Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ANKARA: For All Turks And Armenians: An Analysis And Manifesto

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ANKARA: For All Turks And Armenians: An Analysis And Manifesto

    FOR ALL TURKS AND ARMENIANS: AN ANALYSIS AND MANIFESTO
    Barin Kayaoglu
    JTW Columnist

    Journal of Turkish Weekly
    Oct 17 2007

    This op-ed aims to do two things: Give a balanced rendering of the
    Turkish-Armenian dispute and call upon Turks and Armenians to get
    out of their straight-jackets and reach an understanding.

    The Analysis

    Last week, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. House of
    Representatives passed Resolution 106, titled "Affirmation of the
    United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution." Introduced
    by Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), H. Res. 106 calls "upon the
    President [of the United States] to ensure that the foreign policy of
    the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity
    concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and
    genocide documented in the United States record relating to the
    Armenian Genocide, and for other purposes."[1] It is expected that
    the resolution will be approved by the full House in mid-November.

    While Armenians around the world rejoiced at the decision, Turkish
    officials have pointed out that if the House accepts the resolution,
    nationalist reaction in Turkey will damage Turkish-American and
    Turkish-Armenian relations beyond repair.

    For decades, a lot has been said on the tragedy that befell Ottoman
    Armenians during World War I. The argument is over whether the
    events can be described as genocide (defined by the "UN Convention on
    Genocide" as the deliberate "intent to destroy, in whole or in part,
    a national, ethnical [sic], racial or religious group") or not.[2]

    Those who make a case for genocide argue that from April 1915 until
    late 1917, the Ottoman government used the military losses on the
    Caucasian front at the hands of Russia and the terrorism by Armenian
    nationalist revolutionaries to implement a genocide against Armenian
    civilians. For this school, the Ottoman government's decision to
    relocate/deport the Armenians was a smoke-screen.[3]

    Those who argue that the events did not constitute genocide point
    out that Istanbul's order to temporarily deport Ottoman Armenians
    intended to do strictly that - to relocate Armenian civilians to
    areas away from the troubles. Their destination was other Ottoman
    provinces. Incompetent administrators, pressed by terrorism, poor
    logistics, and an inadequate infrastructure, failed to cope with
    the situation. All of this resulted in the tragic deaths of the
    Armenians. At any rate, this school argues, Armenian terrorists also
    killed many Muslims; the killings went both ways.[4]

    These stances can be scrutinized in different ways. A strict
    application of the UN Convention's definition of the term "genocide"
    may disqualify the Armenian example. Those who make the case against
    genocide maintain that the government in Istanbul did not intend
    to exterminate the Armenians. Those arguing for genocide claim the
    opposite and point out to the secret telegrams sent from Istanbul to
    the eastern front ordering the mass killings.

    Some of those Ottoman officials who were guilty of premeditated murder
    actually confessed to their crimes in military tribunals following
    World War I. The records of the tribunals, coupled with some of the
    hand-written copies of telegrams sent from Istanbul to the front,
    demonstrate that it took a little more than berserk troops on the
    ground to carry out the genocidal killings.

    But the claim that Istanbul ordered the annihilation of Armenians
    is also weakened by certain factors. The authenticity of certain
    documents tarnishes the case for genocide. The secret telegrams,
    for example, are almost exclusively available at the archives of the
    Armenian Patriarchate in Jerusalem. Not a terribly neutral venue.

    Specifically, take the "Naim-Andonian telegrams." In 1920, Aram
    Andonian, an Armenian journalist who had worked for the Young Turk
    government earlier in the war, published the memoirs of a certain
    Naim Bey. According to Andonian, Naim Bey was a Turkish official who
    served as the chief secretary of the deportation committee in Aleppo
    during the war. Upon the conclusion of the war, Naim handed Andonian
    the telegrams originating from Istanbul with the orders to massacre
    Armenian civilians. The problem is that those telegrams are labeled
    as forgeries by some historians because Andonian never produced the
    originals. In fact, some scholars have even gone far as to suggest
    that Andonian simply wrote what he thought about the massacres by
    using Naim as a mouthpiece.[5]

    Documents comparable to the minutes of the Nazis' Wannsee Conference of
    January 1942 (where they came up with their infamous "final solution
    to the Jewish question") in brevity, scope, and authenticity cannot
    easily be mustered that in the Armenian case and that is a problem.

    None of these points, however, eclipse one glaring fact: Hundreds
    of thousands of Ottoman Armenians died between 1915 and 1917 (the
    estimates range from 600,000 to 1.5 million, depending on one's
    position). Turkish and Kurdish civilians also suffered horrendously
    at the hands of Armenian bands, both in the Russian-occupied parts
    of Eastern Anatolia and the territory controlled by the Ottoman state.

    It is true that some of the Armenians died of disease, cold, and
    malnutrition. On the other hand, it must be conceded that probably
    a lot Armenians died at the hands of Turkish soldiers and Kurdish
    tribesmen as well.

    The Manifesto

    Looking at the sheer numbers of dead civilians, we have to understand
    the futility of the "genocide - not genocide" discussion. How can
    anyone limit one's conscience to a single word? No person in his right
    mind would do such a thing. And neither should Turks and Armenians.

    This tragedy that befell us was much more sinister than a genocide.

    If the Istanbul government implemented a genocide, why did most of our
    ancestors not stand up for their neighbors? When Armenian terrorists
    rounded up fellow Muslim villagers, why did most of our grandparents
    not do anything to stop them? Forget about stopping the massacres, some
    of them - Armenian and Muslim - happily did their part in the killings!

    What is tragic is that since 1915, we have only emulated their
    mistakes. The deaths of Turkish diplomats in the 1970s and 1980s,
    incessant bickering between Turks and Armenians, and lately, the tragic
    murder of the Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink in January 2007,
    attest to the fact that we have to change our attitude.

    That change of attitude should start by recognizing the fact that we
    Turks and Armenians killed each other on an industrial scale. That many
    more Armenians died than Turks is irrelevant. The important thing is
    that innocent civilians perished - babies, mothers, fathers, sisters,
    brothers, aunts, uncles, and grandparents.

    If you cannot comprehend the gravity of such a loss, just imagine
    yourself at a family gathering: You are surrounded by all the people
    you love - your mother, father, siblings, spouse, children, nieces,
    nephews. And all of a sudden imagine that these people - every single
    one of them - are killed before your eyes by people with whom you
    lived as good neighbors for nearly a millennium. After the deaths of
    your loved ones, hundreds, thousands, and millions would mean very
    little for you because you do not have a reason to exist anymore.

    So I call upon all Turks and Armenians: Come to your senses!

    We have lost too much and suffered long enough. Let us regain what
    we once had - our friendship, peaceful coexistence, and respect for
    each other. Let the Armenians convince Turks, rather than American
    politicians, about their sufferings. Let the Turks make the Armenians
    see their point of view. As Hrant Dink said in an interview not
    long before he was slain, "Armenians are the doctors of Turks and
    Turks are the doctors of Armenians." Only by talking to each other
    rather than through each other can we resolve our differences and
    ease our suffering.

    Esteemed members of the U.S. House of Representatives: The
    biggest favor that Western nations can possibly do to Turkish and
    Armenian people is to mind their own business and let them come to an
    understanding on their own. Your resolution is only going to exacerbate
    enmities. To expect that H. Res. 106 will facilitate a reconciliation
    between Turks and Armenians is as sensible as extinguishing fire with
    dynamite. We implore you not to do it.

    Finally, those who owe their petty existence to the perpetuation of
    this dispute: Hate-mongers! Appear as you may as Turks or Armenians,
    you are all on the same side. Yes, you hate-mongers are on the
    same side!

    You extremists do not strive for the happiness of your peoples; you
    look around for enemies to satiate your neurosis. Stirring up trouble
    is only a convenience for you. You live by seeing enemies everywhere.

    If you cannot find enemies, you create them, just as you did nearly a
    hundred years ago. You, murderers of Hrant Dink, Mehmet Baydar, Artin
    Penik, Necla Kuneralp and hundreds of thousands of others, are all on
    the same side. We - real Turks and Armenians - are on the other side.

    Leave us alone!

    Barýn Kayaoðlu is a Ph.D. student in history at the University of
    Virginia in Charlottesville, Virginia and a regular contributor to
    the Journal of Turkish Weekly.

    --Boundary_(ID_jQJ0kiIJ4QfF3IvREbgRzQ)--
Working...
X