Remembering the Past in Diasporic Spaces: Kurdish Reflections on Genocide Memorialization for Anfal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diasporas engage in a variety of practices and activities to commemorate past massacres and genocides that might have led to the formation of the diaspora in the first place. In this process, certain massacres can be constructed as the “chosen trauma” and consequently become a central element in commemoration practices and identity formation. In this paper, we discuss genocide memorialization in the context of the Iraqi Kurdish diaspora in Europe. We focus specifically on genocide memorialization of the Anfal Campaign (1986–1989) that was orchestrated by Saddam Hussein’s regime against the Kurdish population in Northern Iraq. We examine how collective remembering for Anfal takes place in the diasporic space, what diasporic articulations and representations of Anfal as the chosen trauma are produced in commemoration practices, and how these genocide memorialization processes differ from those in the homeland context. The article asks the following questions: How do Kurdish diaspora communities in Europe commemorate Anfal? How do diaspora narratives relate to collective memory and identity? What spatial and generational dynamics are at play in these processes?
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".