Tweet
'MEDS YEGHERN'
SUAT KINIKLIOLU
Today's Zaman
April 27 2009
Turkey
US President Barack Obama did the anticipated and avoided using the
term "genocide" when referring to the events of 1915 in the midst of
World War I in eastern Anatolia. Yet, no one is happy about it.
Neither the Armenians nor the Turks thought the statement appropriately
reflected how to describe the complicated events of 1915. However,
the statement actually attempts to find a middle path between Obama's
election promises and the realities on the ground. What is troubling
from the Turkish perspective is the persistence in interpreting
the events of 1915 solely from one perspective, namely the Armenian
one. There is an abundance of evidence about the hundreds of thousands
of Muslim losses during the time span in question. However, this is
not what this piece intends to accentuate. Instead, I want to look
into the possibility of whether the term "Meds Yeghern" could offer
a new opening for a common narrative between Turks and Armenians.
Obama's statement is interesting from a variety of perspectives,
and I believe it is worth examining whether the term "Meds Yeghern"
has the potential to become a mutually acceptable term for both sides
to commemorate the events in question. As is now commonly known,
"Meds Yeghern" denotes "Great Calamity/Great Disaster" in the Armenian
language. Although I am not in a position to fully comprehend the
context in which this term is being used in Armenian, I am willing
to venture into the following.
I believe the events of World War I constituted a Great Calamity for
Turks, Kurds, Armenians, Anatolian Greeks and probably other peoples
of the Ottoman Empire. Indeed, it was a great trauma for the Turks,
who saw their great empire collapse in front of their own eyes and
who saw a multitude of peoples rebel against the state and side
with the invading enemies of the time. It was a Great Calamity to
the Armenians who had to be relocated during harsh war conditions
and subsequently suffered immensely. It was a disaster for them as
they left behind their homes and memories, similar to the millions of
Turks who were chased out of the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle
East. It was a Great Calamity for the Turks and the Kurds fighting
on the eastern front against the invading Russian armies, who were
intent on grabbing the eastern part of the remaining territories of
the Ottoman realm. It was a true disaster for all involved as the
war time conditions of eastern Anatolia were brutal and certainly
far from being hospitable to any of the struggling sides. Famine,
disease and misery were the order of the day.
Yet, as President Abdullah Gul said in response to Obama's statement,
we need to look forward and see whether the Turks and the Armenians
will be able to normalize relations in the coming months and
years. Therefore, the term "Meds Yeghern" should not be chided right
away because it is an Armenian term. I think it harbors the potential
to bring all of the aggrieved parties together. "Meds Yeghern" could
become the cornerstone of a positive language about the events of
1915, one which signifies the calamity that the competition over
the Ottoman realms between the imperial powers brought about, which
ultimately led to the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and the
loss of the Armenian population. It also resulted in the loss of the
empire's Greek subjects. We Turks built a new nation-state from the
ashes of the empire, but one consequence of these historic events was
the loss of the richness and diversity of the Ottoman days and the
change in the social fabric of these lands. Could it be possible to
utilize this term as a base around which all of us could mourn the
losses we all incurred during the fateful days of World War I?
All interested in the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations
should look into the potential of whether the term "Meds Yeghern"
could be applied to the wider pain and disaster that occurred in
eastern Anatolia during World War I and thus could pave the way for
a common language on this painful chapter of history.
SUAT KINIKLIOLU
Today's Zaman
April 27 2009
Turkey
US President Barack Obama did the anticipated and avoided using the
term "genocide" when referring to the events of 1915 in the midst of
World War I in eastern Anatolia. Yet, no one is happy about it.
Neither the Armenians nor the Turks thought the statement appropriately
reflected how to describe the complicated events of 1915. However,
the statement actually attempts to find a middle path between Obama's
election promises and the realities on the ground. What is troubling
from the Turkish perspective is the persistence in interpreting
the events of 1915 solely from one perspective, namely the Armenian
one. There is an abundance of evidence about the hundreds of thousands
of Muslim losses during the time span in question. However, this is
not what this piece intends to accentuate. Instead, I want to look
into the possibility of whether the term "Meds Yeghern" could offer
a new opening for a common narrative between Turks and Armenians.
Obama's statement is interesting from a variety of perspectives,
and I believe it is worth examining whether the term "Meds Yeghern"
has the potential to become a mutually acceptable term for both sides
to commemorate the events in question. As is now commonly known,
"Meds Yeghern" denotes "Great Calamity/Great Disaster" in the Armenian
language. Although I am not in a position to fully comprehend the
context in which this term is being used in Armenian, I am willing
to venture into the following.
I believe the events of World War I constituted a Great Calamity for
Turks, Kurds, Armenians, Anatolian Greeks and probably other peoples
of the Ottoman Empire. Indeed, it was a great trauma for the Turks,
who saw their great empire collapse in front of their own eyes and
who saw a multitude of peoples rebel against the state and side
with the invading enemies of the time. It was a Great Calamity to
the Armenians who had to be relocated during harsh war conditions
and subsequently suffered immensely. It was a disaster for them as
they left behind their homes and memories, similar to the millions of
Turks who were chased out of the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle
East. It was a Great Calamity for the Turks and the Kurds fighting
on the eastern front against the invading Russian armies, who were
intent on grabbing the eastern part of the remaining territories of
the Ottoman realm. It was a true disaster for all involved as the
war time conditions of eastern Anatolia were brutal and certainly
far from being hospitable to any of the struggling sides. Famine,
disease and misery were the order of the day.
Yet, as President Abdullah Gul said in response to Obama's statement,
we need to look forward and see whether the Turks and the Armenians
will be able to normalize relations in the coming months and
years. Therefore, the term "Meds Yeghern" should not be chided right
away because it is an Armenian term. I think it harbors the potential
to bring all of the aggrieved parties together. "Meds Yeghern" could
become the cornerstone of a positive language about the events of
1915, one which signifies the calamity that the competition over
the Ottoman realms between the imperial powers brought about, which
ultimately led to the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and the
loss of the Armenian population. It also resulted in the loss of the
empire's Greek subjects. We Turks built a new nation-state from the
ashes of the empire, but one consequence of these historic events was
the loss of the richness and diversity of the Ottoman days and the
change in the social fabric of these lands. Could it be possible to
utilize this term as a base around which all of us could mourn the
losses we all incurred during the fateful days of World War I?
All interested in the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations
should look into the potential of whether the term "Meds Yeghern"
could be applied to the wider pain and disaster that occurred in
eastern Anatolia during World War I and thus could pave the way for
a common language on this painful chapter of history.