avineri, comparing the Nakba to the catastrophe of European Jewry demonstrates “serious moral blindness.”
Following the October 7, 2023, terrorist aggression by Hamas against Israel and the subsequent launch of the IDF’s “Operation Iron Swords” in Gaza, anti-Israel and antisemitic manipulations of the Holocaust theme have escalated dramatically. Notably, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva caused global outrage in February 2024 when he accused Israel of “genocide” in Gaza and compared Israel’s actions to Adolf Hitler’s extermination of the Jewish people.
Even more problematic is when such narratives are adopted by organizations claiming to speak on behalf of the Jewish people. For instance, in early 2023, the Illinois Holocaust Museum published a statement supporting the self-proclaimed “Autonomous Republic of Artsakh” in Karabakh, demanding sanctions against Baku. Regardless of the merits of either side in this longstanding conflict, it is difficult to ignore the fact that a Holocaust museum addressing a regional post-Soviet conflict with questionable parallels to Jewish experience represents an exploitation of the Holocaust’s significance in an entirely foreign context. Unsurprisingly, following public outrage and appeals from prominent Jewish leaders, the statement was removed.
The Activities of the Lemkin Institute
The most egregious example of this strategy, however, is the behavior of the so-called Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention (LIPG), established in 2021 in Pennsylvania. The institute, named after Raphael Lemkin—a Jewish jurist, Zionist, and the originator of the term “genocide”—exploits his name for anti-Israel and antisemitic activities.
In practice, LIPG has actively promoted anti-Israel and pro-Hamas agendas since its founding. The institute publishes materials used as “evidence” to attack Israeli politicians and military personnel. These propaganda texts have little in common with scholarly or professional analysis. For example, in January 2023, LIPG published its “conceptual” article, “The Genocide Red Flag: Israel,” which alleged that Israel was planning “genocidal actions.” In July of the same year, the institute updated its previous warnings, focusing on rising violence in the West Bank and the expansion of Israeli settlements, which it claimed were indicators of potential genocide against Palestinians.
This activity escalated following the October 7, 2023, Hamas aggression on Israeli towns and villages in the Western Negev. Notably, the institute failed to issue a clear condemnation of the massacre of Israeli civilians carried out by radical Islamist terrorists. Instead, it issued successive statements accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza (December 2023), alleging that Israeli actions in the West Bank are part of a broader genocidal campaign (April 2024), and similar publications.
A new target soon emerged—this time in the form of Western media. While many Israelis, honest journalists, and analysts express frustration with the unbalanced pro-Palestinian coverage of events in Gaza, the LIPG has taken to criticizing these same media outlets for their “pro-Israel” portrayal of the Israeli Air Force’s “bombings” in Gaza. According to the institute, any attempts to present Israel’s actions as self-defense constitute an effort to conceal the “genocidal nature” of these military operations.
Exploiting Raphael Lemkin’s Name Against Israel
Moreover, LIPG actively supports figures such as Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Palestinian Territories, who is notorious for her anti-Israel statements. Responding to criticism from U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who deemed Albanese “unfit for her role” due to antisemitism, LIPG accused the ambassador of “participating in genocide.” Notably, the UN’s internal oversight services recently launched an investigation into Albanese over allegations of financial misconduct, including accepting funds from groups linked to Hamas.
LIPG’s longstanding and systematic anti-Israel activities are not confined to the Middle East. The institute maintains close ties with the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA), known for its aggressive anti-Israel and anti-Azerbaijani rhetoric. In 2023, 11 of LIPG’s 34 statements focused on the Nagorno-Karabakh situation, interpreting the Armenian population’s departure from territories internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan as “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing.”
At the same time, LIPG made no statements regarding the October 7 massacre of 1,200 Israelis or the displacement of nearly half a million residents of southern and northern Israel due to rocket attacks. According to Raphael Lemkin’s definition, genocide is “a coordinated plan of various actions aimed at the destruction of the essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.” This is precisely the goal openly pursued by Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, which regularly attack Israel using rockets and drones. Yet LIPG ignores these facts, advancing its selective and biased interpretation of genocide.
The exploitation of Raphael Lemkin’s name, anti-Israel propaganda, and disregard for historical truth reflect a deliberate strategy to undermine Jewish identity. This occurs without the consent of the Lemkin family, who are outraged by the misuse of his name for purposes diametrically opposed to his vision and intellectual legacy. The family is reportedly considering legal action or an official protest. However, this alone is insufficient. It is clear that such distortions and appropriations of Jewish experience and memory require a decisive response from the international Jewish community to protect historical heritage from antisemitic manipulation.
[1] Lokshin A. “Remember or Forget? The Soviet Regime and Society’s Attitude to the Holocaust,” in Remembering the Past for the Future: Jewish Identity and Collective Memory, edited by T. Karasova and E. Nosenko-Shtein. Moscow: IVRAN, 2014, pp. 75–100.
[2] Khanin V. (Z) and Bardach-Yalova E. “Historical Memory in the Postmodern Era: Experts on the Place of the Holocaust in Post-Soviet Jewish Self-Awareness,” in Issues in Holocaust Studies, Issue 7, 2018, pp. 18–32.
