Tweet
Wikileaks: Stepping Out of Ottoman Archives, Diplomat Says `We Really
Slaughtered Them!'
http://www.armenianweekly.com/2011/09/10/wikileaks-stepping-out/
Sat, Sep 10 2011
By: Nanore Barsoumian
(A.W.)-The Ottoman Archives are undergoing a purging campaign to
destroy all incriminating evidence relating to the Armenian Genocide
of 1915-1923, say scholars, and according to one source the
evidence - at one time or another - indicated that what transpired in the
waning days of the Ottoman Empire was purely and simply a `slaughter.'
`Berktay claims that at the time he was combing the archives, Nuri
Birgi met regularly with a mutual friend and at one point, referring
to the Armenians, ruefully confessed that `We really slaughtered
them.''
According to Sabanci University Professor Halil Berktay, there have
been `two serious efforts to `purge' the archives of any incriminating
documents on the Armenian question,' wrote Consul General David Arnett
on July 4, 2004, in a Wikileaks released cable originating in the U.S.
Consulate in Istanbul. The first, according to Berktay and others,
took place in 1918; during the 1919 Turkish Military Tribunals it was
revealed that documents had been `stolen' from the Archives.
According to Arnett, Berktay believes that a second round of
house-cleaning was carried out in the late 1980s and early 1990s,
during Turgut Ozal's Prime Ministership and Presidency, as he
undertook efforts to open the archives. Around that same time period a
group of retired generals and diplomats, led by former Turkish
Ambassador to London and NATO and Secretary General of the Turkish
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Muharrem Nuri Birgi, went through the
archives, supposedly in an effort to destroy evidence.
`Berktay claims that at the time he was combing the archives, Nuri
Birgi met regularly with a mutual friend and at one point, referring
to the Armenians, ruefully confessed that `We really slaughtered
them,'' wrote Arnett, adding that Director of the American Research
Institute in Turkey Tony Greenwood had divulged that when he was doing
work in the archives around the same time, `it was well known that a
group of retired military officers had privileged access and spent
months going through archival documents.'
Arnett added that according to another Turkish scholar, the ongoing
cataloging process is in fact a guise to purge the archives.
The cable then discussed Turkey's need to hold on to the artificially
constructed `Turkish identity' which dates back to Ataturk and his
cohorts, as an essential component of the modern Republic of Turkey.
`Decades of official denial and the absence of historical accounts or
academic debate within Turkey on this taboo issue have deprived Turks
today of an objective context in which to process assertions of
genocide,' wrote Arnett, who subsequently noted that while traveling
through central and eastern Anatolia, `ordinary citizens' would often
openly speak about `what their grandfathers did to the Armenians.'
Arnett also remarked that an essay competition had been set up by the
Ministry of Education to deny the Genocide, which, according to
Berktay, had been an idea devised by the `nationalist' think tank
ASAM.
The current government's stance was more muted than earlier
governments, said Arnett, though still parroting the mantra `leave the
issue for historians to discuss.'
In his conclusion, Arnett argues that it is unlikely that a noticeable
shift will occur in the Turkish government's stance regarding the
Genocide, though he claims that creating a more conducive environment
to dialogue is possible, and adds that it is important to encourage
researchers to demand unobstructed access to the Ottoman Archives.
The full text of the cable is below.
US embassy cable - 04ISTANBUL1074
ARMENIAN `GENOCIDE' AND THE OTTOMAN ARCHIVES
Identifier:
04ISTANBUL1074
Origin:
Consulate Istanbul
Created:
2004-07-12 09:01:00
Classification:
CONFIDENTIAL
Tags:
PREL PGOV AM TU Istanbul
Redacted:
This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks.
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text
of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ISTANBUL 001074
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/11/2014
TAGS: PREL, PGOV, AM, TU, Istanbul
SUBJECT: ARMENIAN `GENOCIDE' AND THE OTTOMAN ARCHIVES
Classified By: Consul General David Arnett for Reasons 1.5 (b&d)
This is a joint CG Istanbul/Embassy Ankara message.
1. (sbu) Summary: The lack of agreement and dialogue on the so-called
Armenian `genocide' question remains a major obstacle to
Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. A long-term resolution of this
problematic issue can only be built on an open dialogue and healthy
academic debate. Free and complete access to the Ottoman archives,
one of the primary repositories for historical evidence during this
period, will be critical to building the mutual trust needed for such
a debate. Although Turkey has made great strides to open the archives
and destigmatize the issue, persistent problems and doubts about the
archives continue to undermine efforts to bridge the gulf of
misunderstanding between Armenians and Turks on this historical
question. End Summary.
2. (u) The most significant obstacle to Turkish-Armenian
reconciliation remains a lack of agreement or even healthy dialogue on
the Armenian `question' or what most Turks refer to as the `supposed
genocide.' The accusations, denials, and counter-accusations on this
issue have long obscured most genuine academic debate. Armenian
diaspora scholars have amassed scores of eyewitness accounts and
narratives detailing the tragic events of 1915-16 that they claim
amounted to a genocide of as many as 1.5 million Armenians living in
the Ottoman Empire. Turkish historians, meanwhile, have argued that
no more than a few hundred thousand Armenians were killed by bandits,
disease, and harsh conditions when, in response to the threat posed by
Armenian insurgents (and the `massacre' of many Turkish Muslims), much
of the Armenian population was deported to Syria and Lebanon.
A Question of Identity
- - - - - - - -
3. (sbu) In addition to thousands of years of recorded history, a rich
cultural heritage, and a vibrant Church, for Armenians around the
world the 1915-16 events remain a crucial component of their modern
identity. Although some Armenians have at times sought retribution
through terror and violence (including ASALA terrorism in the 1970s),
focus has shifted to a tireless political campaign for recognition of
the events as genocide.
4. (sbu) The Turkish approach to the Armenian issue is complex. From
the inception of the Republic, Ataturk and his establishment heirs
have asserted that maintenance of a `Turkish identity' - which Ataturk
and his circle developed as an artificial construct and which his
political heirs claim is under threat from domestic and foreign
enemies - is essential to the preservation and development of the
Republic. Representatives of both the Turkish state and every
government to date believe that acknowledging any wrongs inflicted on
the Armenians would call into question Turkey's own claims of
victimization and its borders, and would make Turkey vulnerable to
claims for indemnity. Decades of official denial and the absence of
historical accounts or academic debate within Turkey on this taboo
issue have deprived Turks today of an objective context in which to
process assertions of genocide.
Are the Archives Open?
- - - - - - - -
5. (sbu) Both sides have attempted to use the Ottoman Archives to
support their version of events. The Turks have published volumes of
documents to bolster their case, while Armenian scholars charge that
the Turkish government's obstruction of free access to the archives
suggests that they are hiding the `smoking gun' that would prove the
genocide. Armenian scholars have long complained that they could not
obtain access permits or were obstructed in their research in the
archives. Others point to long (and, they say, deliberate) delays in
securing permits that often consumed most or all of the time available
on grants or sabbaticals. Kevork Bardakchian, head of the Armenian
Studies program at the University of Michigan, for example, told
poloff that he and other colleagues were simply denied without
explanation when they applied for access to the archives in the 1970s
and 1980s. An Archive Director in this period spoke openly about the
need to `protect' the documents from misuse by hostile foreigners.
6. (sbu) Turkish and foreign scholars agree that former PM and
President Turgut Ozal made a real push to open the archives in the
late 1980s and early 1990s. The records were placed under the
supervision of the Prime Ministry, procedures for obtaining research
permits were simplified, and efforts to catalog the 150 million
documents were accelerated. Everyone we have spoken to concedes that
this represented a `sea change' that has continued to this day.
According to Turkish archive officials, permits are usually granted
within a week, archival staff are helpful, and photocopies of desired
documents are readily available at reasonable fees. When poloff
visited the Ottoman Archive research room earlier this month, the
staff showed him a computerized list of over 300 Americans who have
received permission to conduct research there in recent years (over 30
so far this year alone). The catalogs are also freely available
through the Archive website over the internet.
7. (sbu) Some restrictions on access remain in place. Turkish
officials do not permit access to over 70 million still-uncatalogued
documents and claim that many others are too damaged for use by
researchers. Moreover, some critics still complain that the Turkish
government seeks to block those researching the Armenian question.
Prime Ministry State Archive Director Yusuf Sarinay pointed out to
poloff that researchers must be legally in Turkey for that purpose,
which requires visa approval by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Some
researchers continue to have permits delayed or denied altogether
(Greek researchers have also been victims of such discrimination in
the past). Archive Director Sarinay said that although many American
researchers have come to the archives, notably not one has come from
Armenia. He speculated that this was because there are no diplomatic
relations between Turkey and Armenia - and because of a policy of
reciprocity for Armenia supposedly not allowing Turkish researchers
into its archives. Turkey's own preeminent Ottoman historian, Halil
Inalcik, criticized the Archives' lack of openness in a February 2001
editorial for Radikal daily entitled `The Ottoman Archives Should Be
Opened to the World.' Despite the criticism, however, the mantra
today is `openness' and any talk of `protecting' the archives from
foreigners is politically incorrect. Although the Archives Director
still has considerable authority to deny access, he would be
hard-pressed to explain placing such restrictions on any serious
academic researcher.
Have the Archives Been Purged?
- - - - - - - - - -
8. (c) Perhaps more important than the question of access, however, is
whether or not the archives themselves are complete. According to
Sabanci University Professor Halil Berktay, there were two serious
efforts to `purge' the archives of any incriminating documents on the
Armenian question. The first took place in 1918, presumably before
the Allied forces occupied Istanbul. Berktay and others point to
testimony in the 1919 Turkish Military Tribunals indicating that
important documents had been `stolen' from the archives. Berktay
believes a second purge was executed in conjunction with Ozal's
efforts to open the archives by a group of retired diplomats and
generals led by former Ambassador Muharrem Nuri Birgi (Note: Nuri
Birgi was previously Ambassador to London and NATO and Secretary
General of the MFA). Berktay claims that at the time he was combing
the archives, Nuri Birgi met regularly with a mutual friend and at one
point, referring to the Armenians, ruefully confessed that `We really
slaughtered them.' Tony Greenwood, the Director of the American
Research Institute in Turkey, told poloff separately that when he was
working in the Archives during that same period it was well known that
a group of retired military officers had privileged access and spent
months going through archival documents. Another Turkish scholar who
has researched Armenian issues claims that the ongoing cataloging
process is used to purge the archives.
Coming to Grips With History
- - - - - - - - - -
9. (sbu) Turkish attitudes on the genocide issue have evolved over
time. Although few have the courage to do so publicly, some
intellectuals, academics, and others privately question the official
version of events. Ordinary citizens in central and eastern Anatolia
often openly acknowledge to us what their grandfathers did to the
Armenians. Several visiting American academics have noted that the
subject is no longer as taboo as it once was. Publicly, the Turkish
establishment (including the nationalist think-tank ASAM, the state
Turkish Historical Association, and even the Archives) continues to
challenge the assertions of the Armenian diaspora and fire off
counter-accusations charging Armenians with having engaged in massive,
wide-spread revolts during the war and with having perpetrated
wholesale massacres on Turkish Muslims. In recent years the Education
Ministry has asked high-school students to compete in an essay
competition to deny the genocide (note: Berktay claims that this idea
originated with ASAM and was imposed on the Ministry by ASAM's
military contacts). The current government, however, has been
noticeably more quiet on the subject than some of its predecessors,
dutifully repeating the need to `leave the issue for historians to
discuss.'
Comment
- - -
10. (c) Although almost a century has passed since the 1915-16 events,
the gulf of misunderstanding between the Armenians and Turks on this
issue remains considerable. No longer as completely closed a subject
as it once was, discussion of the issue in Turkey still remains
limited and dominated by the nationalist/establishment line. Even if
the current government hopes to put this issue behind them, it is
unlikely that they will be able to do more than simply encourage an
environment in which a healthy discussion can take place. It is
doubtful that, in their current state, the Ottoman Archives will ever
deliver a definitive interpretation of the Armenian question, but they
will be a focal point and key resource for any Turks and Armenians
seeking to engage in genuine research and debate on the issue. To
that end, we should support and encourage researchers to continue to
push for access to the archival materials and be prepared to approach
the Turkish government to discuss any complaints of official
obstruction. We request that the Department make us aware of any such
complaints.
ARNETT
Slaughtered Them!'
http://www.armenianweekly.com/2011/09/10/wikileaks-stepping-out/
Sat, Sep 10 2011
By: Nanore Barsoumian
(A.W.)-The Ottoman Archives are undergoing a purging campaign to
destroy all incriminating evidence relating to the Armenian Genocide
of 1915-1923, say scholars, and according to one source the
evidence - at one time or another - indicated that what transpired in the
waning days of the Ottoman Empire was purely and simply a `slaughter.'
`Berktay claims that at the time he was combing the archives, Nuri
Birgi met regularly with a mutual friend and at one point, referring
to the Armenians, ruefully confessed that `We really slaughtered
them.''
According to Sabanci University Professor Halil Berktay, there have
been `two serious efforts to `purge' the archives of any incriminating
documents on the Armenian question,' wrote Consul General David Arnett
on July 4, 2004, in a Wikileaks released cable originating in the U.S.
Consulate in Istanbul. The first, according to Berktay and others,
took place in 1918; during the 1919 Turkish Military Tribunals it was
revealed that documents had been `stolen' from the Archives.
According to Arnett, Berktay believes that a second round of
house-cleaning was carried out in the late 1980s and early 1990s,
during Turgut Ozal's Prime Ministership and Presidency, as he
undertook efforts to open the archives. Around that same time period a
group of retired generals and diplomats, led by former Turkish
Ambassador to London and NATO and Secretary General of the Turkish
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Muharrem Nuri Birgi, went through the
archives, supposedly in an effort to destroy evidence.
`Berktay claims that at the time he was combing the archives, Nuri
Birgi met regularly with a mutual friend and at one point, referring
to the Armenians, ruefully confessed that `We really slaughtered
them,'' wrote Arnett, adding that Director of the American Research
Institute in Turkey Tony Greenwood had divulged that when he was doing
work in the archives around the same time, `it was well known that a
group of retired military officers had privileged access and spent
months going through archival documents.'
Arnett added that according to another Turkish scholar, the ongoing
cataloging process is in fact a guise to purge the archives.
The cable then discussed Turkey's need to hold on to the artificially
constructed `Turkish identity' which dates back to Ataturk and his
cohorts, as an essential component of the modern Republic of Turkey.
`Decades of official denial and the absence of historical accounts or
academic debate within Turkey on this taboo issue have deprived Turks
today of an objective context in which to process assertions of
genocide,' wrote Arnett, who subsequently noted that while traveling
through central and eastern Anatolia, `ordinary citizens' would often
openly speak about `what their grandfathers did to the Armenians.'
Arnett also remarked that an essay competition had been set up by the
Ministry of Education to deny the Genocide, which, according to
Berktay, had been an idea devised by the `nationalist' think tank
ASAM.
The current government's stance was more muted than earlier
governments, said Arnett, though still parroting the mantra `leave the
issue for historians to discuss.'
In his conclusion, Arnett argues that it is unlikely that a noticeable
shift will occur in the Turkish government's stance regarding the
Genocide, though he claims that creating a more conducive environment
to dialogue is possible, and adds that it is important to encourage
researchers to demand unobstructed access to the Ottoman Archives.
The full text of the cable is below.
US embassy cable - 04ISTANBUL1074
ARMENIAN `GENOCIDE' AND THE OTTOMAN ARCHIVES
Identifier:
04ISTANBUL1074
Origin:
Consulate Istanbul
Created:
2004-07-12 09:01:00
Classification:
CONFIDENTIAL
Tags:
PREL PGOV AM TU Istanbul
Redacted:
This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks.
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text
of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ISTANBUL 001074
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/11/2014
TAGS: PREL, PGOV, AM, TU, Istanbul
SUBJECT: ARMENIAN `GENOCIDE' AND THE OTTOMAN ARCHIVES
Classified By: Consul General David Arnett for Reasons 1.5 (b&d)
This is a joint CG Istanbul/Embassy Ankara message.
1. (sbu) Summary: The lack of agreement and dialogue on the so-called
Armenian `genocide' question remains a major obstacle to
Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. A long-term resolution of this
problematic issue can only be built on an open dialogue and healthy
academic debate. Free and complete access to the Ottoman archives,
one of the primary repositories for historical evidence during this
period, will be critical to building the mutual trust needed for such
a debate. Although Turkey has made great strides to open the archives
and destigmatize the issue, persistent problems and doubts about the
archives continue to undermine efforts to bridge the gulf of
misunderstanding between Armenians and Turks on this historical
question. End Summary.
2. (u) The most significant obstacle to Turkish-Armenian
reconciliation remains a lack of agreement or even healthy dialogue on
the Armenian `question' or what most Turks refer to as the `supposed
genocide.' The accusations, denials, and counter-accusations on this
issue have long obscured most genuine academic debate. Armenian
diaspora scholars have amassed scores of eyewitness accounts and
narratives detailing the tragic events of 1915-16 that they claim
amounted to a genocide of as many as 1.5 million Armenians living in
the Ottoman Empire. Turkish historians, meanwhile, have argued that
no more than a few hundred thousand Armenians were killed by bandits,
disease, and harsh conditions when, in response to the threat posed by
Armenian insurgents (and the `massacre' of many Turkish Muslims), much
of the Armenian population was deported to Syria and Lebanon.
A Question of Identity
- - - - - - - -
3. (sbu) In addition to thousands of years of recorded history, a rich
cultural heritage, and a vibrant Church, for Armenians around the
world the 1915-16 events remain a crucial component of their modern
identity. Although some Armenians have at times sought retribution
through terror and violence (including ASALA terrorism in the 1970s),
focus has shifted to a tireless political campaign for recognition of
the events as genocide.
4. (sbu) The Turkish approach to the Armenian issue is complex. From
the inception of the Republic, Ataturk and his establishment heirs
have asserted that maintenance of a `Turkish identity' - which Ataturk
and his circle developed as an artificial construct and which his
political heirs claim is under threat from domestic and foreign
enemies - is essential to the preservation and development of the
Republic. Representatives of both the Turkish state and every
government to date believe that acknowledging any wrongs inflicted on
the Armenians would call into question Turkey's own claims of
victimization and its borders, and would make Turkey vulnerable to
claims for indemnity. Decades of official denial and the absence of
historical accounts or academic debate within Turkey on this taboo
issue have deprived Turks today of an objective context in which to
process assertions of genocide.
Are the Archives Open?
- - - - - - - -
5. (sbu) Both sides have attempted to use the Ottoman Archives to
support their version of events. The Turks have published volumes of
documents to bolster their case, while Armenian scholars charge that
the Turkish government's obstruction of free access to the archives
suggests that they are hiding the `smoking gun' that would prove the
genocide. Armenian scholars have long complained that they could not
obtain access permits or were obstructed in their research in the
archives. Others point to long (and, they say, deliberate) delays in
securing permits that often consumed most or all of the time available
on grants or sabbaticals. Kevork Bardakchian, head of the Armenian
Studies program at the University of Michigan, for example, told
poloff that he and other colleagues were simply denied without
explanation when they applied for access to the archives in the 1970s
and 1980s. An Archive Director in this period spoke openly about the
need to `protect' the documents from misuse by hostile foreigners.
6. (sbu) Turkish and foreign scholars agree that former PM and
President Turgut Ozal made a real push to open the archives in the
late 1980s and early 1990s. The records were placed under the
supervision of the Prime Ministry, procedures for obtaining research
permits were simplified, and efforts to catalog the 150 million
documents were accelerated. Everyone we have spoken to concedes that
this represented a `sea change' that has continued to this day.
According to Turkish archive officials, permits are usually granted
within a week, archival staff are helpful, and photocopies of desired
documents are readily available at reasonable fees. When poloff
visited the Ottoman Archive research room earlier this month, the
staff showed him a computerized list of over 300 Americans who have
received permission to conduct research there in recent years (over 30
so far this year alone). The catalogs are also freely available
through the Archive website over the internet.
7. (sbu) Some restrictions on access remain in place. Turkish
officials do not permit access to over 70 million still-uncatalogued
documents and claim that many others are too damaged for use by
researchers. Moreover, some critics still complain that the Turkish
government seeks to block those researching the Armenian question.
Prime Ministry State Archive Director Yusuf Sarinay pointed out to
poloff that researchers must be legally in Turkey for that purpose,
which requires visa approval by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Some
researchers continue to have permits delayed or denied altogether
(Greek researchers have also been victims of such discrimination in
the past). Archive Director Sarinay said that although many American
researchers have come to the archives, notably not one has come from
Armenia. He speculated that this was because there are no diplomatic
relations between Turkey and Armenia - and because of a policy of
reciprocity for Armenia supposedly not allowing Turkish researchers
into its archives. Turkey's own preeminent Ottoman historian, Halil
Inalcik, criticized the Archives' lack of openness in a February 2001
editorial for Radikal daily entitled `The Ottoman Archives Should Be
Opened to the World.' Despite the criticism, however, the mantra
today is `openness' and any talk of `protecting' the archives from
foreigners is politically incorrect. Although the Archives Director
still has considerable authority to deny access, he would be
hard-pressed to explain placing such restrictions on any serious
academic researcher.
Have the Archives Been Purged?
- - - - - - - - - -
8. (c) Perhaps more important than the question of access, however, is
whether or not the archives themselves are complete. According to
Sabanci University Professor Halil Berktay, there were two serious
efforts to `purge' the archives of any incriminating documents on the
Armenian question. The first took place in 1918, presumably before
the Allied forces occupied Istanbul. Berktay and others point to
testimony in the 1919 Turkish Military Tribunals indicating that
important documents had been `stolen' from the archives. Berktay
believes a second purge was executed in conjunction with Ozal's
efforts to open the archives by a group of retired diplomats and
generals led by former Ambassador Muharrem Nuri Birgi (Note: Nuri
Birgi was previously Ambassador to London and NATO and Secretary
General of the MFA). Berktay claims that at the time he was combing
the archives, Nuri Birgi met regularly with a mutual friend and at one
point, referring to the Armenians, ruefully confessed that `We really
slaughtered them.' Tony Greenwood, the Director of the American
Research Institute in Turkey, told poloff separately that when he was
working in the Archives during that same period it was well known that
a group of retired military officers had privileged access and spent
months going through archival documents. Another Turkish scholar who
has researched Armenian issues claims that the ongoing cataloging
process is used to purge the archives.
Coming to Grips With History
- - - - - - - - - -
9. (sbu) Turkish attitudes on the genocide issue have evolved over
time. Although few have the courage to do so publicly, some
intellectuals, academics, and others privately question the official
version of events. Ordinary citizens in central and eastern Anatolia
often openly acknowledge to us what their grandfathers did to the
Armenians. Several visiting American academics have noted that the
subject is no longer as taboo as it once was. Publicly, the Turkish
establishment (including the nationalist think-tank ASAM, the state
Turkish Historical Association, and even the Archives) continues to
challenge the assertions of the Armenian diaspora and fire off
counter-accusations charging Armenians with having engaged in massive,
wide-spread revolts during the war and with having perpetrated
wholesale massacres on Turkish Muslims. In recent years the Education
Ministry has asked high-school students to compete in an essay
competition to deny the genocide (note: Berktay claims that this idea
originated with ASAM and was imposed on the Ministry by ASAM's
military contacts). The current government, however, has been
noticeably more quiet on the subject than some of its predecessors,
dutifully repeating the need to `leave the issue for historians to
discuss.'
Comment
- - -
10. (c) Although almost a century has passed since the 1915-16 events,
the gulf of misunderstanding between the Armenians and Turks on this
issue remains considerable. No longer as completely closed a subject
as it once was, discussion of the issue in Turkey still remains
limited and dominated by the nationalist/establishment line. Even if
the current government hopes to put this issue behind them, it is
unlikely that they will be able to do more than simply encourage an
environment in which a healthy discussion can take place. It is
doubtful that, in their current state, the Ottoman Archives will ever
deliver a definitive interpretation of the Armenian question, but they
will be a focal point and key resource for any Turks and Armenians
seeking to engage in genuine research and debate on the issue. To
that end, we should support and encourage researchers to continue to
push for access to the archival materials and be prepared to approach
the Turkish government to discuss any complaints of official
obstruction. We request that the Department make us aware of any such
complaints.
ARNETT