Tweet
Assyrian International News Agency AINA
July 21 2012
Turkey's Attempt to Repackage Armenian Issue Likely to Fall Short
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu recently spoke of "just
memory" regarding the Armenian issue in a chat with journalists. He
did not say that nothing happened in 1915, but he did say, "I wouldn't
classify the events as a genocide, and I believe that the usage of
this term is a matter of personal preference. However, we need to
develop new language about this issue. We understand your pain, we are
not denying it. Come, let's do whatever needs to be done together. but
not with a one-sided sheet of charges."
Davutoglu further elaborated on what he means by the concept of "just memory:"
"We are not like Germans. Our history does not have a record of ethnic
cleansing or ghettoization. [In 1915] there were losses and worries
regarding the Muslims in the Balkans and in the Caucuses as well.
These incidents led to paranoia on the Turkish side. The Turks were
terrified at the idea that they would be forced to move out of
Anatolia. This paranoia led Turks to act in the way they did. There
was never any intention to wipe out a whole race. This psychology
cannot be compared to the Nazis. You can not represent the Turks as a
murderous race. We cannot accept a one-sided sheet of charges against
Turkey."
Drawing upon these statements, how can we evaluate this new concept of
"just memory"?
First of all, it is a good move on Davutoglu's part to introduce this
new way of thinking at a time when there is not yet any crisis with
the West on this issue. We should appreciate Davutoglu broaching the
subject at this time. Usually, the genocide issue is only brought up
in Turkish public opinion when proposals are made regarding it or when
it is discussed in the US congress or French parliament. The potential
for rational discussion is always then hampered by an angry,
reactionary and nationalist campaign, when what the issue really needs
is to be handled in a strategically sound manner.
Hence, given that there is currently no pressure coming from the West,
the steps Davutoglu has taken to introduce discussion on the issue are
timely. Turkey needs to discuss this issue on its own timetable and
within its own dynamics, away from the pressure that would be imposed
from the West. This pressure will be especially strong in 2015, on the
event's 100th anniversary.
"Just memory" is looking to strike a balance by saying that there was
indeed a tragedy, but that it was not limited to the Armenians.
Millions of Turks and Muslims were also massacred and forced to leave
their land. The events represent a common pain and tragedy for all of
us.
Although this seems reasonable for Turkey, it will have no positive
effects in Armenia or within the Armenian diaspora. You can't simply
expect the Armenians to empathize with our grief. Armenia and the
Armenians were not responsible for the tragedies that befell the
Ottomans in the Balkans, at Gallipoli or in the Middle East.
Explaining why the 1915 incidents took place is indeed crucial for
academic purposes. However if the aim is to reconcile with Armenia and
the Armenians before 2015, this kind of academic analysis dilutes the
effects of a heartfelt apology. The Armenians expect an apology, or at
least a deep empathy, for what they went through.
We should feel the pain of those who also died in the Balkans,
Gallipoli and Yemen. However it is not realistic to expect Armenians
to feel this pain, because it was neither Armenians nor Armenia that
were responsible for the tragedies suffered by the Ottomans in these
places.
By Omer Taspina
www.al-monitor.com
http://www.aina.org/news/20120721101551.htm
July 21 2012
Turkey's Attempt to Repackage Armenian Issue Likely to Fall Short
Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu recently spoke of "just
memory" regarding the Armenian issue in a chat with journalists. He
did not say that nothing happened in 1915, but he did say, "I wouldn't
classify the events as a genocide, and I believe that the usage of
this term is a matter of personal preference. However, we need to
develop new language about this issue. We understand your pain, we are
not denying it. Come, let's do whatever needs to be done together. but
not with a one-sided sheet of charges."
Davutoglu further elaborated on what he means by the concept of "just memory:"
"We are not like Germans. Our history does not have a record of ethnic
cleansing or ghettoization. [In 1915] there were losses and worries
regarding the Muslims in the Balkans and in the Caucuses as well.
These incidents led to paranoia on the Turkish side. The Turks were
terrified at the idea that they would be forced to move out of
Anatolia. This paranoia led Turks to act in the way they did. There
was never any intention to wipe out a whole race. This psychology
cannot be compared to the Nazis. You can not represent the Turks as a
murderous race. We cannot accept a one-sided sheet of charges against
Turkey."
Drawing upon these statements, how can we evaluate this new concept of
"just memory"?
First of all, it is a good move on Davutoglu's part to introduce this
new way of thinking at a time when there is not yet any crisis with
the West on this issue. We should appreciate Davutoglu broaching the
subject at this time. Usually, the genocide issue is only brought up
in Turkish public opinion when proposals are made regarding it or when
it is discussed in the US congress or French parliament. The potential
for rational discussion is always then hampered by an angry,
reactionary and nationalist campaign, when what the issue really needs
is to be handled in a strategically sound manner.
Hence, given that there is currently no pressure coming from the West,
the steps Davutoglu has taken to introduce discussion on the issue are
timely. Turkey needs to discuss this issue on its own timetable and
within its own dynamics, away from the pressure that would be imposed
from the West. This pressure will be especially strong in 2015, on the
event's 100th anniversary.
"Just memory" is looking to strike a balance by saying that there was
indeed a tragedy, but that it was not limited to the Armenians.
Millions of Turks and Muslims were also massacred and forced to leave
their land. The events represent a common pain and tragedy for all of
us.
Although this seems reasonable for Turkey, it will have no positive
effects in Armenia or within the Armenian diaspora. You can't simply
expect the Armenians to empathize with our grief. Armenia and the
Armenians were not responsible for the tragedies that befell the
Ottomans in the Balkans, at Gallipoli or in the Middle East.
Explaining why the 1915 incidents took place is indeed crucial for
academic purposes. However if the aim is to reconcile with Armenia and
the Armenians before 2015, this kind of academic analysis dilutes the
effects of a heartfelt apology. The Armenians expect an apology, or at
least a deep empathy, for what they went through.
We should feel the pain of those who also died in the Balkans,
Gallipoli and Yemen. However it is not realistic to expect Armenians
to feel this pain, because it was neither Armenians nor Armenia that
were responsible for the tragedies suffered by the Ottomans in these
places.
By Omer Taspina
www.al-monitor.com
http://www.aina.org/news/20120721101551.htm