London, 8-9 March 1999
Summary of the Meeting of the Working Group of the Task Force, 8-9 March 1999, in London
Meeting Opening
Jeremy Cresswell, Chairman (UK) welcomed all delegates on behalf of the Foreign Secretary, particularly those from France (observers), the Netherlands and Poland who were attending for the first time.
Review of Progress
Directory/survey of International Holocaust education: many errors in addresses, etc which had to be corrected; US Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) may make it available in other languages but believed it appropriate for member countries to provide translations.
Calendar of events difficult to find out what was happening in a number of countries. The USHMM was happy to be the central point for information.
A calendar of events' contact to be designated from each country delegation to make sure the relevant information is collected and transmitted. The formation of a sub committee with specialist input to carry forward the survey. A 'survey' contact to be designated from each country delegation to gather curricula and other educational information and send on to USHMM.
Archival Website Guidance
Those contributing countries/institutions who had not commented should be asked whether they needed any help in mounting their information on the website. The home page of the website would be redrafted to help people to access records by links and pointers, not by reproducing the information. The French 'observer' was tasked to pursue putting the 1995 Paris conference record on the website.
Holocaust Education Guidelines
In discussions it was agreed that this could be disseminated in a variety of ways, e.g. used as a discussion document at education conferences/ seminars etc; send with letters explaining our Liaison Projects concept send to museums/NGOs/Institutions for further distribution as they see fit send to ministries of Education. Chair to circulate the education guidelines to Task Force Members.
Annual Holocaust Educators' Conferences
There was unanimous support for Task Force "moral sponsorship" of the Yad Vashem conference in October 1999. The offer to other countries to host future conferences had been noted. There was no real conflict between the Yad Vashem conference and the Stockholm conference. Future requests for Task Force sponsorship will be treated on an ad hoc basis. Important that sponsorship not be devalued by sponsoring too many conferences/events or any of dubious quality.
Holocaust Remembrance Day
Mr. Smith (Beth Shalom, UK) opened the discussion by describing consideration of a British day. He noted that in Europe it was difficult to find a single date equally meaningful and appropriate to all. The overriding principle was that any such day should be a day not just of remembrance, but also of education. Mr. Cresswell (Chair, UK) said UK Government Ministers would be consulted soon on this.
In addition to calling on Governments for support, it was suggested that the Task Force also approach Parliaments, the Council of Europe and the European Parliament, as means of disseminating and supporting a Commemoration Day.
Each Task Force delegation should nominate an individual as a coordinator for this subject. Using the Stockholm Conference as a target for achieving progress could be a productive idea. Subject to the views of the Swedish Government, the Task Force could channel ideas to the Stockholm Conference.
Endowment Fund
Sweden supported the idea of an Endowment Fund and had provided a model agreement for the Fund on the assumption that the Fund would be headquartered in Stockholm. If the Task Force agreed, the Swedish government was prepared to launch the Fund.
- The fund should not compete for sources of finance with other Holocaust related institutions. Finance for the fund would have to come from governments and institutions that had nothing to do with these issues. The Task Force cannot function in the long term without funding of its own
- it need not be a huge amount of money.
- Any Fund should not be a fund for financing other institutions, and the administration to operate the fund should be financed by the host government not the fund itself.
- The bureaucracy for operating the fund would be small and lean. Funding could be shared between the host government and the Task Force Chair.
- The fund should be administered, at least at the start, by an existing organization with experience in Holocaust education. Details of what the fund can and cannot do are necessary before putting a structure in place. Some percentage of the fund could be used for administration, until the administration is finally established.
Creation of the fund could be announced at the Stockholm conference. Further discussion required on this subject including the likely size of the fund.
A new paper should be prepared bringing together the various ideas expressed by the Task Force with a view to discussing the idea further at the next working group meeting.
Professor Bauer and the Swedish delegation agreed to work on a new draft of the fund paper including more detail on objectives etc. It was recognized that difficulties on the institutionalization aspects of the fund concept need to be clarified and more details needed of what the fund will be used for and what it will not be used for must also be clear to tall Task Force members.
Field Missions/Liaison Projects
Mr. Freeman (US) said Field Missions should be a primary vehicle for Task Force outreach to other countries. The US redrafted Field Missions paper had borrowed considerably from Yad Vashem's original draft but had broadened the concept far beyond teacher training. He visualised a series of missions starting in summer 1999. Missions would be made up of ideally three member countries reflecting diplomatic and cultural ties with the country to be visited.
Missions should only visit countries that have invited them to do so. To date the Czech Republic has expressed an interest as have (informally) the Argentines.
Missions should form the heart of Task Force activities but should be developed further with a flexible approach.
Responsibility for organizing missions would rest with the Chair or the Chair can nominate a mission leader.
Essential that work in this field has already been done and what level of knowledge teachers have about the Holocaust in the proposed country.
Considerations When Developing Concept of Missions
- Teachers can be resentful of westerners parachuting in, conducting one workshop and then leaving
- Senior and Head Teachers should be involved. Junior teachers require their support
- NGOs are mostly still fledgling in Central and Eastern Europe. They want to see longer projects.
- Expect a certain amount of resistance from some education ministries Holocaust education is often seen as a priority.
- Education ministries also need to be lobbied by visiting mission.
- Teachers in cities tend to have some experience of Holocaust matters. Teachers in smaller towns do not.
- Each country is different and needs to be approached in a different way. Need to have a strategic plan for each mission. We must be responding to a request not imposing ourselves.
- In 1999 Task Force governments should fund their own mission members. In 2000, missions could be partly funded by the Endowment Fund, if set up by then.
- Prior assessment of countries, level of Holocaust education etc not necessarily costly or time consuming. The Task Force can use contacts in governments, NGO to NGO contacts and Embassies.
- Missions should be looking at longer term cooperation, integration with other Task Force activities and have more depth, i.e. cover remembrance and archival issues as well as education.
- The Task Force to consider establishing a point of contact in each country with a project to act as a longterm link between the Task Force and the country, and to be responsible for followup. Followup is essential for the missions to be effective.
- The Czech government had approached the Swedish "Living History Project" for a contribution to their Holocaust Phenomenon Conference in October. The Task Force could combine this conference with a field mission and use the Czech Republic offer as a pilot project.
- Must stress the partnership between the Task Force and the countries we visit.
- Still some confusion between the pedagogical and political aspects of the missions. Little clear detail of what government and NGO representatives will do. Need to slow down and work towards the Stockholm Conference as a showcase for the pilot project. What is done in 1999 can be viewed as an experiment.
- Not possible to send a mission to a country without host government's agreement even if invitation not from host government.
- Not necessary to go so slowly in realizing missions concept. One pilot project not enough this year. By Stockholm conference the Task Force should aim to have two missions under its belt to showcase. It would be a mistake to wait until the next meeting to try to achieve consensus.
- "Field missions" renamed several times during discussion in an attempt to better reflect their purpose. Variations included "outreach teams", "cooperation teams", "partnership teams". The final agreed name was "Task Force Liaison Projects"
- There was a feeling that we could not afford to make mistakes that we needed to get it right. To do this we might have to proceed more slowly.
- The UK in principle supported the concept of Liaison projects and that the Czech Republic would be a good pilot project. The UK looked forward to receiving the US redrafted paper, reflecting Task Force discussions, before commenting substantively. Other Task Force delegations were encouraged to send their comments on the paper directly to Mr. Cohen with a side copy to Mr. Cresswell.
- In a subsequent subgroup discussion it was agreed that Sweden would explore further with the Czechs the prospects for a mutually beneficial pilot project. Task Force members would be informed and invited to comment before any further commitments were made.
Stockholm Conference
The Swedish delegation introduced their concept paper on the Stockholm conference; they proposed to circulate a draft agenda by next meeting. Organizers would not expect to have high level politicians for the whole conference. This conference different to London and Washington conferences, less controversial addressing the question of politicians meeting experts. Possibly have a seminar on responsibilities of politicians.
Task Force members gave unanimous thanks to Sweden and Prime Minister Persson for this conference. Task Force governments should alert senior ministers to the conference. The Swedes would draw together the content of the conference but look to the Task Force for expertise.
Any Other Business
Mr. Cresswell (Chair, UK) noted there were no set rules on chairmanship. There was a general feeling that two further meetings should be held this year. In the light of informal discussions he suggested that the UK should retain the chair until the end of June, and hold a meeting in late June in London. Thereafter the chair would pass to Israel who would look to host a meeting at the time of the Educators' conference in Jerusalem in October. In the run up to the Stockholm conference the Chair would pass to Sweden. This was agreed.
In the absence of further expressions of interest in joining the Task Force Mr. Cresswell (Chair, UK) ondered whether there was actually a need to discuss the issue of Task Force expansion. Mr. Freeman (US) noted that the Task Force had reached a good size. He hoped that the French observer would convey the substance of the meeting back to Paris and that France would decide to become a full member soon.
Professor Bauer asked that the subject of Academic Centres should be placed on the agenda for the next meeting so a fuller discussion could take place. He would prepare a paper for the next meeting outlining the problems, but not suggesting solutions, for discussion. Briefly he explained that academic centres were needed for 2 main reasons. Firstly, these centres could conduct locally the necessary research, and secondly, they were needed to train the teachertrainers. Without these centres the efforts of the Task Force will not be successful.
