Tweet
REMEMBERING ARMENIAN SORROWS AND ARTICULATING ARMENIAN HOPES
By Harry Hagopian
Ekklesia
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/16594
April 27 2012
UK
During my recent travels, I followed with interest the controversy in
Germany over a recent poem, What Must Be Said, written by the German
Nobel literature laureate Gunter Grass. His nine-stanza, 69-line poem,
published in the Munich-based daily Suddeutsche Zeitung, referred to
the nuclear standoff with Iran and labelled Israel as a threat to
an 'already fragile world peace'. Following the publication of his
poem, the 84-year-old author of The Tin Drum was excoriated in some
circles for being critical of Israel whilst only obliquely referring
to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's repeated threats against
Israel by writing solely that the Iranian people are being "subjugated
by a loudmouth".
Grass, not a stranger to controversy, admitted later that he might have
been a tad hasty with his pen, but his thoughts and words nonetheless
contained the kernels of some truth in them. And not unexpectedly,
they stirred up a hornet's nest across the whole of the country and
forced Germans to exercise some soul-searching in their relations
with Israel. After all, one key characteristic of German-Israeli
close relations is that Germany remains reluctant - unable even - to
criticise Israel because of the sheer force of the moral guilt it still
feels from the execrable killings of Jews by the Nazis during WWII.
Turkey, on the other hand, feels no such moral compunction or guilt at
all despite the holocaust (as Robert Fisk calls it) that it committed
against Armenians. Instead, and unlike Germany than has bent backwards
in its admission of responsibility for the Jewish Holocaust, Turkey
challenges any statement that dares question its actions during WWI.
So I would like to take a leaf from this German poet's book today
in order to share with readers some of my own broader thoughts about
the issue of the Armenian genocide, 97 years old this week, and its
zealous let alone frenetic denial by Turkey.
I would like to re-affirm today that there is no doubt in my mind
about the historical veracity of this genocide - a macabre event that
one priest recently described as 'the granddaddy of all genocides'.
And I utter this statement not as an ethnic Armenian with presumed
genetic biases, but as someone quite familiar with the solid literature
coming out from international historians, organisations, scholars and
lawyers - not least the International Association of Genocide Scholars
- confirming time and again that forced deportations and massacres
took place against Armenians of Turkish nationality [alongside Greeks,
Assyrians and Nestorians] living in their homelands in Western Armenia
during the ominous years of WWI.
Mind you, any search engine would come up with a wealth of serious
and incontrovertible documentation about this genocide. As Professor
Colin Tatz, former director of the Centre for Comparative Genocide
Studies, stated, "The Turkish denial [of the Armenian genocide] is
probably the foremost example of historical perversion. With a mix
of academic sophistication and diplomatic thuggery - of which we at
Macquarie University [in Sydney, Australia] have been targets - the
Turks have put both memory and history into reverse gear". In fact,
was it not Tala'at Pasha, in a conversation with Dr Mordtmann of the
German embassy in June 1915, who said that Turkey was taking advantage
of the war in order to thoroughly liquidate {grundlich aufraumen}
its internal foes?
Yet, many Turks remain largely unaware of this Ottoman chapter in
their history. How could they really? A blend of Turkish stubborn
nationalism, coupled with a blackout of any literary or academic
sources (until quite recently) have meant that a gap has existed
in the education of Turks. One rule of thumb has always been that
ignorance often fosters strident tones of nationalism - which is
what also happens at times in modern-day Turkey. Nonetheless, there
is a creeping awareness by Turks of this genocide: after all, some
universities, academics, authors and researchers are openly - at times
bravely - defying this manner of self-imposed and deliberate denial.
In this sense, one very powerful manifestation of this evolving trend
was the public Call for Commemoration: The 24th of April statement that
came out this week from the Human Rights Association, Istanbul Branch
Committee against Racism and Discrimination. Its members held a silent
procession on 24th April in keeping with the tradition of mourning in
front of the Museum for Turkish and Islamic Arts (a prison during the
Ottoman era). They also sent letters to the two catholicoi (highest
authorities of the Armenian Church in Etchmiadzin and Antelias)
in which they decried "the deracination of the Armenian population
throughout Anatolia where they had lived for thousands of years,
and their annihilation as a result of starvation, destitution and
massacres". In fact, the significance of this decision by the Human
Rights Association far outreaches its small numbers. It is a bold
decision that is driven by respect for human rights per se and as
such is a crucial transit point for the future since what matters
most is not the recognition of this genocide by third parties -
even important ones such as the USA or the UK - but rather by Turkey
itself. Simply put, the buck started with Turkey, and the buck can
only really stop with Turkey.
Moreover, and as Marc Nichanian writes somewhat controversially in
his Historiographic Perversion (CUP, 2009) when discussing history
and law, the Armenian genocide deals with amputation as well as
imputation. Indeed, the certainty alone that the genocide occurred
- no matter how deliberately cruel - is in itself an inadequate
response. The same could be argued for the self-sufficiency of
worldwide campaigns for recognition embracing our political, religious
or community leaders. Even though their words are fiery and rousing,
their follow-up actions remain politic and therefore casuistic. Nor,
for that matter, is recognition achieved merely through an overinflated
reliance on draft laws submitted to parliaments (such as in the
French Houses of Parliament by President Nicolas Sarkozy who uses
Armenian-French votes as a political football) or the prevarications
of US Administrations and Israeli governments who spin their decisions
politically and label the genocide as medz yeghern (great catastrophe)
or market the recognition of the genocide episodically for the sake
of rankling if not pressuring Turkey. This panting dependency by
Armenians on recognition by world leaders or parliaments is not
the real solution. What is required is a much deeper reflection on
longer-term strategies rather than shorter-term tactics alone.
In my opinion, as a Christian believer let alone political advisor,
such expressions of frustration and indignation - understandable
though they might well be - must also be measured and well
thought out. We must certainly lift up our indefatigable values,
sacrifices and traditions as Armenians but we should also ensure
that we do not go down the slippery road of revenge. Recognition is
not tantamount to revenge or a settling of scores. So I do wonder
about the wisdom of constant Turkey-bashing with words and eggs
(as happened this week in front of the Turkish embassy in Beirut),
or when our recognition-campaigns turn exceedingly jingoistic and
attempt to legislate our freedoms of thought and expression - those
very freedoms our forefathers were deprived of during the genocide?
This year, in 2012, the Republic of Armenia has invited Diasporan
communities to establish committees that would prepare for the
centenary of the Armenian genocide. So what should be the task of
those august committees world-wide? Should it be one of narrow-minded
self-centredness, with each committee behaving parochially or else
slavering to the expectations of vested interests - Armenian or
otherwise - as they consider the programmes that could feature in
our commemorative events in 2015? Or should they come together as
avant-garde thinkers who go outside the box and confidently seek to
define a robust and united roadmap that is grounded in an inclusive
vision? Are they ready to challenge some of our long-held taboos?
Where do we Armenians wish to go in terms of a genocide that cleansed
two-thirds of the Armenian populations in Ottoman Turkey during
1915-1918? Should we not look at the arsenal of tools that constitute
the real wealth of the whole Armenian nation today?
Such tools could be political, legal, literary, religious and
media-friendly - to name just five. Are we not aware of the number
of journalists or activists being detained in Turkish gaols today
or are we not familiar of the vagaries of the Turkish Penal Code
and its restrictive articles that muzzle Turks and handcuff their
words, let alone deeds? Should we not challenge the vociferous denial
of modern-day Turkey in legal fora, academic and media outlets as
well as on political levels that require less grandstanding perhaps
than the White House or Elysee Palace but are at least as effective
in mobilising grassroots support for an Armenian case that helped
Lemkin craft the UN Genocide Convention of 1948? Here in the UK,
a small number of committed activists in Wales have over the years
achieved much more than in many other parts of the UK. The same could
easily be said of Edinburgh where a handful of Armenians also managed
twice to pass Resolutions by the Edinburgh City Council recognising
the Armenian genocide despite massive Turkish opposition and the
reluctance of Scottish Conservatives to support the Motion.
Finally, and while keeping recognition by Turkey as the clear target
of all collective efforts, the Armenian genocide must also tap into its
available resources in association with survivors of other genocides -
from the Holocaust and Cambodia to Rwanda and Darfur.
After all, and as George Shirinian of the Canada-based Zoryan
Institute stated recently, education is a mnemonic, the one
indispensable skeleton key toward the achievement of the Armenian
objective. Education is harder than loose words, but it could also
re-incarnate the memories of all those Armenians killed, wounded,
raped, deported, converted or forgotten during this cheerless period
in the history of humankind.
Like most Diasporan Armenians today, I too trace my roots to the
horrors committed against my family by the triumvirate rulers of Turkey
almost one century ago. But I do not seek revenge, nor do I want to
spill more blood in order to cleanse the stain that blots Turkish
history. Rather, I seek my painful way of honouring the memories
of all my relatives who perished during the genocide so that I too
can move forward - alongside other Armenians and Turks. After all,
whilst all Turks are certainly not righteous Hrant Dinks, some of
them certainly are and therefore they too become part of my future.
So let us not forget: 2012-1915 = 97.
Harry Hagopian is an international lawyer, ecumenist and EU
political consultant. He also acts as a Middle East and inter-faith
advisor to the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England & Wales
and as Middle East consultant to ACEP (Christians in Politics)
in Paris. He is an Ekklesia associate and regular contributor
(http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/HarryHagopian). Formerly an Executive
Secretary of the Jerusalem Inter-Church Committee and Executive
Director of the Middle East Council of Churches, he is now an
international fellow, Sorbonne III University, Paris, consultant to
the Campaign for Recognition of the Armenian Genocide (UK), Ecumenical
consultant to the Primate of Armenian Church in UK & Ireland, and
author of The Armenian Church in the Holy Land. Dr Hagopian's own
website is www.epektasis.net
By Harry Hagopian
Ekklesia
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/16594
April 27 2012
UK
During my recent travels, I followed with interest the controversy in
Germany over a recent poem, What Must Be Said, written by the German
Nobel literature laureate Gunter Grass. His nine-stanza, 69-line poem,
published in the Munich-based daily Suddeutsche Zeitung, referred to
the nuclear standoff with Iran and labelled Israel as a threat to
an 'already fragile world peace'. Following the publication of his
poem, the 84-year-old author of The Tin Drum was excoriated in some
circles for being critical of Israel whilst only obliquely referring
to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's repeated threats against
Israel by writing solely that the Iranian people are being "subjugated
by a loudmouth".
Grass, not a stranger to controversy, admitted later that he might have
been a tad hasty with his pen, but his thoughts and words nonetheless
contained the kernels of some truth in them. And not unexpectedly,
they stirred up a hornet's nest across the whole of the country and
forced Germans to exercise some soul-searching in their relations
with Israel. After all, one key characteristic of German-Israeli
close relations is that Germany remains reluctant - unable even - to
criticise Israel because of the sheer force of the moral guilt it still
feels from the execrable killings of Jews by the Nazis during WWII.
Turkey, on the other hand, feels no such moral compunction or guilt at
all despite the holocaust (as Robert Fisk calls it) that it committed
against Armenians. Instead, and unlike Germany than has bent backwards
in its admission of responsibility for the Jewish Holocaust, Turkey
challenges any statement that dares question its actions during WWI.
So I would like to take a leaf from this German poet's book today
in order to share with readers some of my own broader thoughts about
the issue of the Armenian genocide, 97 years old this week, and its
zealous let alone frenetic denial by Turkey.
I would like to re-affirm today that there is no doubt in my mind
about the historical veracity of this genocide - a macabre event that
one priest recently described as 'the granddaddy of all genocides'.
And I utter this statement not as an ethnic Armenian with presumed
genetic biases, but as someone quite familiar with the solid literature
coming out from international historians, organisations, scholars and
lawyers - not least the International Association of Genocide Scholars
- confirming time and again that forced deportations and massacres
took place against Armenians of Turkish nationality [alongside Greeks,
Assyrians and Nestorians] living in their homelands in Western Armenia
during the ominous years of WWI.
Mind you, any search engine would come up with a wealth of serious
and incontrovertible documentation about this genocide. As Professor
Colin Tatz, former director of the Centre for Comparative Genocide
Studies, stated, "The Turkish denial [of the Armenian genocide] is
probably the foremost example of historical perversion. With a mix
of academic sophistication and diplomatic thuggery - of which we at
Macquarie University [in Sydney, Australia] have been targets - the
Turks have put both memory and history into reverse gear". In fact,
was it not Tala'at Pasha, in a conversation with Dr Mordtmann of the
German embassy in June 1915, who said that Turkey was taking advantage
of the war in order to thoroughly liquidate {grundlich aufraumen}
its internal foes?
Yet, many Turks remain largely unaware of this Ottoman chapter in
their history. How could they really? A blend of Turkish stubborn
nationalism, coupled with a blackout of any literary or academic
sources (until quite recently) have meant that a gap has existed
in the education of Turks. One rule of thumb has always been that
ignorance often fosters strident tones of nationalism - which is
what also happens at times in modern-day Turkey. Nonetheless, there
is a creeping awareness by Turks of this genocide: after all, some
universities, academics, authors and researchers are openly - at times
bravely - defying this manner of self-imposed and deliberate denial.
In this sense, one very powerful manifestation of this evolving trend
was the public Call for Commemoration: The 24th of April statement that
came out this week from the Human Rights Association, Istanbul Branch
Committee against Racism and Discrimination. Its members held a silent
procession on 24th April in keeping with the tradition of mourning in
front of the Museum for Turkish and Islamic Arts (a prison during the
Ottoman era). They also sent letters to the two catholicoi (highest
authorities of the Armenian Church in Etchmiadzin and Antelias)
in which they decried "the deracination of the Armenian population
throughout Anatolia where they had lived for thousands of years,
and their annihilation as a result of starvation, destitution and
massacres". In fact, the significance of this decision by the Human
Rights Association far outreaches its small numbers. It is a bold
decision that is driven by respect for human rights per se and as
such is a crucial transit point for the future since what matters
most is not the recognition of this genocide by third parties -
even important ones such as the USA or the UK - but rather by Turkey
itself. Simply put, the buck started with Turkey, and the buck can
only really stop with Turkey.
Moreover, and as Marc Nichanian writes somewhat controversially in
his Historiographic Perversion (CUP, 2009) when discussing history
and law, the Armenian genocide deals with amputation as well as
imputation. Indeed, the certainty alone that the genocide occurred
- no matter how deliberately cruel - is in itself an inadequate
response. The same could be argued for the self-sufficiency of
worldwide campaigns for recognition embracing our political, religious
or community leaders. Even though their words are fiery and rousing,
their follow-up actions remain politic and therefore casuistic. Nor,
for that matter, is recognition achieved merely through an overinflated
reliance on draft laws submitted to parliaments (such as in the
French Houses of Parliament by President Nicolas Sarkozy who uses
Armenian-French votes as a political football) or the prevarications
of US Administrations and Israeli governments who spin their decisions
politically and label the genocide as medz yeghern (great catastrophe)
or market the recognition of the genocide episodically for the sake
of rankling if not pressuring Turkey. This panting dependency by
Armenians on recognition by world leaders or parliaments is not
the real solution. What is required is a much deeper reflection on
longer-term strategies rather than shorter-term tactics alone.
In my opinion, as a Christian believer let alone political advisor,
such expressions of frustration and indignation - understandable
though they might well be - must also be measured and well
thought out. We must certainly lift up our indefatigable values,
sacrifices and traditions as Armenians but we should also ensure
that we do not go down the slippery road of revenge. Recognition is
not tantamount to revenge or a settling of scores. So I do wonder
about the wisdom of constant Turkey-bashing with words and eggs
(as happened this week in front of the Turkish embassy in Beirut),
or when our recognition-campaigns turn exceedingly jingoistic and
attempt to legislate our freedoms of thought and expression - those
very freedoms our forefathers were deprived of during the genocide?
This year, in 2012, the Republic of Armenia has invited Diasporan
communities to establish committees that would prepare for the
centenary of the Armenian genocide. So what should be the task of
those august committees world-wide? Should it be one of narrow-minded
self-centredness, with each committee behaving parochially or else
slavering to the expectations of vested interests - Armenian or
otherwise - as they consider the programmes that could feature in
our commemorative events in 2015? Or should they come together as
avant-garde thinkers who go outside the box and confidently seek to
define a robust and united roadmap that is grounded in an inclusive
vision? Are they ready to challenge some of our long-held taboos?
Where do we Armenians wish to go in terms of a genocide that cleansed
two-thirds of the Armenian populations in Ottoman Turkey during
1915-1918? Should we not look at the arsenal of tools that constitute
the real wealth of the whole Armenian nation today?
Such tools could be political, legal, literary, religious and
media-friendly - to name just five. Are we not aware of the number
of journalists or activists being detained in Turkish gaols today
or are we not familiar of the vagaries of the Turkish Penal Code
and its restrictive articles that muzzle Turks and handcuff their
words, let alone deeds? Should we not challenge the vociferous denial
of modern-day Turkey in legal fora, academic and media outlets as
well as on political levels that require less grandstanding perhaps
than the White House or Elysee Palace but are at least as effective
in mobilising grassroots support for an Armenian case that helped
Lemkin craft the UN Genocide Convention of 1948? Here in the UK,
a small number of committed activists in Wales have over the years
achieved much more than in many other parts of the UK. The same could
easily be said of Edinburgh where a handful of Armenians also managed
twice to pass Resolutions by the Edinburgh City Council recognising
the Armenian genocide despite massive Turkish opposition and the
reluctance of Scottish Conservatives to support the Motion.
Finally, and while keeping recognition by Turkey as the clear target
of all collective efforts, the Armenian genocide must also tap into its
available resources in association with survivors of other genocides -
from the Holocaust and Cambodia to Rwanda and Darfur.
After all, and as George Shirinian of the Canada-based Zoryan
Institute stated recently, education is a mnemonic, the one
indispensable skeleton key toward the achievement of the Armenian
objective. Education is harder than loose words, but it could also
re-incarnate the memories of all those Armenians killed, wounded,
raped, deported, converted or forgotten during this cheerless period
in the history of humankind.
Like most Diasporan Armenians today, I too trace my roots to the
horrors committed against my family by the triumvirate rulers of Turkey
almost one century ago. But I do not seek revenge, nor do I want to
spill more blood in order to cleanse the stain that blots Turkish
history. Rather, I seek my painful way of honouring the memories
of all my relatives who perished during the genocide so that I too
can move forward - alongside other Armenians and Turks. After all,
whilst all Turks are certainly not righteous Hrant Dinks, some of
them certainly are and therefore they too become part of my future.
So let us not forget: 2012-1915 = 97.
Harry Hagopian is an international lawyer, ecumenist and EU
political consultant. He also acts as a Middle East and inter-faith
advisor to the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England & Wales
and as Middle East consultant to ACEP (Christians in Politics)
in Paris. He is an Ekklesia associate and regular contributor
(http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/HarryHagopian). Formerly an Executive
Secretary of the Jerusalem Inter-Church Committee and Executive
Director of the Middle East Council of Churches, he is now an
international fellow, Sorbonne III University, Paris, consultant to
the Campaign for Recognition of the Armenian Genocide (UK), Ecumenical
consultant to the Primate of Armenian Church in UK & Ireland, and
author of The Armenian Church in the Holy Land. Dr Hagopian's own
website is www.epektasis.net