Tweet
RIGHTEOUS TURKS: WHO ARE THEY AND WHY ARE THEY SO IMPORTANT?
13:38 17.09.2014
Within the last five years numerous talks could be heard about the
Turks who rescued the Armenians during the years of genocide. The
expression "the Turks who rescued the Armenians" sounds a bit
strange, if not wrathful to an Armenian hearing. But is it true? An
affirmative answer is recorded - yes, it is true. There are myriad
examples and stories from handwritten and published memoires of the
genocide survivors, as well as from oral stories stating about the
mercifulness of ordinary Muslims - Turks, Kurds, Arabs and others,
who helped Armenian individuals and whole families to survive, even
if temporarily.
Yet, at least two challenges should be considered, referring to this
topic. The first one is the classification of such cases. In general,
human behavior reacts differently to wars, mass atrocities and natural
disasters. Speaking about the Armenian genocide, the first and the most
important statement is that the crime constituted a state organized
and orchestrated genocide. Moreover, in case of the genocide against
the Armenians there was an overwhelming consensus among the majority
of the Turkish population of the Ottoman Empire. The latter regarded
the state-initiated crime as beneficial for the state and for the
security of the Ottoman Empire. It was also regarded as a great chance
from the Heaven to make a profit while looting and expropriating
Armenian property, as well as the chance for the most fanatical part
of the Ottoman Muslims to kill the "infidels" and get permission for
entering Paradise. Mass participation in the crimes against the Ottoman
Christians, including also Turkish and Kurdish women and children,
was also associated with the war time propaganda activities of the
'Committee of Union and Progress' government, especially with regard
to the announcement of Jihad by late November 1914 shortly after
the empire went into the war. This became a fatal point for the
mobilization of the Ottoman Muslims to back the state planned crime
of the genocide against the Armenians and other Christians.
In this regard the question of the mass participation of Turkish
population in the crimes against the Armenians is vividly presented
in a telegram sent to Paris Peace conference by Admiral Richard Webb,
High Commissionaire in Istanbul:
"To punish all persons guilty of Armenian atrocities would necessitate
wholesale execution of the Turks, and I therefore suggest retribution
both on a national scale by dismembering the late Turkish empire, as
well as individually by the trial of high officials, such as those
on my list, whose fate will serve as an example."(A telegram sent
to Paris Peace conference by High Commissionaire in Istanbul Admiral
Richard Webb at April 13, 1919.)
This means that at the end of the war Allies had already realized
the impossibility of full punishment of the Ottoman Turks who were
involved in the crimes en mass.
The second challenge is the growing interest towards the topic of
Righteous Turks and the need of the classification of rescue cases.
Today we observe two hot topics being widely circulated in Turkey
and beyond its borders at the threshold of the Armenian genocide
centennial. One is about the "Turks who saved Armenians" and the
second is about so called "hidden Armenians" still living in Turkey.
Plenty of findings are available for research and data collection, as
well as several international conferences also dedicated to this topic.
My sincere apologies if I destroy someone's rosy and well calculated
plans and prospects, but I have to state that in overstressing on
the rescuing stories the existence of which I admit, it is easy to
understand, that we deal with a clear-cut strategy of shifting the
main narrative of the Armenian genocide with a quite secondary one.
Although it is not an attempt for banalization or denial of the
genocide, however, it is aimed at making such events as the dominant
paradigm in overall representation of the genocide committed.
It will be ludicrous to say that there has been an Armenian
Genocide, but as a result of these "tragic events" some Turks rescued
Armenians. Any attempt to shift the main narrative of the genocide and
any financial injection to support such attempts will be fruitless
and will work against the real reconciliation of both sides. Such
reconciliation is possible only after the acknowledgment of the
crime committed and the acceptance of the necessity to deal with
its consequences.
Another issue is why such stories must be important to the Armenian
part too. Firstly, all the cases of the Armenian lives' rescue by the
Turks during the genocide must be mentioned, even if those stories
are few in number and scope over the general picture of the genocide,
they MUST be presented, since the cover up or escape from mentioning
such cases will be simply regarded as a denial. In other words, the
stories of the rescue of the Armenians by the Turks are an unalienable
part of the general story of the Armenian genocide. Secondly, those
stories are important, since they additionally come to back the
statement that the very state organized and orchestrated nature of
the crime committed by Ottoman state. Those Muslims who saved the
Armenians opposed to the Turkish state policy and risked their and
their family members' lives while hiding the Armenians. It is well
known that the Ottoman military issued a strict order stating that
if any Muslim would hide an Armenian in his house he would be hanged
in front of his house and the whole house would be burnt.
This is an essential point in this topic since we have to clarify that
the whole discourse of the rescue stories touched upon the questions
who, in which circumstances and from whom saved Armenian victims.
Clearly enough such questions appear in the second place. Additional
note: cases of those who saved Armenian lives simply to exploit them
or expropriate their property ARE NOT among the cases of rescue.
Similar to that is when a Turk, a Kurd or whoever saved whole family
members' lives just to get married to a beautiful Armenian female.
These were often just physical rescue cases, and many times rescued
Armenians, among them children, were forced to convert to Islam,
were made Turkish in their new families and as a result lost their
identity. These constitute the genocidal act according to the Genocide
Convention. Let's return to the main definition: the real rescue story
is that when a Turkish individual or a whole family while opposing
to the state order to destroy Armenians and while risking their lives
hid or saved Armenians from deportations or helped them to escape from
an inevitable death with no economic or personal benefit. Sorry, but
the rest of the stories are a part of overall violence and shameful
genocidal acts...
By Hayk Demoyan Director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute
http://www.armradio.am/en/2014/09/17/righteous-turks-who-are-they-and-why-are-they-so-important/
13:38 17.09.2014
Within the last five years numerous talks could be heard about the
Turks who rescued the Armenians during the years of genocide. The
expression "the Turks who rescued the Armenians" sounds a bit
strange, if not wrathful to an Armenian hearing. But is it true? An
affirmative answer is recorded - yes, it is true. There are myriad
examples and stories from handwritten and published memoires of the
genocide survivors, as well as from oral stories stating about the
mercifulness of ordinary Muslims - Turks, Kurds, Arabs and others,
who helped Armenian individuals and whole families to survive, even
if temporarily.
Yet, at least two challenges should be considered, referring to this
topic. The first one is the classification of such cases. In general,
human behavior reacts differently to wars, mass atrocities and natural
disasters. Speaking about the Armenian genocide, the first and the most
important statement is that the crime constituted a state organized
and orchestrated genocide. Moreover, in case of the genocide against
the Armenians there was an overwhelming consensus among the majority
of the Turkish population of the Ottoman Empire. The latter regarded
the state-initiated crime as beneficial for the state and for the
security of the Ottoman Empire. It was also regarded as a great chance
from the Heaven to make a profit while looting and expropriating
Armenian property, as well as the chance for the most fanatical part
of the Ottoman Muslims to kill the "infidels" and get permission for
entering Paradise. Mass participation in the crimes against the Ottoman
Christians, including also Turkish and Kurdish women and children,
was also associated with the war time propaganda activities of the
'Committee of Union and Progress' government, especially with regard
to the announcement of Jihad by late November 1914 shortly after
the empire went into the war. This became a fatal point for the
mobilization of the Ottoman Muslims to back the state planned crime
of the genocide against the Armenians and other Christians.
In this regard the question of the mass participation of Turkish
population in the crimes against the Armenians is vividly presented
in a telegram sent to Paris Peace conference by Admiral Richard Webb,
High Commissionaire in Istanbul:
"To punish all persons guilty of Armenian atrocities would necessitate
wholesale execution of the Turks, and I therefore suggest retribution
both on a national scale by dismembering the late Turkish empire, as
well as individually by the trial of high officials, such as those
on my list, whose fate will serve as an example."(A telegram sent
to Paris Peace conference by High Commissionaire in Istanbul Admiral
Richard Webb at April 13, 1919.)
This means that at the end of the war Allies had already realized
the impossibility of full punishment of the Ottoman Turks who were
involved in the crimes en mass.
The second challenge is the growing interest towards the topic of
Righteous Turks and the need of the classification of rescue cases.
Today we observe two hot topics being widely circulated in Turkey
and beyond its borders at the threshold of the Armenian genocide
centennial. One is about the "Turks who saved Armenians" and the
second is about so called "hidden Armenians" still living in Turkey.
Plenty of findings are available for research and data collection, as
well as several international conferences also dedicated to this topic.
My sincere apologies if I destroy someone's rosy and well calculated
plans and prospects, but I have to state that in overstressing on
the rescuing stories the existence of which I admit, it is easy to
understand, that we deal with a clear-cut strategy of shifting the
main narrative of the Armenian genocide with a quite secondary one.
Although it is not an attempt for banalization or denial of the
genocide, however, it is aimed at making such events as the dominant
paradigm in overall representation of the genocide committed.
It will be ludicrous to say that there has been an Armenian
Genocide, but as a result of these "tragic events" some Turks rescued
Armenians. Any attempt to shift the main narrative of the genocide and
any financial injection to support such attempts will be fruitless
and will work against the real reconciliation of both sides. Such
reconciliation is possible only after the acknowledgment of the
crime committed and the acceptance of the necessity to deal with
its consequences.
Another issue is why such stories must be important to the Armenian
part too. Firstly, all the cases of the Armenian lives' rescue by the
Turks during the genocide must be mentioned, even if those stories
are few in number and scope over the general picture of the genocide,
they MUST be presented, since the cover up or escape from mentioning
such cases will be simply regarded as a denial. In other words, the
stories of the rescue of the Armenians by the Turks are an unalienable
part of the general story of the Armenian genocide. Secondly, those
stories are important, since they additionally come to back the
statement that the very state organized and orchestrated nature of
the crime committed by Ottoman state. Those Muslims who saved the
Armenians opposed to the Turkish state policy and risked their and
their family members' lives while hiding the Armenians. It is well
known that the Ottoman military issued a strict order stating that
if any Muslim would hide an Armenian in his house he would be hanged
in front of his house and the whole house would be burnt.
This is an essential point in this topic since we have to clarify that
the whole discourse of the rescue stories touched upon the questions
who, in which circumstances and from whom saved Armenian victims.
Clearly enough such questions appear in the second place. Additional
note: cases of those who saved Armenian lives simply to exploit them
or expropriate their property ARE NOT among the cases of rescue.
Similar to that is when a Turk, a Kurd or whoever saved whole family
members' lives just to get married to a beautiful Armenian female.
These were often just physical rescue cases, and many times rescued
Armenians, among them children, were forced to convert to Islam,
were made Turkish in their new families and as a result lost their
identity. These constitute the genocidal act according to the Genocide
Convention. Let's return to the main definition: the real rescue story
is that when a Turkish individual or a whole family while opposing
to the state order to destroy Armenians and while risking their lives
hid or saved Armenians from deportations or helped them to escape from
an inevitable death with no economic or personal benefit. Sorry, but
the rest of the stories are a part of overall violence and shameful
genocidal acts...
By Hayk Demoyan Director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute
http://www.armradio.am/en/2014/09/17/righteous-turks-who-are-they-and-why-are-they-so-important/