Tweet
ON SOME TENDENCIES OF CONTEMPORARY TURKISH HISTORIOGRAPHY
Ruben Melkonyan
http://noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6123
17.11.2011
For many decades Turkey has been struggling against the recognition
of the Armenian Genocide not only on political but also on academic
levels. It should be mentioned that the so-called Turkish official
historiography, in its essence, is the same wrench of history,
especially when it comes to the Armenian Genocide or the Armenian
Issue. The Turkish historiography received the task of representing
history in a new way, i.e. its falsification, from the founder
of the Turkish Republic Kemal Ataturk and this issue was under his
direct control. The assault of the Turkish historiography against the
Armeniancy especially stirred up in 1965 and this process has been
continuing till our days. Today the issue of the Armenian Genocide
is a top priority for the Turkish historiography and in its regard
it implements systematic policy.
In the context of all the aforementioned, rather interesting are the
articles and interviews of the Turkish historians which defer from
the official viewpoint. During discussions which were initiated after
2005 and, especially, after the conclusion of the Armenian-Turkish
protocols some objective Turkish historians and analysts began
publishing articles and interviews on the issue of the Armenian
Genocide and in those articles sometimes you can meet interesting
revelations and confessions. Let us also mention that those materials
were mainly published in comparatively more free Turkish media. Below,
in translation, we present some opinions of the Turkish researchers
on the Armenian Genocide which demonstrate the developments in a
small segment of the Turkish academic circles.
R. M.
Taner Akcam (historian) - Halil Mentes, who occupied the post of the
Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Speaker of the Parliament under
the Young Turks, mentioned in one of the letters written from Malta
that if they had not exiled the Armenians and Greeks they would not
have been able to establish the state. The similar words were said
in 1920 in the Turkish parliament by Hassan Fehmin: "Before carrying
out the exile we knew that we would be called murderers", - he said
and asked: "Why did we take the risk of being called murderers?" And
then he answered to his own question: "We were obliged to do that
for the sake of our sacred motherland".
The Turkish Republic was established also in consequence of the 1915
Armenian Genocide. The fame and glory of the founders of the Republic
of Turkey is an inseparable part of our national identity. Criticising
or accusing them is like accusing yourself and it is very hard. But
among the founders of the Republic of Turkey there were people who
took part in the 1915 genocide or they knew about it and this is the
reason why we have a difficulty while speaking about that.
According to the 1919 official Ottoman numbers about 800 thousand
Armenians were killed. It is easy to say - 800 thousand Armenians were
killed and it is obvious that the state is responsible for murdering
so many people. Let us consider this issue in details: let's assume
800 thousand people died "of hunger, miserable conditions, unknown
reasons" and etc. Well, but in 1916, 1917, 1918 the Ottoman government
resettled about 1.5 million Muslims without any problem. How could
the state, which resettled 1.5 million Muslims without any problem,
not avert death of about 1 million Armenians?
You know, we have an official lie: they say that "the Armenians would
have delivered strike from behind and that was why we exiled them
from the war regions and resettled them in more secure places so that
they could not fight against us". But it should be mentioned that the
Armenians were exiled from all the regions of Anatolia - Ankara, Bursa,
Kyutahia, Amasia, Tokat, Samsun, Edirne, Tekirdag. The Armenians were
exiled from those vilayets to the deserts of Syria and Iraq. Meanwhile,
according to the Turkish documents Syria and Iraq were announced war
territories. The Armenians were exiled from the centre of Anatolia,
from the most secure vialayets, where no incident happened, and sent
to the war zone, to the war with the Englishmen.
Isn't it queer?
We are tired of "Let's leave this issue to the historians" sentence.
The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and our diplomats, without
any reason, has become big historians. And after this you say that we
should leave this issue for the consideration of the historians? I.e.
we will leave it to the historians only when they say what you want.
Or the opposite - you don't let the historians whose viewpoint defers
from yours speak. This is entirely political issue and it is necessary
for the statesmen of two countries sit and settle it.
Turkey cannot live covering up this crime. This is Turkey's shame.
With this shame Turkey can neither become a member of the European
Union nor find its place in the modern world. They would simply not
be allowed. Today we call this century the age of apology. Turkey
is like a kind of boiler: the Ministry of the Foreign Affairs is
the cover which can hardly "cover" Turkey. Now this boiler is going
to blow up: it is no more possible to keep Turkey isolated from the
external world. The boiler is bursting out from all the places.
Selim Deringil (historian) - They say: "Let the historians consider
the events of 1915", but have they really asked the historians? No,
Turkish authorities have historians whom I call "A-team". When saying
"Let the historians consider" they mean those historians.
Those who established the Republic of Turkey were not estimated
in thousands. They numbered hundreds who occupied different posts
during the exile of the Armenians in 1915. They either knew about
those events or were directly involved in them. On the large scale
those were the same people. It is said: "Exile, massacres, genocide
or whatever it was, were perpetrated by the Young Turks". Very well,
and who were those Young Turks? All the founders of the Republic of
Turkey were Young Turks.
Halil Berktai (historian) - The issue of the Turkish state or
semi-state stance is rather hard. Everybody knew about the massacres
in 1915-1930s. That's why when we study the historiography of those
times we can never see such formulations as "nothing like that
happened, this is all lie". The reason is that the memories of those
events were still fresh among the generations and everybody knew
what had happened. There were people who were even proud saying "if
we did not kill them, they would". In 1926 in Los Angeles Examiner
newspaper interview with Ataturk was published. By that time trial
at some members of the Young Turks party was finished. Answering the
journalist's question Mustafa Kemal said: "People, whom we condemn
today, are the perpetrators of awful violence and massacres in regard
to the Christian population of the Ottoman Empire".
Ayse Hyur (analyst-essayist) - According to the records made in 1914
there were 2538 churches, 451 monasteries and 2000 schools belonging
to the Armenian community. The first thing the Muslims who settled in
the Armenian villages and towns after the exile did was turning central
and beautiful churches into mosques. The rest were used as storehouses,
boiler houses. The representative of the radical nationalist wing in
the Turkish parliament Riza Nur in his letter of May 25, 1921 to the
commander of the Eastern front Kazim Karabekir wrote: "If we manage
to wipe off from the face of the earth the ruins of the city of Ani,
it would be a great service for Turkey". He wrote about the capital
city of the Medieval Armenian kingdom. In his memories Karaberkir
wrote that he turned down the offer of Riza Nur, because the ruins
of Ani occupy territory equal to the walls of Istanbul and it would
have been very difficult to carry out such works.
While perpetrating the exile the Young Turks party made both wide
people masses and most of the political, administrative and military
staff of the Ottoman Empire accomplice. I.e. there was a collectively
perpetrated crime. The ideology of the Young Turks has reached out
days. Due to that very continuity, which can be called complicity,
after about 90 years, it is still impossible to reveal the truth
about the 1915 exile of the Armenians (which can be characterized
as genocide".
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Ruben Melkonyan
http://noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6123
17.11.2011
For many decades Turkey has been struggling against the recognition
of the Armenian Genocide not only on political but also on academic
levels. It should be mentioned that the so-called Turkish official
historiography, in its essence, is the same wrench of history,
especially when it comes to the Armenian Genocide or the Armenian
Issue. The Turkish historiography received the task of representing
history in a new way, i.e. its falsification, from the founder
of the Turkish Republic Kemal Ataturk and this issue was under his
direct control. The assault of the Turkish historiography against the
Armeniancy especially stirred up in 1965 and this process has been
continuing till our days. Today the issue of the Armenian Genocide
is a top priority for the Turkish historiography and in its regard
it implements systematic policy.
In the context of all the aforementioned, rather interesting are the
articles and interviews of the Turkish historians which defer from
the official viewpoint. During discussions which were initiated after
2005 and, especially, after the conclusion of the Armenian-Turkish
protocols some objective Turkish historians and analysts began
publishing articles and interviews on the issue of the Armenian
Genocide and in those articles sometimes you can meet interesting
revelations and confessions. Let us also mention that those materials
were mainly published in comparatively more free Turkish media. Below,
in translation, we present some opinions of the Turkish researchers
on the Armenian Genocide which demonstrate the developments in a
small segment of the Turkish academic circles.
R. M.
Taner Akcam (historian) - Halil Mentes, who occupied the post of the
Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Speaker of the Parliament under
the Young Turks, mentioned in one of the letters written from Malta
that if they had not exiled the Armenians and Greeks they would not
have been able to establish the state. The similar words were said
in 1920 in the Turkish parliament by Hassan Fehmin: "Before carrying
out the exile we knew that we would be called murderers", - he said
and asked: "Why did we take the risk of being called murderers?" And
then he answered to his own question: "We were obliged to do that
for the sake of our sacred motherland".
The Turkish Republic was established also in consequence of the 1915
Armenian Genocide. The fame and glory of the founders of the Republic
of Turkey is an inseparable part of our national identity. Criticising
or accusing them is like accusing yourself and it is very hard. But
among the founders of the Republic of Turkey there were people who
took part in the 1915 genocide or they knew about it and this is the
reason why we have a difficulty while speaking about that.
According to the 1919 official Ottoman numbers about 800 thousand
Armenians were killed. It is easy to say - 800 thousand Armenians were
killed and it is obvious that the state is responsible for murdering
so many people. Let us consider this issue in details: let's assume
800 thousand people died "of hunger, miserable conditions, unknown
reasons" and etc. Well, but in 1916, 1917, 1918 the Ottoman government
resettled about 1.5 million Muslims without any problem. How could
the state, which resettled 1.5 million Muslims without any problem,
not avert death of about 1 million Armenians?
You know, we have an official lie: they say that "the Armenians would
have delivered strike from behind and that was why we exiled them
from the war regions and resettled them in more secure places so that
they could not fight against us". But it should be mentioned that the
Armenians were exiled from all the regions of Anatolia - Ankara, Bursa,
Kyutahia, Amasia, Tokat, Samsun, Edirne, Tekirdag. The Armenians were
exiled from those vilayets to the deserts of Syria and Iraq. Meanwhile,
according to the Turkish documents Syria and Iraq were announced war
territories. The Armenians were exiled from the centre of Anatolia,
from the most secure vialayets, where no incident happened, and sent
to the war zone, to the war with the Englishmen.
Isn't it queer?
We are tired of "Let's leave this issue to the historians" sentence.
The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and our diplomats, without
any reason, has become big historians. And after this you say that we
should leave this issue for the consideration of the historians? I.e.
we will leave it to the historians only when they say what you want.
Or the opposite - you don't let the historians whose viewpoint defers
from yours speak. This is entirely political issue and it is necessary
for the statesmen of two countries sit and settle it.
Turkey cannot live covering up this crime. This is Turkey's shame.
With this shame Turkey can neither become a member of the European
Union nor find its place in the modern world. They would simply not
be allowed. Today we call this century the age of apology. Turkey
is like a kind of boiler: the Ministry of the Foreign Affairs is
the cover which can hardly "cover" Turkey. Now this boiler is going
to blow up: it is no more possible to keep Turkey isolated from the
external world. The boiler is bursting out from all the places.
Selim Deringil (historian) - They say: "Let the historians consider
the events of 1915", but have they really asked the historians? No,
Turkish authorities have historians whom I call "A-team". When saying
"Let the historians consider" they mean those historians.
Those who established the Republic of Turkey were not estimated
in thousands. They numbered hundreds who occupied different posts
during the exile of the Armenians in 1915. They either knew about
those events or were directly involved in them. On the large scale
those were the same people. It is said: "Exile, massacres, genocide
or whatever it was, were perpetrated by the Young Turks". Very well,
and who were those Young Turks? All the founders of the Republic of
Turkey were Young Turks.
Halil Berktai (historian) - The issue of the Turkish state or
semi-state stance is rather hard. Everybody knew about the massacres
in 1915-1930s. That's why when we study the historiography of those
times we can never see such formulations as "nothing like that
happened, this is all lie". The reason is that the memories of those
events were still fresh among the generations and everybody knew
what had happened. There were people who were even proud saying "if
we did not kill them, they would". In 1926 in Los Angeles Examiner
newspaper interview with Ataturk was published. By that time trial
at some members of the Young Turks party was finished. Answering the
journalist's question Mustafa Kemal said: "People, whom we condemn
today, are the perpetrators of awful violence and massacres in regard
to the Christian population of the Ottoman Empire".
Ayse Hyur (analyst-essayist) - According to the records made in 1914
there were 2538 churches, 451 monasteries and 2000 schools belonging
to the Armenian community. The first thing the Muslims who settled in
the Armenian villages and towns after the exile did was turning central
and beautiful churches into mosques. The rest were used as storehouses,
boiler houses. The representative of the radical nationalist wing in
the Turkish parliament Riza Nur in his letter of May 25, 1921 to the
commander of the Eastern front Kazim Karabekir wrote: "If we manage
to wipe off from the face of the earth the ruins of the city of Ani,
it would be a great service for Turkey". He wrote about the capital
city of the Medieval Armenian kingdom. In his memories Karaberkir
wrote that he turned down the offer of Riza Nur, because the ruins
of Ani occupy territory equal to the walls of Istanbul and it would
have been very difficult to carry out such works.
While perpetrating the exile the Young Turks party made both wide
people masses and most of the political, administrative and military
staff of the Ottoman Empire accomplice. I.e. there was a collectively
perpetrated crime. The ideology of the Young Turks has reached out
days. Due to that very continuity, which can be called complicity,
after about 90 years, it is still impossible to reveal the truth
about the 1915 exile of the Armenians (which can be characterized
as genocide".
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress