Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was there genocide in early 20th century Armenia?

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

  • Was there genocide in early 20th century Armenia?

    Was there genocide in early 20th century Armenia?

    The Boston Phoenix
    20-May-2005

    Dear Cecil:

    I keep hearing about the Armenian genocide that happened early in the
    20th century. The Turkish have done a good job of denial, and there
    doesn't seem to be that much public recognition of the deed. So,
    what's the real scoop--genocide or not? --monkeykarma, via e-mail

    Cecil replies:

    It tells you something about human nature and the century just
    past that the typical response to this question is: What Armenian
    genocide? Hardly anyone remembers this appalling crime, even though
    at a million-plus deaths it was the first modern holocaust, ranking
    eighth on the list of high-volume butcherings 1900-'87 compiled by
    genocide historian R. J. Rummel. Few can even tell you where Armenia
    is. (The traditional Armenian homeland covers the modern republic
    of Armenia plus some of Turkey, Iran, and Iraq, but the killings
    were confined to Turkey and other parts of the old Ottoman empire.)
    It's not like the murders were conducted in secret or were over before
    anybody noticed--on the contrary, they spanned 30 years and received
    sustained worldwide publicity. So why the amnesia? Turkey's adamant
    refusal to acknowledge the massacres is part of it, but equally
    important is the West's agreement to forget.

    The story of the Armenian extermination has filled books and resists
    easy summary. Suffice it to say that successive Ottoman and Turkish
    governments using the machinery of state organized a campaign of
    ethnic cleansing in which hundreds of thousands of Armenian men,
    women, and children were shot, beheaded, burned alive, or otherwise
    done away with. Thousands more succumbed to starvation or disease,
    and still more were driven into exile.

    What had the Armenians done to deserve all this? Not much--their
    main offense was to be a Christian minority in a crumbling Islamic
    empire. Like another much-persecuted Middle Eastern ethnic group whose
    sufferings are better known, the Armenians had an ancient language
    and culture plus a reputation for clannishness and a knack for
    finance, and they became the target of a similar type of unreasoning
    bigotry. After years of low-level harassment by the Ottoman regime,
    the first large-scale killings took place from 1894 through 1896,
    when by conservative estimate 200,000 Armenians died, half murdered
    by Ottoman forces and the balance dying in the subsequent chaos. The
    "starving Armenians" became a cause celebre among European and
    U.S. humanitarians. (Sixty years later your columnist's guilt-tripping
    great aunts were still admonishing their young relations to eat
    their veggies because the starving Armenians didn't have any.) To
    no avail--the British government found the Ottomans a useful ally
    against the Russians and refused to impose sanctions.

    When a 1908 revolt by the Young Turks, secular modernizers with a
    support base in the Turkish army, forced the Ottoman sultan to cede
    power to a constitutional government, the Armenians thought they might
    get a break, but the new nationalist leaders proved no more tolerant
    than the old religious ones. A massacre of 15,000 to 25,000 Armenians
    in 1909 set the table for the main event during World War I. Blaming
    the supposedly disloyal Christian minority for an early defeat by the
    Russians, the Turkish government starting in 1915 rounded up Armenians
    throughout the country, murdered vast numbers outright and deported the
    rest, with many dying on forced marches or in refugee camps. The brutal
    work was carried out by an elaborate bureaucracy that some historians
    consider a model for the extermination program of the Nazis. Add in
    a couple of additional massacres in the early 1920s and the Armenian
    death toll for 1915-1922 totals a million to a million and a half.

    For a time after the war it seemed that the surviving Armenians
    would get a homeland protected by an American mandate, but resurgent
    U.S. isolationism doomed the effort. (Russian Armenia wound up as
    a Maryland-sized republic in the Soviet Union; it's now the site of
    present-day Armenia.) Attempts to try the Ottoman officials responsible
    for atrocities came to little. In the 1923 Lausanne treaty, the Western
    powers abandoned the Armenians in return for commercial guarantees
    from Turkey, where the no-longer-so-young Turks under Mustafa Kemal
    Ataturk had consolidated their power. Though Congress never ratified
    the treaty, the U.S. made its peace with the Kemal government and
    Turkey has been a reliable ally in a volatile part of the world
    ever since. For that reason the U.S. has remained largely silent in
    the face of Turkish insistence that the Armenian genocide is a myth,
    was the Armenians' fault, etc. (One difficulty in researching this
    topic now is that much of what's written about it is the work of
    Armenian or Turkish partisans and so of uncertain reliability. For
    this column I've relied on The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide
    and America's Response by Peter Balakian, a persuasive 2003 account
    by an Armenian-American university professor.) One understands the
    political realities; still, it's creepy that a million deaths could
    be expunged from human memory so thoroughly that 90 years later barely
    anyone would know.
Working...
X