Tweet
GENOCIDE RESISTANCE: THE POSSESSION OF ARMS SAVED MANY ARMENIANS
By Dave Kopel & Paul Gallant, & Joanne D. Eisen
National Review Online Blogs, NY
Oct 16 2007
Whatever may be said about the U.S. House of Representatives committee
vote concerning the use of the term "genocide" in reference to
Turkey's atrocities against the Armenians during World War I,
two facts are indisputable: It was gun confiscation that made the
atrocities possible. And it was the possession of firearms that saved
many Armenians.
Under the Ottoman Empire, Armenians, who are mostly Christian, had not
been allowed to own firearms. This was standard practice for Christians
and Jews throughout the Empire, under sharia law for the "Dhimmi" -
Christians and Jews (and sometimes other faiths) who were allowed to
retain their religion, provided that they lived in subordination.
One feature of dhimmitude is a ban on the possession of any
weapons, and a prohibition from striking a Muslim, even in an act of
self-defense. Unsurprisingly, the Dhimmi were easy prey for thugs and
extortionists. For example, Armenian Christians in the 19th century
had to pay the Kurds not to attack their villages and pillage their
monasteries.
Military necessity led to a change in the Ottoman policy in 1908.
Armenian Christian soldiers would be permitted to train with weapons,
and by 1915, a significant number of Armenian men had done so. After
the Balkan War of 1912, many Armenian civilians bought firearms from
returning Turkish soldiers. Weapons and ammunition were secreted in
the walls of homes.
During World War I, in 1915, the Ottoman government decided to launch a
massive persecution of the Armenians. The current Turkish government,
along some scholars, denies that genocide was the intention, although
there is no doubt that many hundreds of thousands died.
U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau reported that the Ottoman Turks faced
an obstacle: "Before Armenia could be slaughtered, Armenia must be
made defenseless." Armenians were reluctant to disarm, given their
distrust of the Turks.
As a first step, Armenian soldiers in the Ottoman army were stripped
of their weapons. Beaten and clubbed, placed on short rations, and
sometimes murdered, they were used to dig fortifications and latrines
for the Turks. Soldiers fled and returned home, bringing stories of
the destruction of Armenian villages and towns, murders of priests,
and rapes of women.
Disarmament orders were sent to Armenian towns; however, Armenian
leaders would collect broken and useless weapons, and, with a bribe,
deliver them to Turkish leaders - while keeping the functioning
weapons for themselves.
As the persecution intensified, contemporaneous Armenian writings
lamented that if civilians taken a more pro-active approach sooner,
more Armenians would have survived. But initially, the Armenians had
felt their best chance for survival lay in keeping a low profile and
remaining passive. It was only after a long pattern of murders by
the Turks that they began to actively defend themselves.
The 5,000 townspeople of Shabin Karahissar, including 600 poorly
armed Armenian men, retreated to a nearby fort when 10,000 regular
and irregular Turkish army troops approached. The Armenians' guns
allowed them to keep the enemy at bay for 26 days. Although they
had sufficient water, they lacked adequate planning and eventually
starved. One survivor, Aram Haigaz, wrote: "Of the more than 5,000
who ascended the Fort, only 47 survived...."
Armed resistance movements also sprang up in Ourfa, in Shadakh,
and in the Pesan Valley. At Van, a group of 1,500 men with only 300
rifles fought off an army of 5,000 Turkish soldiers, and diverted the
attention of Turkish troops away from the Russian enemy. The defenders
at Van successfully held out for five weeks until they were rescued
by the Russian army. But shortly after, the Russian army made an
unexpected retreat, allowing the Turks to swoop in by surprise and
kill the 55,000 people of Van.
The best-known and most successful of resistance movement was
memorialized in the 1934 historical novel The Forty Days of Musa
Dagh. People from several villages retreated to the mountain whose
English name is "Moses Mountain." Provisioned with weapons and
supplies, the villagers held out on Musa Dagh for 53 days.
Pastor Tigran Andreasian listed the Armenian population of his native
region as 6,311. Of them, 4,231 persons chose to fight on the mountain,
while 2,080 people obeyed the deportation order of the Turks. When
the fighters were eventually rescued by the Allies, an amazing 4,200
survivors were taken to Port Said, Egypt.
As for those who accepted deportation, according to Vahram Shemmassian,
a scholar and descendant of one of the fighters, "the exact count
of casualties may never be determined, many families lost several
members and others perished completely."
Hitler reminded his generals that "nobody remembers the Armenians,"
and he worked assiduously to disarm his own genocide victims more
thoroughly than the Turks had done. When we do remember the Armenians,
let us remember that the difference between life and death was often
the possession of arms to resist mass murder by government.
David Kopel is research director for the Independence Institute. Paul
Gallant and Joanne D. Eisen are senior fellows at the Independence
Institute.
http://article.nationalre view.com/?q=N2M4YWQxZjJjZDZiZTM2MTc0NmFjMTMzMzRlNW RlMzk=
By Dave Kopel & Paul Gallant, & Joanne D. Eisen
National Review Online Blogs, NY
Oct 16 2007
Whatever may be said about the U.S. House of Representatives committee
vote concerning the use of the term "genocide" in reference to
Turkey's atrocities against the Armenians during World War I,
two facts are indisputable: It was gun confiscation that made the
atrocities possible. And it was the possession of firearms that saved
many Armenians.
Under the Ottoman Empire, Armenians, who are mostly Christian, had not
been allowed to own firearms. This was standard practice for Christians
and Jews throughout the Empire, under sharia law for the "Dhimmi" -
Christians and Jews (and sometimes other faiths) who were allowed to
retain their religion, provided that they lived in subordination.
One feature of dhimmitude is a ban on the possession of any
weapons, and a prohibition from striking a Muslim, even in an act of
self-defense. Unsurprisingly, the Dhimmi were easy prey for thugs and
extortionists. For example, Armenian Christians in the 19th century
had to pay the Kurds not to attack their villages and pillage their
monasteries.
Military necessity led to a change in the Ottoman policy in 1908.
Armenian Christian soldiers would be permitted to train with weapons,
and by 1915, a significant number of Armenian men had done so. After
the Balkan War of 1912, many Armenian civilians bought firearms from
returning Turkish soldiers. Weapons and ammunition were secreted in
the walls of homes.
During World War I, in 1915, the Ottoman government decided to launch a
massive persecution of the Armenians. The current Turkish government,
along some scholars, denies that genocide was the intention, although
there is no doubt that many hundreds of thousands died.
U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau reported that the Ottoman Turks faced
an obstacle: "Before Armenia could be slaughtered, Armenia must be
made defenseless." Armenians were reluctant to disarm, given their
distrust of the Turks.
As a first step, Armenian soldiers in the Ottoman army were stripped
of their weapons. Beaten and clubbed, placed on short rations, and
sometimes murdered, they were used to dig fortifications and latrines
for the Turks. Soldiers fled and returned home, bringing stories of
the destruction of Armenian villages and towns, murders of priests,
and rapes of women.
Disarmament orders were sent to Armenian towns; however, Armenian
leaders would collect broken and useless weapons, and, with a bribe,
deliver them to Turkish leaders - while keeping the functioning
weapons for themselves.
As the persecution intensified, contemporaneous Armenian writings
lamented that if civilians taken a more pro-active approach sooner,
more Armenians would have survived. But initially, the Armenians had
felt their best chance for survival lay in keeping a low profile and
remaining passive. It was only after a long pattern of murders by
the Turks that they began to actively defend themselves.
The 5,000 townspeople of Shabin Karahissar, including 600 poorly
armed Armenian men, retreated to a nearby fort when 10,000 regular
and irregular Turkish army troops approached. The Armenians' guns
allowed them to keep the enemy at bay for 26 days. Although they
had sufficient water, they lacked adequate planning and eventually
starved. One survivor, Aram Haigaz, wrote: "Of the more than 5,000
who ascended the Fort, only 47 survived...."
Armed resistance movements also sprang up in Ourfa, in Shadakh,
and in the Pesan Valley. At Van, a group of 1,500 men with only 300
rifles fought off an army of 5,000 Turkish soldiers, and diverted the
attention of Turkish troops away from the Russian enemy. The defenders
at Van successfully held out for five weeks until they were rescued
by the Russian army. But shortly after, the Russian army made an
unexpected retreat, allowing the Turks to swoop in by surprise and
kill the 55,000 people of Van.
The best-known and most successful of resistance movement was
memorialized in the 1934 historical novel The Forty Days of Musa
Dagh. People from several villages retreated to the mountain whose
English name is "Moses Mountain." Provisioned with weapons and
supplies, the villagers held out on Musa Dagh for 53 days.
Pastor Tigran Andreasian listed the Armenian population of his native
region as 6,311. Of them, 4,231 persons chose to fight on the mountain,
while 2,080 people obeyed the deportation order of the Turks. When
the fighters were eventually rescued by the Allies, an amazing 4,200
survivors were taken to Port Said, Egypt.
As for those who accepted deportation, according to Vahram Shemmassian,
a scholar and descendant of one of the fighters, "the exact count
of casualties may never be determined, many families lost several
members and others perished completely."
Hitler reminded his generals that "nobody remembers the Armenians,"
and he worked assiduously to disarm his own genocide victims more
thoroughly than the Turks had done. When we do remember the Armenians,
let us remember that the difference between life and death was often
the possession of arms to resist mass murder by government.
David Kopel is research director for the Independence Institute. Paul
Gallant and Joanne D. Eisen are senior fellows at the Independence
Institute.
http://article.nationalre view.com/?q=N2M4YWQxZjJjZDZiZTM2MTc0NmFjMTMzMzRlNW RlMzk=