Tweet
SOCIOLOGIST TRACES ROOTS OF COLLECTIVE VIOLENCE IN TURKEY AGAINST ARMENIANS
By Daphne Abeel
Mirror-Spectator Staff
Posted on November 25
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - On Wednesday, November 16, Fatma Muge Gocek,
associate professor of sociology and women's studies at the University
of Michigan, gave a lecture at Harvard University's Knafel Hall as
part of a series of seminars on Turkey in the modern world.
Titled "Deciphering Denial: Modernity, the Turkish State and the 1915
Collective Violence against the Armenians, 1789-2009," the event drew
an audience of about 40, including students, faculty and members of
the Turkish and Armenian communities.
Following a brief introduction by Cemal Kafadar, professor of Turkish
Studies, Gocek used a PowerPoint slideshow and a historical chart
to illustrate her investigation of collective violence against
Armenians in Turkey. "The violence against Armenians was the first
instance of collective violence in Turkish history," Gocek said. "I'm
a sociologist and when I began to explore this topic, I realized I
had entered a political minefield. The nationalists on either side,
Turks and Armenians, said I couldn't be a Turk."
She continued, "I wanted to explore the contested memoirs of 1915. On
the one hand, we have the Armenian Diaspora, which argues that this
was the first genocide of the 20th century and that it killed between
800,000 and a million-and-a-half people. The Turkish state, on the
other hand, denies that the events were a genocide, calling them
reciprocal massacres and claims there was nothing intentional in them.
Turkey sets the number of deaths at 400,000, both military and
civilians."
She added, "Most scholars agree that the events were a genocide. Then
the question is, why do the Turkish state and society still deny it?
This is not just a significant issue for a sociologist; it is a
significant issue in Turkey today."
To explore the historical roots of collective violence, Gocek said
it is necessary to study social pressures. "Even if there is tension
in a society, it doesn't necessarily translate to violence."
Studying government documents, interviews with survivors or descendants
of survivors and Turkish memoirs can provide evidence of certain
patterns. "If you look at Ottoman history," said Gocek, "you can see
that violence was always there, even as far back as 1789, the time
of the French Revolution. There were the massacres under Abdul Hamid
in 1894 to 1896, and the pattern of violence continued in the Turkish
Republic with forced military recruitment in 1941-42 and the forcible
removal of the Greek population in 1964."
In reading the memoirs of Turkish Muslims, Gocek said it was
possible to discover patterns of attitudes and emotions expressed
towards Armenians and other minorities. In one striking account by
a Turkish Muslim couple, published in 2004, the wife acknowledged
seeing Armenians dying and being deported. However, her husband, who
was a participant, asserted, "I would have done it again." Gocek said,
"Under the milliyet system, there emerged a divide between Muslims and
non-Muslims that was kept under control by the state or local leaders.
One can see in these memoirs a social polarization. There were certain
instances used by the state and society to rationalize violence."
Gocek sketched the differences between the Western-Armenian
communities, which traded with Europe and were more affluent,
and the Eastern, more rural and provincial communities, where land
was the most important possession.When land reform efforts did not
ameliorate conditions, in 1830, Armenians in the Eastern provinces
mounted protests against injustices.
Gocek pointed to the attempted takeover of the Ottoman Bank in 1895
by Armenian revolutionaries as an attempt to get the attention of
the rest of the world for their suffering. The bank manager actually
escorted the revolutionaries to his yacht to take them to France.
"This was the first instance in which the Western powers took any
interest in what was happening in Armenia," said Gocek. When the
Young Turks took over the Ottoman Empire, there was a marked social
polarization amongst the Turkish Muslim majority. The reformists
wanted to transform the empire while the traditionalists hoped to
sustain Ottoman rule.
With the formation of the Committee for Union and Progress (CUP),
a policy of ethnic cleansing ensued, said Gocek, exacerbated by the
Balkan Wars. This was a period of rising nationalism and fear on the
part of Turks about whether they would have a place to call their own.
In order to claim the lands of Anatolia, the massacres and deportation
took place.
"This was a period when Turkey felt that the Western Europe ignored
the plight of the Muslims and led to the idea that the Turk had no
friend but himself," she added.
After 1919, said Gocek, the violence before 1923 was not discussed -
the subject was banned from the educational system. The trials of the
perpetrators were declared illegitimate and many of them escaped. The
Armenian issue was considered closed.
Said Gocek, "Of all the deputies in the First Turkish Assembly, 25
percent had been involved in the massacres, but many were promoted
to important government positions."
The period of 1975 to 1986 saw retaliatory efforts by individual
Armenians who assassinated Turkish diplomats. These acts introduced
Turkish society to its own history, yet Armenians were defined and
labeled as revolutionaries and terrorists.
While Gocek does not employ the word "genocide," she said, "It is
important to acknowledge the suffering." She views what happened to
the Armenians, and to other minority populations such as the Greeks,
the Assyrians and the Circassians, as part of "the end of a great
complicated empire that broke up over the period of the 19th century.
Outsiders were involved in this breakup and the story of the Armenians
needs to be put into that nuanced context."
Gocek pointed to the fact that the Genocide has received more
discussion since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. For example,
she said the Kurds, in the last five to 10 years, have acknowledged
what they did to the Armenians. She added, "When I attended that
important conference at Bilgi University in Istanbul in 2005, there
were granddaughters there who had discovered from their grandmothers
that they were Armenian. And it is often the women who pass on this
knowledge."
The event was sponsored by the Harvard Center of Middle Eastern Studies
and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. The next seminar,
scheduled for Wednesday, November 30, is titled "Turkey and Its
Neighborhood Foreign Policy," to be given by Prof. Kemal Kirisci of
Bogazici University.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
By Daphne Abeel
Mirror-Spectator Staff
Posted on November 25
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - On Wednesday, November 16, Fatma Muge Gocek,
associate professor of sociology and women's studies at the University
of Michigan, gave a lecture at Harvard University's Knafel Hall as
part of a series of seminars on Turkey in the modern world.
Titled "Deciphering Denial: Modernity, the Turkish State and the 1915
Collective Violence against the Armenians, 1789-2009," the event drew
an audience of about 40, including students, faculty and members of
the Turkish and Armenian communities.
Following a brief introduction by Cemal Kafadar, professor of Turkish
Studies, Gocek used a PowerPoint slideshow and a historical chart
to illustrate her investigation of collective violence against
Armenians in Turkey. "The violence against Armenians was the first
instance of collective violence in Turkish history," Gocek said. "I'm
a sociologist and when I began to explore this topic, I realized I
had entered a political minefield. The nationalists on either side,
Turks and Armenians, said I couldn't be a Turk."
She continued, "I wanted to explore the contested memoirs of 1915. On
the one hand, we have the Armenian Diaspora, which argues that this
was the first genocide of the 20th century and that it killed between
800,000 and a million-and-a-half people. The Turkish state, on the
other hand, denies that the events were a genocide, calling them
reciprocal massacres and claims there was nothing intentional in them.
Turkey sets the number of deaths at 400,000, both military and
civilians."
She added, "Most scholars agree that the events were a genocide. Then
the question is, why do the Turkish state and society still deny it?
This is not just a significant issue for a sociologist; it is a
significant issue in Turkey today."
To explore the historical roots of collective violence, Gocek said
it is necessary to study social pressures. "Even if there is tension
in a society, it doesn't necessarily translate to violence."
Studying government documents, interviews with survivors or descendants
of survivors and Turkish memoirs can provide evidence of certain
patterns. "If you look at Ottoman history," said Gocek, "you can see
that violence was always there, even as far back as 1789, the time
of the French Revolution. There were the massacres under Abdul Hamid
in 1894 to 1896, and the pattern of violence continued in the Turkish
Republic with forced military recruitment in 1941-42 and the forcible
removal of the Greek population in 1964."
In reading the memoirs of Turkish Muslims, Gocek said it was
possible to discover patterns of attitudes and emotions expressed
towards Armenians and other minorities. In one striking account by
a Turkish Muslim couple, published in 2004, the wife acknowledged
seeing Armenians dying and being deported. However, her husband, who
was a participant, asserted, "I would have done it again." Gocek said,
"Under the milliyet system, there emerged a divide between Muslims and
non-Muslims that was kept under control by the state or local leaders.
One can see in these memoirs a social polarization. There were certain
instances used by the state and society to rationalize violence."
Gocek sketched the differences between the Western-Armenian
communities, which traded with Europe and were more affluent,
and the Eastern, more rural and provincial communities, where land
was the most important possession.When land reform efforts did not
ameliorate conditions, in 1830, Armenians in the Eastern provinces
mounted protests against injustices.
Gocek pointed to the attempted takeover of the Ottoman Bank in 1895
by Armenian revolutionaries as an attempt to get the attention of
the rest of the world for their suffering. The bank manager actually
escorted the revolutionaries to his yacht to take them to France.
"This was the first instance in which the Western powers took any
interest in what was happening in Armenia," said Gocek. When the
Young Turks took over the Ottoman Empire, there was a marked social
polarization amongst the Turkish Muslim majority. The reformists
wanted to transform the empire while the traditionalists hoped to
sustain Ottoman rule.
With the formation of the Committee for Union and Progress (CUP),
a policy of ethnic cleansing ensued, said Gocek, exacerbated by the
Balkan Wars. This was a period of rising nationalism and fear on the
part of Turks about whether they would have a place to call their own.
In order to claim the lands of Anatolia, the massacres and deportation
took place.
"This was a period when Turkey felt that the Western Europe ignored
the plight of the Muslims and led to the idea that the Turk had no
friend but himself," she added.
After 1919, said Gocek, the violence before 1923 was not discussed -
the subject was banned from the educational system. The trials of the
perpetrators were declared illegitimate and many of them escaped. The
Armenian issue was considered closed.
Said Gocek, "Of all the deputies in the First Turkish Assembly, 25
percent had been involved in the massacres, but many were promoted
to important government positions."
The period of 1975 to 1986 saw retaliatory efforts by individual
Armenians who assassinated Turkish diplomats. These acts introduced
Turkish society to its own history, yet Armenians were defined and
labeled as revolutionaries and terrorists.
While Gocek does not employ the word "genocide," she said, "It is
important to acknowledge the suffering." She views what happened to
the Armenians, and to other minority populations such as the Greeks,
the Assyrians and the Circassians, as part of "the end of a great
complicated empire that broke up over the period of the 19th century.
Outsiders were involved in this breakup and the story of the Armenians
needs to be put into that nuanced context."
Gocek pointed to the fact that the Genocide has received more
discussion since the dissolution of the Soviet Union. For example,
she said the Kurds, in the last five to 10 years, have acknowledged
what they did to the Armenians. She added, "When I attended that
important conference at Bilgi University in Istanbul in 2005, there
were granddaughters there who had discovered from their grandmothers
that they were Armenian. And it is often the women who pass on this
knowledge."
The event was sponsored by the Harvard Center of Middle Eastern Studies
and the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs. The next seminar,
scheduled for Wednesday, November 30, is titled "Turkey and Its
Neighborhood Foreign Policy," to be given by Prof. Kemal Kirisci of
Bogazici University.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress