Tweet
Journal of Turkish Weekly, Turkey
Jan 15 2008
Understanding the `Other': Whose `truth' is Correct ?
Bulent OZDEMIR, Balikesir University
Tuesday , 15 January 2008
When I first came to the United States in 1994 as a graduate of
history major to pursue an MA degree, I had been shocked many times
in the first month that I faced with the same question, the Armenian
genocide. I do not remember how many times the conversation with an
American began with the movie called `Midnight Express'. Although I
was a history major, I had almost no concept of genocide and had
little knowledge about what happened to Armenians during WW I.
Neither in the history books nor in the social memory and
consciousness of Turkish people, the Armenian issue still do not
occupy big importance. Even the bloody terrorist attacks on the
Turkish diplomatic missions did not put the Armenian issue at the
center of national discussion.
If we look at the present position of the Turkish-Armenian relations,
one hardly sees any possible understanding of each other. There are
certain and perpetual obstacles for the reconciliation and
comprehension of the problem. The first one is the politization of
the issue which mostly comes from the Armenian Diaspora. Trying to
force the politicians of different countries, who are actually more
concern with their home politics and their voters than with the
Armenian genocide, to pass resolutions against Turkey is nothing
other than politicizing the issue and widening the gap between the
parties for reconciliation. More importantly this process paves way
to liquidation of history. Needless to say, history has always been
a tool in the hands of politicians. Many national histories of kind
witness to that fact. While the Armenian Diaspora tries to produce
its own version of the history of what had happened during World War
I, Turkey creates its own story, mostly in response to Armenian
claims. The second step taken by both parties is the feeding of the
people with their own biased version of the history of WW I. The
passing of resolutions respecting the Armenian genocide in some third
party countries' parliaments does not constitute anything for the
historians to use it as the proof of the Armenian genocide. It makes
the issue more complicated and political one. In return to this
activities, Turkey use its political, economic and diplomatic power
to evade the impact of these political activities.
Personal stories and memoirs occupy more place than the archival
sources in the present literature of the Armenian genocide. Since a
huge population of Armenians are living in different countries and
constituting a powerful Diaspora, past social memories and
transmission of these to the next generations become important. In
addition to this, the question of why they live oversea countries may
be asked and have to be answered. Therefore, the Armenian Diaspora
concerning the tragic events that took place almost a century ago
during the World War I, in which all the peoples including Armenians
and Turks living in the Ottoman Empire were paid a heavy price, is
trying to put all responsibility on Turkey's shoulders which is
totally unfair by any standards. This became an undisputed fact for
the Armenian Diaspora and never to be discussed or even researched.
Accordingly, if one is going to do research and write or talk about
the subject, one has to start with after accepting the truth of
genocide. This attitude simply implies a modern myth. Armenian
Diaspora created this myth and almost equated it with Armenian
identity. Thus, Turks have to be known as the murderers and a killer
nation in all over the world, while Armenians are the victims and an
aggrieved nation.
If a nation or a group of people uses the adjectives as massacred,
insulted, humiliated, repressed while defining their identity, it is
not possible for them to have sound thinking and to produce positive
policies. Therefore, even trying to talk to these people in order to
reach a compromise and a setting of dialog would be really hard to
realize. The reason here is that this psychology does not want to
check the authenticity of the claims. In their thinking these claims
are true and there is no doubts about it. If there will be a
compromise, one has to accept these claims as prerequisite. It is
thought that any effort to open these claims up a discussion in terms
of history or academic thinking would be the same thing as discussing
the identity of this nation.
Certain themes are noticeable in the stories of eye witnesses or the
tellers who listened from the eye witnesses. In the first place there
are scenes of death involving violence, killing and torture. The
rhetoric of these stories contains violence and savagery coercing our
imagination. In particular, tragic deaths of elderly, children and
pregnant women are explained in detail. Pillaging, robbing and
raping are common and almost the order of the day. In some books,
presentation of these scenes are very interesting. It is presented
ironically that the Armenians, mostly defenseless women and children,
were waiting to be killed by the cruel Turks who were not at war in
seven fronts for four years and thought only how to massacre
Armenians and tried to find ways to exterminate them. In this
setting, there were no civil population of Turks, no Turkish
families, elders, women and children. Turks were nothing other than
the soldiers, only male population who had been programmed to kill
and massacre Armenians.
Today, Turkish public opinion and its approach to the so called
Armenian genocide is almost totally ignored in the international
circles in general and by the Armenian Diaspora in particular. There
is an Armenian Diaspora debating the issue only with the Turkish
government. It is important to know what the Turkish public think
about the Armenian claims and what their position is. The First World
War is remembered with painful events by the Turkish people as is the
case for the Armenians. The Ottoman Empire collapsed and after a big
struggle against Western imperialism, they were be able to stand up
again by creating a new republic. Almost every Turkish family has
bitter memories regarding WW I. At this point, Turkish people who
lived together with the Armenians for centuries in peace cannot
understand the Armenian claims respecting genocide. They do not
comprehend the genocide claims and think that this is against their
belief and tradition. Moreover, it is asked in full sincerity and
confusion whether they had done such a thing. In fact, this
sincerity, interjection and disbelief in their question constitute
sort of a proof that there were not such a thing as genocide against
Armenians during WW I. In the Turkish intellectual circles, these
claims are found derogatory and too severe to accept, thinking that
even the next generations would be affected by the consequences. Some
parties of the Armenian Diaspora stress that they find not the
Turkish Republic but the Ottoman Empire and in particular the leaders
of Union and Progress Party (Enver, Talat, Cemal) responsible. I am
afraid, this does not change anything for the Turkish people because
as is the case for every nation, Turkish people also consider that
their past and history is a part of their identity.
Another important reason for the Turkish people's denial of genocide
accusations is the Islam's prohibition of killing civillians even at
wars. What are the limits of warfare and the position of civilians in
the wars and wartimes according to the Islamic law and tradition is
important to note here.
>From the Muslims' point of view, Islam is the religion appointed by
God for the welfare of mankind, individually and collectively, in
both worlds. It is based on belief in and worship of God, without
associating with him any partners whatsoever. Belief in and worship
of God requires on the part of a believer deep concern with
creatures, animate or inanimate. The deeper one's belief in and
submission to God is, the deeper one's concern for all creatures.
Belief in the unity of God allows no one on the earth to enjoy and
exercise absolute freedom in dealing with creatures.[1]
Islam, literally meaning peace, salvation and submission, came to
establish peace, first, in the inner worlds of human beings
themselves, making them at peace with God, nature and themselves,
and, then, in the entire world and universe. For this reason, peace
and order are fundamental in Islam. It always seeks to spread in a
peaceful atmosphere and refrains from resorting to force as much as
possible. Islam never approves injustice in whatever form it is, and
severely forbids bloodshed. According to the Qur'an: `Whoever slays a
soul not to retaliate for a soul slain or corruption in the earth, it
shall be as if he had slain all mankind, and whoever `gives life' to
a soul, it shall be as if he had `given life' to the whole of
mankind.'[2]
There are strict rules regulating how war may be conducted. For
example, the following is the order given by Prophet Muhammad to come
until the present day to armies dispatched for fighting:
Always keep fear of God in your mind. Remember that you can not
afford to do anything without His grace. Do not forget that Islam is
a mission of peace and love. Do not destroy fruit trees nor fertile
fields in your paths. Be just, and spare the feelings of the
vanquished. Respect all religious persons who live in hermitages or
convents and spare their edifices. Do not kill civilians. Do not
outrage the chastity of women and the honor of conquered. Do not harm
old people and children. Do not accept any gifts from the civil
population of any place. Do not billet your soldiers or officers in
the houses of civilians.[3]
Current State of Relations Between Armenian and Turkish Societies
Today 70,000 Armenian citizens are working in Turkey.
There are direct flights between Istanbul and Yerevan.
Numerous contacts are taking place between NGO's, local authorities
and businessmen.
There was great and spontaneous reaction of Turkish people to the
murder of the Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink back in January
this year.
Restoration and inauguration of the old Armenian Orthodox Church of
Akdamar in Van, in eastern Turkey was another occasion of good will
and dialog showed by Turkish government.
On both of these occasions, officials of the Armenian Government as
well as representatives from the Armenian Diaspora were invited by
Turkey to share these moments of grief and joy respectively.
What to do now?
Turkish people conceive the events during WW I not the genocide but
the tragedy that befell the Turkish, Armenian and other peoples of
the then Ottoman Empire all alike.
A thorough and objective research by the historians and academicians
around the world have to be done and put the facts on the table.
To this effect, Turkey has opened its archives, including the
military archives of the period, to the entire international academic
community, and has requested all the other parties involved to follow
suit.
Turkey has reason and right to expect the Armenian archives,
particularly the Hunchak archives to be opened.
Turkey proposed to Armenia in 2005 to establish a joint commission of
historians to find out the truth about the events of 1915.
A positive response has still awaited from the Armenian authorities.
Turkey has also stated its readiness to cooperate with all interested
third parties for the conduct of this research activity within their
own archives as well, with a view to sharing the findings with the
international community.
Any impartial observer would admit that Turkey has so far displayed
magnanimity in its willingness to face its past. Hence she stands
ready today to start building a sound future for our next generations
through the establishment of viable and peaceful relations without
delay. For this, a bit of wise thinking and goodwill as well as
refrainment from rhetoric and baseless accusations would more than
suffice. This should not be too hard a task for any responsible
government or parties to undertake. Turkey has amply and repeatedly
manifested her resolve to this effect; now it is high time for the
Armenian side to respond in kind.
----------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------
[1] Prophet Muhammad as Commander, (London: Truestar Ltd., 1996) p.18
[2] Qur'an, 24:1-7
[3] Bukhari, Manaqib, 9. See also, Andrew Miller, Miller's Church
History from First to Twentieth Century, (London Pickering & Inglis,
1963) p. 285.
Bulent OZDEMIR: Assoc. Prof. Dr. of History, Balýkesir University,
Turkey
2007
Jan 15 2008
Understanding the `Other': Whose `truth' is Correct ?
Bulent OZDEMIR, Balikesir University
Tuesday , 15 January 2008
When I first came to the United States in 1994 as a graduate of
history major to pursue an MA degree, I had been shocked many times
in the first month that I faced with the same question, the Armenian
genocide. I do not remember how many times the conversation with an
American began with the movie called `Midnight Express'. Although I
was a history major, I had almost no concept of genocide and had
little knowledge about what happened to Armenians during WW I.
Neither in the history books nor in the social memory and
consciousness of Turkish people, the Armenian issue still do not
occupy big importance. Even the bloody terrorist attacks on the
Turkish diplomatic missions did not put the Armenian issue at the
center of national discussion.
If we look at the present position of the Turkish-Armenian relations,
one hardly sees any possible understanding of each other. There are
certain and perpetual obstacles for the reconciliation and
comprehension of the problem. The first one is the politization of
the issue which mostly comes from the Armenian Diaspora. Trying to
force the politicians of different countries, who are actually more
concern with their home politics and their voters than with the
Armenian genocide, to pass resolutions against Turkey is nothing
other than politicizing the issue and widening the gap between the
parties for reconciliation. More importantly this process paves way
to liquidation of history. Needless to say, history has always been
a tool in the hands of politicians. Many national histories of kind
witness to that fact. While the Armenian Diaspora tries to produce
its own version of the history of what had happened during World War
I, Turkey creates its own story, mostly in response to Armenian
claims. The second step taken by both parties is the feeding of the
people with their own biased version of the history of WW I. The
passing of resolutions respecting the Armenian genocide in some third
party countries' parliaments does not constitute anything for the
historians to use it as the proof of the Armenian genocide. It makes
the issue more complicated and political one. In return to this
activities, Turkey use its political, economic and diplomatic power
to evade the impact of these political activities.
Personal stories and memoirs occupy more place than the archival
sources in the present literature of the Armenian genocide. Since a
huge population of Armenians are living in different countries and
constituting a powerful Diaspora, past social memories and
transmission of these to the next generations become important. In
addition to this, the question of why they live oversea countries may
be asked and have to be answered. Therefore, the Armenian Diaspora
concerning the tragic events that took place almost a century ago
during the World War I, in which all the peoples including Armenians
and Turks living in the Ottoman Empire were paid a heavy price, is
trying to put all responsibility on Turkey's shoulders which is
totally unfair by any standards. This became an undisputed fact for
the Armenian Diaspora and never to be discussed or even researched.
Accordingly, if one is going to do research and write or talk about
the subject, one has to start with after accepting the truth of
genocide. This attitude simply implies a modern myth. Armenian
Diaspora created this myth and almost equated it with Armenian
identity. Thus, Turks have to be known as the murderers and a killer
nation in all over the world, while Armenians are the victims and an
aggrieved nation.
If a nation or a group of people uses the adjectives as massacred,
insulted, humiliated, repressed while defining their identity, it is
not possible for them to have sound thinking and to produce positive
policies. Therefore, even trying to talk to these people in order to
reach a compromise and a setting of dialog would be really hard to
realize. The reason here is that this psychology does not want to
check the authenticity of the claims. In their thinking these claims
are true and there is no doubts about it. If there will be a
compromise, one has to accept these claims as prerequisite. It is
thought that any effort to open these claims up a discussion in terms
of history or academic thinking would be the same thing as discussing
the identity of this nation.
Certain themes are noticeable in the stories of eye witnesses or the
tellers who listened from the eye witnesses. In the first place there
are scenes of death involving violence, killing and torture. The
rhetoric of these stories contains violence and savagery coercing our
imagination. In particular, tragic deaths of elderly, children and
pregnant women are explained in detail. Pillaging, robbing and
raping are common and almost the order of the day. In some books,
presentation of these scenes are very interesting. It is presented
ironically that the Armenians, mostly defenseless women and children,
were waiting to be killed by the cruel Turks who were not at war in
seven fronts for four years and thought only how to massacre
Armenians and tried to find ways to exterminate them. In this
setting, there were no civil population of Turks, no Turkish
families, elders, women and children. Turks were nothing other than
the soldiers, only male population who had been programmed to kill
and massacre Armenians.
Today, Turkish public opinion and its approach to the so called
Armenian genocide is almost totally ignored in the international
circles in general and by the Armenian Diaspora in particular. There
is an Armenian Diaspora debating the issue only with the Turkish
government. It is important to know what the Turkish public think
about the Armenian claims and what their position is. The First World
War is remembered with painful events by the Turkish people as is the
case for the Armenians. The Ottoman Empire collapsed and after a big
struggle against Western imperialism, they were be able to stand up
again by creating a new republic. Almost every Turkish family has
bitter memories regarding WW I. At this point, Turkish people who
lived together with the Armenians for centuries in peace cannot
understand the Armenian claims respecting genocide. They do not
comprehend the genocide claims and think that this is against their
belief and tradition. Moreover, it is asked in full sincerity and
confusion whether they had done such a thing. In fact, this
sincerity, interjection and disbelief in their question constitute
sort of a proof that there were not such a thing as genocide against
Armenians during WW I. In the Turkish intellectual circles, these
claims are found derogatory and too severe to accept, thinking that
even the next generations would be affected by the consequences. Some
parties of the Armenian Diaspora stress that they find not the
Turkish Republic but the Ottoman Empire and in particular the leaders
of Union and Progress Party (Enver, Talat, Cemal) responsible. I am
afraid, this does not change anything for the Turkish people because
as is the case for every nation, Turkish people also consider that
their past and history is a part of their identity.
Another important reason for the Turkish people's denial of genocide
accusations is the Islam's prohibition of killing civillians even at
wars. What are the limits of warfare and the position of civilians in
the wars and wartimes according to the Islamic law and tradition is
important to note here.
>From the Muslims' point of view, Islam is the religion appointed by
God for the welfare of mankind, individually and collectively, in
both worlds. It is based on belief in and worship of God, without
associating with him any partners whatsoever. Belief in and worship
of God requires on the part of a believer deep concern with
creatures, animate or inanimate. The deeper one's belief in and
submission to God is, the deeper one's concern for all creatures.
Belief in the unity of God allows no one on the earth to enjoy and
exercise absolute freedom in dealing with creatures.[1]
Islam, literally meaning peace, salvation and submission, came to
establish peace, first, in the inner worlds of human beings
themselves, making them at peace with God, nature and themselves,
and, then, in the entire world and universe. For this reason, peace
and order are fundamental in Islam. It always seeks to spread in a
peaceful atmosphere and refrains from resorting to force as much as
possible. Islam never approves injustice in whatever form it is, and
severely forbids bloodshed. According to the Qur'an: `Whoever slays a
soul not to retaliate for a soul slain or corruption in the earth, it
shall be as if he had slain all mankind, and whoever `gives life' to
a soul, it shall be as if he had `given life' to the whole of
mankind.'[2]
There are strict rules regulating how war may be conducted. For
example, the following is the order given by Prophet Muhammad to come
until the present day to armies dispatched for fighting:
Always keep fear of God in your mind. Remember that you can not
afford to do anything without His grace. Do not forget that Islam is
a mission of peace and love. Do not destroy fruit trees nor fertile
fields in your paths. Be just, and spare the feelings of the
vanquished. Respect all religious persons who live in hermitages or
convents and spare their edifices. Do not kill civilians. Do not
outrage the chastity of women and the honor of conquered. Do not harm
old people and children. Do not accept any gifts from the civil
population of any place. Do not billet your soldiers or officers in
the houses of civilians.[3]
Current State of Relations Between Armenian and Turkish Societies
Today 70,000 Armenian citizens are working in Turkey.
There are direct flights between Istanbul and Yerevan.
Numerous contacts are taking place between NGO's, local authorities
and businessmen.
There was great and spontaneous reaction of Turkish people to the
murder of the Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink back in January
this year.
Restoration and inauguration of the old Armenian Orthodox Church of
Akdamar in Van, in eastern Turkey was another occasion of good will
and dialog showed by Turkish government.
On both of these occasions, officials of the Armenian Government as
well as representatives from the Armenian Diaspora were invited by
Turkey to share these moments of grief and joy respectively.
What to do now?
Turkish people conceive the events during WW I not the genocide but
the tragedy that befell the Turkish, Armenian and other peoples of
the then Ottoman Empire all alike.
A thorough and objective research by the historians and academicians
around the world have to be done and put the facts on the table.
To this effect, Turkey has opened its archives, including the
military archives of the period, to the entire international academic
community, and has requested all the other parties involved to follow
suit.
Turkey has reason and right to expect the Armenian archives,
particularly the Hunchak archives to be opened.
Turkey proposed to Armenia in 2005 to establish a joint commission of
historians to find out the truth about the events of 1915.
A positive response has still awaited from the Armenian authorities.
Turkey has also stated its readiness to cooperate with all interested
third parties for the conduct of this research activity within their
own archives as well, with a view to sharing the findings with the
international community.
Any impartial observer would admit that Turkey has so far displayed
magnanimity in its willingness to face its past. Hence she stands
ready today to start building a sound future for our next generations
through the establishment of viable and peaceful relations without
delay. For this, a bit of wise thinking and goodwill as well as
refrainment from rhetoric and baseless accusations would more than
suffice. This should not be too hard a task for any responsible
government or parties to undertake. Turkey has amply and repeatedly
manifested her resolve to this effect; now it is high time for the
Armenian side to respond in kind.
----------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------
[1] Prophet Muhammad as Commander, (London: Truestar Ltd., 1996) p.18
[2] Qur'an, 24:1-7
[3] Bukhari, Manaqib, 9. See also, Andrew Miller, Miller's Church
History from First to Twentieth Century, (London Pickering & Inglis,
1963) p. 285.
Bulent OZDEMIR: Assoc. Prof. Dr. of History, Balýkesir University,
Turkey
2007