Tweet
'THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY'
Mirror Spectator
Editorial 4-18 April 2015
By Edmond Y. Azadian
Detroit Public TV, which is in tune with the sentiments of the
mosaic of the ethnic groups that populate Michigan, recently took
the initiative to dedicate a full day's program to the centennial of
the Armenian Genocide. The program not only sensitized the viewers
to the issue of the Armenian Genocide but it also proved to be a
successful fundraiser.
I was invited to be interviewed along with clergy from the four
area Armenian Churches. The interviewer was a highly professional TV
commentator. He had decided to rehearse his interviews before going
live on the air. He asked me how the Genocide impacted me personally
and what effect it had made on the Armenians collectively. As I
was heading to the conclusion of my statement, I reported that the
Genocide was continuing to this day with the blockade of Armenia by
Turkey and Azerbaijan and the destruction of Armenian Churches and
monuments in both countries.
He stopped me, warning me that we could not politicize the issue
during the interview, because there was nobody present to give "the
other side" of the story.
Stunned, I asked him, "Do you ever question Neo-Nazis while
interviewing survivors of the Holocaust? Of course not. Why should
there be 'one side' on the issue of the Holocaust and 'another side'
when you take up the issue of the Armenian Genocide?"
Confused, he repeated my question.
Many journalists do not do their homework and believe the professional
cop-out is to present two opposing views. Those journalists are
derelict in their responsibilities, when the mission of the journalist
is to explore the facts and come out with a solid conclusion and
present the truth.
For example, why is there no "other side" for the courageous
British journalist Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent for
the Independent newspaper in dealing with the issue of the Armenian
Genocide?
When journalists resort to seeking the "other side" in dealing with
the Armenian Genocide, they try to disguise their dishonesty or
ignorance as professional objectivity, as there is no "other side"
on this issue. There is only one truth and the obfuscations spun by
the guilty side.
The journalistic gymnastics once again emerged throughout the
world news media on the occasion of the Genocide centennial. Most
of the journalists, once again, took cover under the refuge of the
disingenuous "objectivity" with a few informed and courageous ones
standing to be counted.
The anticipated centennial tsunami did not come from traditional
quarters; it came from the most unexpected quarters, ranging from the
sublime to the strange, with the sublime being Pope Francis' powerful
pronouncement and the strange being the Kardashian clan's pilgrimage
to Armenia. Both events caught the attention of world media, driving
Turkey's leadership into panic mode.
On April 12, 2015, during a memorable and historic mass conducted at
St. Peter's Basilica, the Pope unequivocally called a spade a spade.
"In the past century, our human family has lived through three massive
and unprecedented tragedies," the Pope said, commemorating the 100th
anniversary of the Genocide. He added, "The first genocide of the
20th century struck your own Armenian people," referencing a 2001
declaration by Pope John Paul II and the head of the Armenian Church.
A Vatican expert, Marco Tosati, said, "By quoting John Paul II, he
strengthened the church's position, making it clear where it stands
on the issue."
Many Vatican observers believe that the Pope's pronouncement was in
line with his philosophy of giving a voice to the voiceless. In that
respect, the Pope added that it was his duty to honor the memory of
those who were killed, adding, "concealing or denying evil is like
allowing a wound to keep bleeding without bandaging. ... Today we too
are experiencing a sort of genocide created by general and collective
indifference."
The Turkish government's reaction was predictable -- violent and
panicky. When the French legislature passed a resolution recognizing
the Armenian Genocide as a historic fact, Turkey recalled its
ambassador and threatened to cancel the military contracts with
France, but the Pope has no army and no such military contracts with
which it can be blackmailed. However, his message is powerful and
may create a domino effect, contrary to Stalin's sarcastic question:
"How many battalions does the Vatican Pope command?"
Ankara recalled its ambassador to the Holy See, Mehmet Pacaci,
for a "consultation" and the Vatican's envoy to Ankara Archbishop
Antonino Lucibello was summoned to the Foreign Ministry to provide
an explanation on the Pope's statement.
All major figures in Turkey's leadership made angry comments, including
President Erdogan, Prime Minister Davutoglu and Foreign Minister Mevlet
Cavusolgu. And then, the Foreign Ministry circulated a press release,
characterizing the Pope's statement as "unacceptable," "one sided"
and so on, using the devalued currency of denial.
Every time any government passes a resolution in support of recognizing
the Armenian Genocide, Turkish leaders react by stating that other
government's legislatures are not the proper venue to pass judgment on
the 1915 events. This time around, Mr. Cavusoglu angrily criticized the
Pope, accusing him of being "out of touch with both historical facts
and legal basis" adding that "religious offices are not places through
which hatred and animosity are fueled by unfounded allegations."
Even after the official pronouncement of 120 of the most prominent
genocide scholars around the world, Turkey's leaders have pinned their
hopes on a few hired guns posing as bona fide historians on some US
campuses and they avoid the issue proposing to assign the task to a
panel of historians to come up with "the truth."
That truth is once again tortured in the media, giving credence to
Ankara's denialist policy. Here are some statements culled from the
media. For example, CNN reported: "Armenian groups and many scholars
say that Turkey planned and carried out a genocide. .... Turkey
officially denies that a genocide took place, saying that hundreds
and thousands of Armenian Christians and Turkish Muslims died in
intercommunal violence around the bloody battlefields of World War I."
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation, not to be outdone, wrote,
"Armenians say up to 1.5 million of their kin were killed between
1915 and 1917. ... However, Turkey rejects the claims, arguing that
300,000 to 500,000 Armenians and Turks died in a civil strife."
Sky News even goes one step further, casting the blame for what deaths
were admitted to on the victims: "Armenians say up to 1.5 million of
their people were slaughtered as the Ottoman Empire fell apart. ...
Turkey argues that 300,000 to 500,000 Armenians and Turks died in
the civil war when Armenians rose up against their Ottoman rulers
and sided with the invading Russian troops."
Even the "most trusted" and "objective" news corporation, the BBC,
has fallen into the same trap when it reported: "Armenia and many
historians say up to 1.5 million people were killed by Ottoman forces
in 1915. But Turkey has always disputed that figure and said that
the deaths were part of a civil conflict triggered by World War I."
After listening to all these news outlets, one gets the impression
that these reporters and commentators never consult history books.
Reading Captain Sarkis Torossian's memoirs, these writers may receive
a wake-up calls that even those Armenians who fought at Gallipoli in
the Ottoman Army found their families slaughtered, let alone spinning
fiction about siding with the advancing Russian army.
Turkey can never hope to find the truth on the "other side" of the
story, because there is none. The only hope is to interject some
reasonable doubt in a court of law to render the Armenian Genocide
a "controversial" issue. And what those journalists are doing is
providing ammunition to Turkey's denialist machine.
The Armenian reaction to the fury of Turkish leaders was predictably
mild. Only Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian has commented
to one Italian news outlet: "Denial is not opening the door to
reconciliation."
The exaggerated demonstration of anger by Turkish leaders is a studied
and rehearsed performance, reaching beyond Pope Francis to President
Obama, warning him of what might happen if he follows the Pope's lead.
But better than any journalist, President Obama himself has properly
defined the issue by stating in 2008: "My firmly-held conviction [is]
that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion
or a point of view, but rather a widely-documented fact supported by
an overwhelming body of historical evidence. ... As President I will
recognize the Armenian Genocide."
This statement was made when he was himself. After his election, he
seemed to have lost his moral compass. As a peacemaker in Latin America
and in the Middle East, we hope he demonstrates some consistency in
his policies and he returns to his old self to pronounce the truth.
Pope Francis' powerful message has inflamed the imagination of
millions, in the meantime prompting some courageous journalists to
come up with their own blunt statements.
Indeed, while many reporters and editorials are grappling with the
truth and ruminating on historic facts, the Jerusalem Post and the
Los Angeles Times have come up with incredibly honest editorials. The
Jerusalem Post wrote: "Exhibiting his characteristic moral clarity,
Pope Francis referred to Turkey's brutal massacre of about 1.5 million
Armenian men, women and children during World War I as a genocide."
Hitler and the Nazi regime looked to Turkey's moral wound for
inspiration for their own genocide. ... Israel has an obligation to
live up to [its] legacy by using its political sovereignty to prevent
genocide not just against Jews but against any group ... Pope Francis
has publicly recognized the Armenian Genocide. Now it is Israel's
turn." (4/13/15)
On the same day, the Los Angeles Times published an equally frank
editorial under the title, "US Has to Call the Armenian Genocide by
its Name."
"Insistence on the truth about the Ottoman Empire genocide should
not imperil US-Turkey partnership. Denial about the Ottoman Empire
Genocide of the Armenians a century ago only compounds the crime."
The editorial has a lesson to all the politicians who cite the
Turkish-American alliance as a reason to fight the Genocide resolution
as it states, "It is true that US-Turkey relationship is very important
one and one worth nurturing and protecting, but not at the expense
of denying history. ... The president should take his cue from Pope
Francis and include the word genocide in his annual message marking
the carnage a century ago. Enduring friendships require such honesty."
After much soul-searching, those two publications have discovered
that there is no "other side" to the genocide story. We hope their
stand becomes contagious, paving the way for other publications and
statesmen to arrive at the same conclusion.
From: Baghdasarian
Mirror Spectator
Editorial 4-18 April 2015
By Edmond Y. Azadian
Detroit Public TV, which is in tune with the sentiments of the
mosaic of the ethnic groups that populate Michigan, recently took
the initiative to dedicate a full day's program to the centennial of
the Armenian Genocide. The program not only sensitized the viewers
to the issue of the Armenian Genocide but it also proved to be a
successful fundraiser.
I was invited to be interviewed along with clergy from the four
area Armenian Churches. The interviewer was a highly professional TV
commentator. He had decided to rehearse his interviews before going
live on the air. He asked me how the Genocide impacted me personally
and what effect it had made on the Armenians collectively. As I
was heading to the conclusion of my statement, I reported that the
Genocide was continuing to this day with the blockade of Armenia by
Turkey and Azerbaijan and the destruction of Armenian Churches and
monuments in both countries.
He stopped me, warning me that we could not politicize the issue
during the interview, because there was nobody present to give "the
other side" of the story.
Stunned, I asked him, "Do you ever question Neo-Nazis while
interviewing survivors of the Holocaust? Of course not. Why should
there be 'one side' on the issue of the Holocaust and 'another side'
when you take up the issue of the Armenian Genocide?"
Confused, he repeated my question.
Many journalists do not do their homework and believe the professional
cop-out is to present two opposing views. Those journalists are
derelict in their responsibilities, when the mission of the journalist
is to explore the facts and come out with a solid conclusion and
present the truth.
For example, why is there no "other side" for the courageous
British journalist Robert Fisk, the Middle East correspondent for
the Independent newspaper in dealing with the issue of the Armenian
Genocide?
When journalists resort to seeking the "other side" in dealing with
the Armenian Genocide, they try to disguise their dishonesty or
ignorance as professional objectivity, as there is no "other side"
on this issue. There is only one truth and the obfuscations spun by
the guilty side.
The journalistic gymnastics once again emerged throughout the
world news media on the occasion of the Genocide centennial. Most
of the journalists, once again, took cover under the refuge of the
disingenuous "objectivity" with a few informed and courageous ones
standing to be counted.
The anticipated centennial tsunami did not come from traditional
quarters; it came from the most unexpected quarters, ranging from the
sublime to the strange, with the sublime being Pope Francis' powerful
pronouncement and the strange being the Kardashian clan's pilgrimage
to Armenia. Both events caught the attention of world media, driving
Turkey's leadership into panic mode.
On April 12, 2015, during a memorable and historic mass conducted at
St. Peter's Basilica, the Pope unequivocally called a spade a spade.
"In the past century, our human family has lived through three massive
and unprecedented tragedies," the Pope said, commemorating the 100th
anniversary of the Genocide. He added, "The first genocide of the
20th century struck your own Armenian people," referencing a 2001
declaration by Pope John Paul II and the head of the Armenian Church.
A Vatican expert, Marco Tosati, said, "By quoting John Paul II, he
strengthened the church's position, making it clear where it stands
on the issue."
Many Vatican observers believe that the Pope's pronouncement was in
line with his philosophy of giving a voice to the voiceless. In that
respect, the Pope added that it was his duty to honor the memory of
those who were killed, adding, "concealing or denying evil is like
allowing a wound to keep bleeding without bandaging. ... Today we too
are experiencing a sort of genocide created by general and collective
indifference."
The Turkish government's reaction was predictable -- violent and
panicky. When the French legislature passed a resolution recognizing
the Armenian Genocide as a historic fact, Turkey recalled its
ambassador and threatened to cancel the military contracts with
France, but the Pope has no army and no such military contracts with
which it can be blackmailed. However, his message is powerful and
may create a domino effect, contrary to Stalin's sarcastic question:
"How many battalions does the Vatican Pope command?"
Ankara recalled its ambassador to the Holy See, Mehmet Pacaci,
for a "consultation" and the Vatican's envoy to Ankara Archbishop
Antonino Lucibello was summoned to the Foreign Ministry to provide
an explanation on the Pope's statement.
All major figures in Turkey's leadership made angry comments, including
President Erdogan, Prime Minister Davutoglu and Foreign Minister Mevlet
Cavusolgu. And then, the Foreign Ministry circulated a press release,
characterizing the Pope's statement as "unacceptable," "one sided"
and so on, using the devalued currency of denial.
Every time any government passes a resolution in support of recognizing
the Armenian Genocide, Turkish leaders react by stating that other
government's legislatures are not the proper venue to pass judgment on
the 1915 events. This time around, Mr. Cavusoglu angrily criticized the
Pope, accusing him of being "out of touch with both historical facts
and legal basis" adding that "religious offices are not places through
which hatred and animosity are fueled by unfounded allegations."
Even after the official pronouncement of 120 of the most prominent
genocide scholars around the world, Turkey's leaders have pinned their
hopes on a few hired guns posing as bona fide historians on some US
campuses and they avoid the issue proposing to assign the task to a
panel of historians to come up with "the truth."
That truth is once again tortured in the media, giving credence to
Ankara's denialist policy. Here are some statements culled from the
media. For example, CNN reported: "Armenian groups and many scholars
say that Turkey planned and carried out a genocide. .... Turkey
officially denies that a genocide took place, saying that hundreds
and thousands of Armenian Christians and Turkish Muslims died in
intercommunal violence around the bloody battlefields of World War I."
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation, not to be outdone, wrote,
"Armenians say up to 1.5 million of their kin were killed between
1915 and 1917. ... However, Turkey rejects the claims, arguing that
300,000 to 500,000 Armenians and Turks died in a civil strife."
Sky News even goes one step further, casting the blame for what deaths
were admitted to on the victims: "Armenians say up to 1.5 million of
their people were slaughtered as the Ottoman Empire fell apart. ...
Turkey argues that 300,000 to 500,000 Armenians and Turks died in
the civil war when Armenians rose up against their Ottoman rulers
and sided with the invading Russian troops."
Even the "most trusted" and "objective" news corporation, the BBC,
has fallen into the same trap when it reported: "Armenia and many
historians say up to 1.5 million people were killed by Ottoman forces
in 1915. But Turkey has always disputed that figure and said that
the deaths were part of a civil conflict triggered by World War I."
After listening to all these news outlets, one gets the impression
that these reporters and commentators never consult history books.
Reading Captain Sarkis Torossian's memoirs, these writers may receive
a wake-up calls that even those Armenians who fought at Gallipoli in
the Ottoman Army found their families slaughtered, let alone spinning
fiction about siding with the advancing Russian army.
Turkey can never hope to find the truth on the "other side" of the
story, because there is none. The only hope is to interject some
reasonable doubt in a court of law to render the Armenian Genocide
a "controversial" issue. And what those journalists are doing is
providing ammunition to Turkey's denialist machine.
The Armenian reaction to the fury of Turkish leaders was predictably
mild. Only Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian has commented
to one Italian news outlet: "Denial is not opening the door to
reconciliation."
The exaggerated demonstration of anger by Turkish leaders is a studied
and rehearsed performance, reaching beyond Pope Francis to President
Obama, warning him of what might happen if he follows the Pope's lead.
But better than any journalist, President Obama himself has properly
defined the issue by stating in 2008: "My firmly-held conviction [is]
that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion
or a point of view, but rather a widely-documented fact supported by
an overwhelming body of historical evidence. ... As President I will
recognize the Armenian Genocide."
This statement was made when he was himself. After his election, he
seemed to have lost his moral compass. As a peacemaker in Latin America
and in the Middle East, we hope he demonstrates some consistency in
his policies and he returns to his old self to pronounce the truth.
Pope Francis' powerful message has inflamed the imagination of
millions, in the meantime prompting some courageous journalists to
come up with their own blunt statements.
Indeed, while many reporters and editorials are grappling with the
truth and ruminating on historic facts, the Jerusalem Post and the
Los Angeles Times have come up with incredibly honest editorials. The
Jerusalem Post wrote: "Exhibiting his characteristic moral clarity,
Pope Francis referred to Turkey's brutal massacre of about 1.5 million
Armenian men, women and children during World War I as a genocide."
Hitler and the Nazi regime looked to Turkey's moral wound for
inspiration for their own genocide. ... Israel has an obligation to
live up to [its] legacy by using its political sovereignty to prevent
genocide not just against Jews but against any group ... Pope Francis
has publicly recognized the Armenian Genocide. Now it is Israel's
turn." (4/13/15)
On the same day, the Los Angeles Times published an equally frank
editorial under the title, "US Has to Call the Armenian Genocide by
its Name."
"Insistence on the truth about the Ottoman Empire genocide should
not imperil US-Turkey partnership. Denial about the Ottoman Empire
Genocide of the Armenians a century ago only compounds the crime."
The editorial has a lesson to all the politicians who cite the
Turkish-American alliance as a reason to fight the Genocide resolution
as it states, "It is true that US-Turkey relationship is very important
one and one worth nurturing and protecting, but not at the expense
of denying history. ... The president should take his cue from Pope
Francis and include the word genocide in his annual message marking
the carnage a century ago. Enduring friendships require such honesty."
After much soul-searching, those two publications have discovered
that there is no "other side" to the genocide story. We hope their
stand becomes contagious, paving the way for other publications and
statesmen to arrive at the same conclusion.
From: Baghdasarian