Tweet
PRESS RELEASE
Armenia Solidarity
British-Armenian All-Party Parliamentary Group
Nor Serount Publications
Armenian Genocide Trust
[email protected] and baappg.bazil@btinternet,com
House of Commons Library distributes misleading briefing documents
The Defence and International Affairs Section in the House of Commons
Library in the UK Parliament has issued two documents (ref: 2006/4/13-IADS)
and ref: 2007/6/62-IADS) intended as a 'research resource' for MPs. A
number of MPs have declined to sign Early Day Motion 357 urging the British
government to recognise the Armenian Genocide on the basis of these
documents. This EDM has already attracted 160 signatories, a high level in
all parties excluding the Conservatives.
The documents suffer from significant deficiencies and should not be used
when considering this important issue, such as
There is no mention of the House of Commons own evidence in The Blue Book,'The
Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire (Miscellaneous No 31 (1916)'
and the many thousands of documents by non-Turkish and non-Armenian
witnesses who were present at the time, nor the Joint Declaration of Great
Britain, France and Russia of May 1915. Denialist propaganda is quoted
verbatim.
References from Turkish sources are mostly from official sites such
as their Foreign Ministry whereas those from the Armenian side consist of
websites run by private individuals.
False historical information is provided from partisan sources. An
example is "They [the Armenians] armed themselves and spearheaded a massive
Russian invasion of eastern Anatolia" fails to mention that the Russians
were responding to the incursion of the Turkish army into their country. A
second example is "Where Ottoman control was strong, Armenians went
unharmed. In Istanbul..." ignoring the fact that the Armenian Genocide of
1915 started in the capital with the round-up, deportation and murder of all
the Armenian leaders and intellectuals, the anniversary of which is
commemorated each year on 24 April.
The potential strong reaction of the Turkish authorities if Armenian
Genocide resolutions are passed by the US and Britain is given prominence
and linked with France's experience, though no mention is made of the fact
that trade with France is at the same level as before their recognition.
There are no counter arguments relevant to today's political landscape such
as facilitating the opening of the border between Armenia and Turkey, the
resumption of diplomatic relations and commercial trade between the two
countries consistent with international treaties, the lessening of tension
and military build-up in the South Caucasus, the removal of a potential
impediment to Turkey's accession to the EU and so on.
In the British section, there is no mention that both the National
Assembly of Wales and Edinburgh Council have recognised the genocide, or
that the Armenian Genocide has been included in a main podium speech during
the Newcastle Holocaust Memorial Day in 2007.
Finally and the one that is most striking, there is not one mention of
the views of international independent historians. Whereas the government
(and the documents) takes the view that there is no unequivocal evidence
that proves that genocide was intended and carried out, the most eminent
historians including those in the UK have exhaustively researched this topic
and have reached the opposite conclusion.
These documents must be withdrawn forthwith: they are selective in the
information they provide and misleading. They argue the case for the
government position whereas MPs require a briefing that allows them to
assess this policy and come to their own decision. In particular they
support the government's pretence that their judgement of historical events
should prevail whereas Prof Israel Charny and his colleagues in the
International Association of Genocide Scholars wrote to the Turkish Prime
Minister in 2005 in the following terms:
"We note that there may be differing interpretations of genocide - how and
why the Armenian Genocide happened, but to deny its factual and moral
reality as genocide is not to engage in scholarship but in propaganda and
efforts to absolve the perpetrator, blame the victims, and erase the ethical
meaning of this history."
To remedy this mis-information, please consult the proceedings of "The House
of Commons Armenian Genocide Conference" which details
Ø the solid stance for recognition by the most reputable of independent
international scholars (pages 16 and 31)
Ø British historians nailing their colours to the recognition mast
(pages 7, 9 and letters from page 40)
Ø scholars in this country increasingly exposing the dubious arguments
of the denialists, mostly connected with the Turkish authorities (pages 9
and 21)
Ø a better exposition of the Republic of Armenia's policy (page 20)
Ø the support from the UK Muslim Public Affairs Committee (page 42)
Ø a bibliography (page 45) that the House of Commons Library should
consult.
Copies of this publication may be obtained from [email protected]
Armenia Solidarity
British-Armenian All-Party Parliamentary Group
Nor Serount Publications
Armenian Genocide Trust
[email protected] and baappg.bazil@btinternet,com
House of Commons Library distributes misleading briefing documents
The Defence and International Affairs Section in the House of Commons
Library in the UK Parliament has issued two documents (ref: 2006/4/13-IADS)
and ref: 2007/6/62-IADS) intended as a 'research resource' for MPs. A
number of MPs have declined to sign Early Day Motion 357 urging the British
government to recognise the Armenian Genocide on the basis of these
documents. This EDM has already attracted 160 signatories, a high level in
all parties excluding the Conservatives.
The documents suffer from significant deficiencies and should not be used
when considering this important issue, such as
There is no mention of the House of Commons own evidence in The Blue Book,'The
Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire (Miscellaneous No 31 (1916)'
and the many thousands of documents by non-Turkish and non-Armenian
witnesses who were present at the time, nor the Joint Declaration of Great
Britain, France and Russia of May 1915. Denialist propaganda is quoted
verbatim.
References from Turkish sources are mostly from official sites such
as their Foreign Ministry whereas those from the Armenian side consist of
websites run by private individuals.
False historical information is provided from partisan sources. An
example is "They [the Armenians] armed themselves and spearheaded a massive
Russian invasion of eastern Anatolia" fails to mention that the Russians
were responding to the incursion of the Turkish army into their country. A
second example is "Where Ottoman control was strong, Armenians went
unharmed. In Istanbul..." ignoring the fact that the Armenian Genocide of
1915 started in the capital with the round-up, deportation and murder of all
the Armenian leaders and intellectuals, the anniversary of which is
commemorated each year on 24 April.
The potential strong reaction of the Turkish authorities if Armenian
Genocide resolutions are passed by the US and Britain is given prominence
and linked with France's experience, though no mention is made of the fact
that trade with France is at the same level as before their recognition.
There are no counter arguments relevant to today's political landscape such
as facilitating the opening of the border between Armenia and Turkey, the
resumption of diplomatic relations and commercial trade between the two
countries consistent with international treaties, the lessening of tension
and military build-up in the South Caucasus, the removal of a potential
impediment to Turkey's accession to the EU and so on.
In the British section, there is no mention that both the National
Assembly of Wales and Edinburgh Council have recognised the genocide, or
that the Armenian Genocide has been included in a main podium speech during
the Newcastle Holocaust Memorial Day in 2007.
Finally and the one that is most striking, there is not one mention of
the views of international independent historians. Whereas the government
(and the documents) takes the view that there is no unequivocal evidence
that proves that genocide was intended and carried out, the most eminent
historians including those in the UK have exhaustively researched this topic
and have reached the opposite conclusion.
These documents must be withdrawn forthwith: they are selective in the
information they provide and misleading. They argue the case for the
government position whereas MPs require a briefing that allows them to
assess this policy and come to their own decision. In particular they
support the government's pretence that their judgement of historical events
should prevail whereas Prof Israel Charny and his colleagues in the
International Association of Genocide Scholars wrote to the Turkish Prime
Minister in 2005 in the following terms:
"We note that there may be differing interpretations of genocide - how and
why the Armenian Genocide happened, but to deny its factual and moral
reality as genocide is not to engage in scholarship but in propaganda and
efforts to absolve the perpetrator, blame the victims, and erase the ethical
meaning of this history."
To remedy this mis-information, please consult the proceedings of "The House
of Commons Armenian Genocide Conference" which details
Ø the solid stance for recognition by the most reputable of independent
international scholars (pages 16 and 31)
Ø British historians nailing their colours to the recognition mast
(pages 7, 9 and letters from page 40)
Ø scholars in this country increasingly exposing the dubious arguments
of the denialists, mostly connected with the Turkish authorities (pages 9
and 21)
Ø a better exposition of the Republic of Armenia's policy (page 20)
Ø the support from the UK Muslim Public Affairs Committee (page 42)
Ø a bibliography (page 45) that the House of Commons Library should
consult.
Copies of this publication may be obtained from [email protected]