Throughout history, the narratives surrounding violence and atrocities committed against specific populations often reveal a troubling pattern of double standards in acknowledgment and response.

Two prominent examples of such double standards can be observed when comparing the European massacres in Africa and the ongoing violence in Gaza, which many observers categorise as genocide.

The Western world has used biased language to categorise their own violence as uprisings while labelling others’ revolts as genocide.

For instance, the relocation of Armenian rebels during the First World War in Anatolia is termed genocide, whereas the Malagasy Massacres of 1947 in Madagascar and the Mau Mau Genocide of 1952 in Kenya are referred to as uprisings, normalising the violence in the public.

Similarly, this biased mentality applies to the massacres in Palestine today, which are often framed as the Palestine-Israel conflict in Western media.

The Armenian deportation has become integral to the identity of the Armenian diaspora in America, while the atrocities in Africa and the Palestinian struggle are frequently overshadowed by broader geopolitical discussions, minimising the violence experienced by these communities.

For political reasons, the Armenian deportation is often included in human rights education as genocide, while the brutalities of colonial rule in Africa and the ongoing Palestinian crisis receive limited attention, contributing to a narrow understanding of these issues.

During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, European powers engaged in the colonisation of Africa, often accompanied by brutal violence and systematic massacres.

Despite the enormous scale of these atrocities, there has historically been relative silence or minimisation of these events in mainstream European historical narratives.

Many European countries have yet to fully confront their colonial past, and the acknowledgment of the suffering inflicted upon African populations remains significantly less prioritised than historical grievances within Europe or against other regions.

For example, the concentration camps established during the Boer War against Afrikaners were clearly a planned effort for mass killing by the British but are not recognized as massacres.

In contrast, the situation in Gaza has garnered significant international attention, particularly concerning ongoing military actions against Palestinian civilians.

The violence in Gaza often elicits polarised reactions. Some governments, like South Africa and Türkiye, condemn the actions taken against Palestinians, emphasising human rights violations and calling for accountability.

However, others, like the US and UK, express support for Israel, framing the conflict within a narrative of self-defence.

Remember, America called Nelson Mandela terrorist till 2008. This two faces approach illustrates a stark contrast to the acknowledgment of European colonial genocides, where there is often less debate concerning accountability and historical wrongdoing.

The discrepancy in acknowledgment and historical framing reveals serious double standards. European genocides in Africa, despite their historical significance, often remain relegated to academic discussions or marginalised in public discourse.

In contrast, the terror in Gaza continues to provoke widespread media coverage and international political debate, yet it is not recognized as genocide, even after the killing of more than forty thousand innocent Palestinians in a year. Alas!

* Halim Gençoğlu is a historian with PhD from UCT and is a post-doctoral fellow at Wits University.

** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.

Cape Argus

Do you have something on your mind; or want to comment on the big stories of the day? We would love to hear from you. Please send your letters to arglet@inl.co.za.

All letters to be considered for publication, must contain full names, addresses and contact details (not for publication)