Tweet
RETURN OF RUINS OF ANI AND OF MOUNT ARARAT COULD BE CONSIDERED AS CONVINCING GESTURE OF TURKEY'S APOLOGIES: TESSA HOFMANN
11:31, 16 April, 2015
YEREVAN, APRIL 16, ARMENPRESS. It is difficult to determine the reasons
for Germany's evasive, half-hearted approach in memory politics beyond
the commemoration of the Holocaust. I cannot believe that this is all
Turkey's influence, for Germany is a powerful, free democracy, not at
all economically dependent from Turkey. From the correspondence and
statements of German parliamentarians of previous years - of they are
outspoken at all - I gather that some fear the loss of votes of Turkey
born voters. The prominent German expert on genocide studies Dr. Tessa
Hofmann stated this in an interview to "Armenpress" News Agency.
- How would you assess the official position of Germany on the Armenian
Genocide issue?
- The governmental position is evasive. In its official statements, the
Federal Government, represented by the Foreign Office has repeatedly
declined any legally qualified opinion whether the Ottoman 'expulsions
and massacres' of 1915 are a genocide or not. In addition, the Federal
Government announced that it is the task of the two countries concerned
- Armenia and Turkey - to start a dialogue to establish the historic
truth about the 'expulsions and massacres'. In this way, Germany not
only 'outsources' the responsibility to have a clear position on a case
of genocide that empirically forms the base of the UN definition of
genocide (together with the destruction of the European Jewry during
WW2), but avoids a clear own position.
Furthermore, the official German paraphrase of 'expulsion' does not
fully correspond with the legal term of 'deportation' or 'forcible
transfer of population', as defined in the Rome Statute (1998) of
the International Criminal Court as a 'crime against humanity'. In
other words: Deportation or forcible transfers are crimes against
humanity, whereas expulsion is not, at least not necessarily. The
Armenian nationals of the Ottoman Empire were not just uprooted and
chased across the nearest borders, but were deported into the interior
under armed guard; they were driven into areas of massive starvation;
the circumstances of the forcible transfer indicate that the survival
of the deportees was not intended.
Second, the Federal Government pretends that there is still a demand
for academic clarification whether the alleged expulsion and massacres
were genocide. It thus purposely ignores the remarkably intense
scientific achievements of genocide studies and historiography of at
least three decades. In these studies Armenian and Turkish scholars
were and are involved, as well as scholars of other nationalities
or ethnicities.
Third, in the same way the Federal Government purposely and
continuously ignores the achievements of the Turkish Armenian
Reconciliation Commission (TARC, 2001-2004) which had commissioned an
independent expert opinion by the International Center of Transitional
Justice (ICTJ); in its report, the ICTJ established the applicability
of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide on the 'events' of 1915. Subsequently, the Federal
Government's pretention of necessary further academic research and
bilateral dialogue considerably distorts the existing state of art.
- German government up to now continues to regret officially calling
the events of 1915 as genocide. What do you think, what is the reason
of this kind of position of the country which also had genocide
in its history, but had courage to face the truth and to apologize
for Holocaust?
- As mentioned above, the Federal Government - and also the German
legislator - has never applied the term genocide to the 'expulsions
and massacres'. Just recently the Foreign Office and the leaders of
the ruling Conservative-Social Democrat coalition cancelled the term
genocide in a motion that will be discussed in the German Bundestag
on 24 April 2015. In a previous non-legislative resolution of 2005
the German lawmakers announced compassion for the Armenian and other
victims of Ottoman expulsion and massacres' and acknowledged German
co-responsibility; however, the term genocide was avoided.
Germany is responsible not only for the Holocaust, but also for the
first genocide of the 20th century, committed during 1904-1908 in
Namibia. This genocide against the tribes Hereros and Nama bears
many parallels with the Armenian genocide: The defeated by the
German colonial forces Hereros were driven into the Omaheke desert
where ten-thousands perished from starvation and thirst. Herero
men died in German concentration camps from slave labor and brutal
treatment. So far, only one member of the Federal Government,
Mrs. Heide Wieczorek-Zeul, apologized at the occasion of the centenary
in 2004 for the Herero and Namaqua Genocide. Neither the German
legislator, nor the Federal Government ever accepted the Herero
claims for compensation for the land and cattle that were taken by
German colonists in the early 20th century and were never returned
by their descendants. The official German Historic Museum describes
the 'events' not as a genocide, but as an armed uprising against the
German colonial authorities and as a war.
In a very similar way Turkey until today refuses to acknowledge
the genocidal intent of the Ottoman massacres and death marches,
relying to the 'Van uprising'. In 1915, Germany was not only an
all too well informed bystander of the nation-wide massive killings
of its Turkish ally, but benefitted from the unpaid slave labor of
Armenian men, women and even children at the construction sites of the
Baghdad Railway. Survivors of the Armenian genocide such as Archbishop
Grigoris Palakyan (Balakian) in their memoirs accused certain Germans
for stimulating the idea of deportation among their Young Turkish
allies. The German Imperial Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg refused to
distance Germany from the Ottoman policies against the Armenians,
arguing that the military alliance with the CUP regime was of highest
priority, "even if Armenians perish".
If there is any need for further research left than it would be
research on the precise German share in the Armenian genocide. But so
far the German government has never encouraged corresponding research
at university level.
It is difficult to determine the reasons for Germany's evasive,
half-hearted approach in memory politics beyond the commemoration of
the Holocaust. I cannot believe that this is all Turkey's influence,
for Germany is a powerful, free democracy, not at all economically
dependent from Turkey. From the correspondence and statements of German
parliamentarians of previous years - of they are outspoken at all -
I gather that some fear the loss of votes of Turkey born voters.
But German MPs must be aware that their evasiveness and
half-heartedness causes not only persistent pain among the Armenian
community of Germany, but betrays the increasing number of residents
of Turkish ethnicity who acknowledge the historic truth.
- The issue of compensation places an essential role in international
law. What steps should take Turkey to bear its responsibility for
the Armenian Genocide?
- I am not a jurist to answer this question in all competence. But
let me start with three basic demands, deriving from my human rights
practice: First, since 2011, the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee
has repeatedly called on Turkey to return the confiscated church
properties of the Armenian-Orthodox, Greek-Orthodox and Syriac
Churches, which are still hold by Turkish ministries. Second, the
further neglect or deliberate destruction of church and secular
architectural Armenian heritage must immediately be stopped, and
the restoration of Armenian architectural heritage must be conducted
according to internationally accepted standards and not as an attempt
to extinguish the Armenian identity of monuments. Third, it is
shameful that despite years of international and internal criticism
and warnings Turkey's history textbooks and curricula of the 9th up
to the 11th grade provided for the school year 2014/5 do not bear
any revision or improvement, but still contain various versions of
historic falsification, including denial and minimization of the
Armenian genocide. But worst of all, Armenians are perceived as the
largest threat for Turkish state security. This hate education puts
the tiny Armenian community of approximately 50,000 people plus 15,000
labor migrants from the Republic of Armenian into immediate danger.
The loss of the historic Homeland, called 'patricide' by Armenia's
President Serzh Sargsyan, is considered in Armenia and her Diaspora as
the sustained grievous effect of the genocide against their ancestors.
The individual right to homeland is an internationally accepted and
unbreakable elementary right. Armenians of all nationalities must be
able to exercise this right in freedom and security. In addition,
the return of the ruins of Ani and of Mount Ararat, both in the
immediate border area could be considered as a convincing gesture
of Turkey's apologies and will for reconciliation. The encouraging
re-establishment of Armenian place-names, as recently introduced in
the Van area, should be continued in other parts of the historic area
of Armenian settlement.
At places of massive killings the erection of memorials must start,
combined with the erection educational centers of information. The
nation-wide cult of genocide perpetrators such as Talat, Enver or the
local veneration of Osman Aða Feridunoðlu (Topal Osman) of Giresun
must immediately be stopped and replaced by the commemoration of
those who saved or tried to save the lives of Armenians. In future
Turkish genocide awareness education, such personalities can serve
as positive role models.
In its modern history, Turkey has used genocide and in particular
deportation as a systematic tool of her demographic policy. Its
implementation involved large parts of the Muslim, in particular
Sunnite population, resulting in a high degree of societal
brutalization. Societal brutalization, combined with organized massive
violence was mobilized in 1895/6, 1909, 1912-1922 and in 1955.
Political decision-makers and opinion-leaders of Turkey must realize
that every society and every state that relies repeatedly on such
methods weakens civilization, humanity and also stability.
- What is your call to international community and Turkey ahead of
the 100th anniversary of the biggest crime against humanity?
- The refusal of acknowledgement of grave cases of inhumanity increases
the danger of their repetition. In this context we have to recall
Hitler's cynic question: "Who after all is today speaking about the
destruction of the Armenians"? Hitler asked his rhetorical question
only 24 years after the genocide of 1915, when he prepared for the
attack on Poland and wanted to convince German military leaders not
to fear international justice or revenge. One hundred years later we
face the following situation: Due to Armenian persistence in human
rights demands, the Armenian genocide of 1915 is not forgotten at
all, but on the contrary internationally well remembered. At the same
time we are confronted with politicians whose stubborn evasiveness
ruins the positive effects of genocide remembrance. Can three million
people be killed and the perpetrators get away with it? In the case
of the three million Ottoman Christians, who were murdered during
1912-1922, most perpetrators ended their lives without being ever
called to justice. But their crimes can and must be evaluated by
politicians and statesmen of today. In the context of genocide,
evasiveness transforms into the encouragement of further crimes.
- As a scholar how will you contribute to raising awareness about
the Armenian Genocide for future generations?
- As mentioned before, the Armenian genocide is a well-researched
case. However, it was also a case with very distinct gender features.
It is indicative that the female aspects of the Armenian genocide are
much less realized and subsequently much less addressed to. The time
has come to fill this gap, and to do so in a comparative way. For a
start, we recently hold an international workshop 'Gender, Violence,
Genocide' in Berlin, which dealt with the Armenian and Bosnian cases,
with the recent case of Yezidi under the terror regime of ISIS and
with the fate of German women and girls in the end of WW2.
As a German scholar, I feel obliged to contribute to the study of the
German role and position during the WW1 genocide against the Armenians.
- Are you planning to visit Armenia in future?
- I had to decline an invitation for the centenary events around 24
April in Yerevan, due to my many commitments here in Berlin, but I
shall participate in a meeting of the International Association of
Genocide Scholars in mid-July in Yerevan.
Interview by Araks Kasyan
http://armenpress.am/eng/news/801959/return-of-ruins-of-ani-and-of-mount-ararat-could-be-considered-as-convincing-gesture-of-turkey%E2%80%99s.html
From: A. Papazian
11:31, 16 April, 2015
YEREVAN, APRIL 16, ARMENPRESS. It is difficult to determine the reasons
for Germany's evasive, half-hearted approach in memory politics beyond
the commemoration of the Holocaust. I cannot believe that this is all
Turkey's influence, for Germany is a powerful, free democracy, not at
all economically dependent from Turkey. From the correspondence and
statements of German parliamentarians of previous years - of they are
outspoken at all - I gather that some fear the loss of votes of Turkey
born voters. The prominent German expert on genocide studies Dr. Tessa
Hofmann stated this in an interview to "Armenpress" News Agency.
- How would you assess the official position of Germany on the Armenian
Genocide issue?
- The governmental position is evasive. In its official statements, the
Federal Government, represented by the Foreign Office has repeatedly
declined any legally qualified opinion whether the Ottoman 'expulsions
and massacres' of 1915 are a genocide or not. In addition, the Federal
Government announced that it is the task of the two countries concerned
- Armenia and Turkey - to start a dialogue to establish the historic
truth about the 'expulsions and massacres'. In this way, Germany not
only 'outsources' the responsibility to have a clear position on a case
of genocide that empirically forms the base of the UN definition of
genocide (together with the destruction of the European Jewry during
WW2), but avoids a clear own position.
Furthermore, the official German paraphrase of 'expulsion' does not
fully correspond with the legal term of 'deportation' or 'forcible
transfer of population', as defined in the Rome Statute (1998) of
the International Criminal Court as a 'crime against humanity'. In
other words: Deportation or forcible transfers are crimes against
humanity, whereas expulsion is not, at least not necessarily. The
Armenian nationals of the Ottoman Empire were not just uprooted and
chased across the nearest borders, but were deported into the interior
under armed guard; they were driven into areas of massive starvation;
the circumstances of the forcible transfer indicate that the survival
of the deportees was not intended.
Second, the Federal Government pretends that there is still a demand
for academic clarification whether the alleged expulsion and massacres
were genocide. It thus purposely ignores the remarkably intense
scientific achievements of genocide studies and historiography of at
least three decades. In these studies Armenian and Turkish scholars
were and are involved, as well as scholars of other nationalities
or ethnicities.
Third, in the same way the Federal Government purposely and
continuously ignores the achievements of the Turkish Armenian
Reconciliation Commission (TARC, 2001-2004) which had commissioned an
independent expert opinion by the International Center of Transitional
Justice (ICTJ); in its report, the ICTJ established the applicability
of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide on the 'events' of 1915. Subsequently, the Federal
Government's pretention of necessary further academic research and
bilateral dialogue considerably distorts the existing state of art.
- German government up to now continues to regret officially calling
the events of 1915 as genocide. What do you think, what is the reason
of this kind of position of the country which also had genocide
in its history, but had courage to face the truth and to apologize
for Holocaust?
- As mentioned above, the Federal Government - and also the German
legislator - has never applied the term genocide to the 'expulsions
and massacres'. Just recently the Foreign Office and the leaders of
the ruling Conservative-Social Democrat coalition cancelled the term
genocide in a motion that will be discussed in the German Bundestag
on 24 April 2015. In a previous non-legislative resolution of 2005
the German lawmakers announced compassion for the Armenian and other
victims of Ottoman expulsion and massacres' and acknowledged German
co-responsibility; however, the term genocide was avoided.
Germany is responsible not only for the Holocaust, but also for the
first genocide of the 20th century, committed during 1904-1908 in
Namibia. This genocide against the tribes Hereros and Nama bears
many parallels with the Armenian genocide: The defeated by the
German colonial forces Hereros were driven into the Omaheke desert
where ten-thousands perished from starvation and thirst. Herero
men died in German concentration camps from slave labor and brutal
treatment. So far, only one member of the Federal Government,
Mrs. Heide Wieczorek-Zeul, apologized at the occasion of the centenary
in 2004 for the Herero and Namaqua Genocide. Neither the German
legislator, nor the Federal Government ever accepted the Herero
claims for compensation for the land and cattle that were taken by
German colonists in the early 20th century and were never returned
by their descendants. The official German Historic Museum describes
the 'events' not as a genocide, but as an armed uprising against the
German colonial authorities and as a war.
In a very similar way Turkey until today refuses to acknowledge
the genocidal intent of the Ottoman massacres and death marches,
relying to the 'Van uprising'. In 1915, Germany was not only an
all too well informed bystander of the nation-wide massive killings
of its Turkish ally, but benefitted from the unpaid slave labor of
Armenian men, women and even children at the construction sites of the
Baghdad Railway. Survivors of the Armenian genocide such as Archbishop
Grigoris Palakyan (Balakian) in their memoirs accused certain Germans
for stimulating the idea of deportation among their Young Turkish
allies. The German Imperial Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg refused to
distance Germany from the Ottoman policies against the Armenians,
arguing that the military alliance with the CUP regime was of highest
priority, "even if Armenians perish".
If there is any need for further research left than it would be
research on the precise German share in the Armenian genocide. But so
far the German government has never encouraged corresponding research
at university level.
It is difficult to determine the reasons for Germany's evasive,
half-hearted approach in memory politics beyond the commemoration of
the Holocaust. I cannot believe that this is all Turkey's influence,
for Germany is a powerful, free democracy, not at all economically
dependent from Turkey. From the correspondence and statements of German
parliamentarians of previous years - of they are outspoken at all -
I gather that some fear the loss of votes of Turkey born voters.
But German MPs must be aware that their evasiveness and
half-heartedness causes not only persistent pain among the Armenian
community of Germany, but betrays the increasing number of residents
of Turkish ethnicity who acknowledge the historic truth.
- The issue of compensation places an essential role in international
law. What steps should take Turkey to bear its responsibility for
the Armenian Genocide?
- I am not a jurist to answer this question in all competence. But
let me start with three basic demands, deriving from my human rights
practice: First, since 2011, the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee
has repeatedly called on Turkey to return the confiscated church
properties of the Armenian-Orthodox, Greek-Orthodox and Syriac
Churches, which are still hold by Turkish ministries. Second, the
further neglect or deliberate destruction of church and secular
architectural Armenian heritage must immediately be stopped, and
the restoration of Armenian architectural heritage must be conducted
according to internationally accepted standards and not as an attempt
to extinguish the Armenian identity of monuments. Third, it is
shameful that despite years of international and internal criticism
and warnings Turkey's history textbooks and curricula of the 9th up
to the 11th grade provided for the school year 2014/5 do not bear
any revision or improvement, but still contain various versions of
historic falsification, including denial and minimization of the
Armenian genocide. But worst of all, Armenians are perceived as the
largest threat for Turkish state security. This hate education puts
the tiny Armenian community of approximately 50,000 people plus 15,000
labor migrants from the Republic of Armenian into immediate danger.
The loss of the historic Homeland, called 'patricide' by Armenia's
President Serzh Sargsyan, is considered in Armenia and her Diaspora as
the sustained grievous effect of the genocide against their ancestors.
The individual right to homeland is an internationally accepted and
unbreakable elementary right. Armenians of all nationalities must be
able to exercise this right in freedom and security. In addition,
the return of the ruins of Ani and of Mount Ararat, both in the
immediate border area could be considered as a convincing gesture
of Turkey's apologies and will for reconciliation. The encouraging
re-establishment of Armenian place-names, as recently introduced in
the Van area, should be continued in other parts of the historic area
of Armenian settlement.
At places of massive killings the erection of memorials must start,
combined with the erection educational centers of information. The
nation-wide cult of genocide perpetrators such as Talat, Enver or the
local veneration of Osman Aða Feridunoðlu (Topal Osman) of Giresun
must immediately be stopped and replaced by the commemoration of
those who saved or tried to save the lives of Armenians. In future
Turkish genocide awareness education, such personalities can serve
as positive role models.
In its modern history, Turkey has used genocide and in particular
deportation as a systematic tool of her demographic policy. Its
implementation involved large parts of the Muslim, in particular
Sunnite population, resulting in a high degree of societal
brutalization. Societal brutalization, combined with organized massive
violence was mobilized in 1895/6, 1909, 1912-1922 and in 1955.
Political decision-makers and opinion-leaders of Turkey must realize
that every society and every state that relies repeatedly on such
methods weakens civilization, humanity and also stability.
- What is your call to international community and Turkey ahead of
the 100th anniversary of the biggest crime against humanity?
- The refusal of acknowledgement of grave cases of inhumanity increases
the danger of their repetition. In this context we have to recall
Hitler's cynic question: "Who after all is today speaking about the
destruction of the Armenians"? Hitler asked his rhetorical question
only 24 years after the genocide of 1915, when he prepared for the
attack on Poland and wanted to convince German military leaders not
to fear international justice or revenge. One hundred years later we
face the following situation: Due to Armenian persistence in human
rights demands, the Armenian genocide of 1915 is not forgotten at
all, but on the contrary internationally well remembered. At the same
time we are confronted with politicians whose stubborn evasiveness
ruins the positive effects of genocide remembrance. Can three million
people be killed and the perpetrators get away with it? In the case
of the three million Ottoman Christians, who were murdered during
1912-1922, most perpetrators ended their lives without being ever
called to justice. But their crimes can and must be evaluated by
politicians and statesmen of today. In the context of genocide,
evasiveness transforms into the encouragement of further crimes.
- As a scholar how will you contribute to raising awareness about
the Armenian Genocide for future generations?
- As mentioned before, the Armenian genocide is a well-researched
case. However, it was also a case with very distinct gender features.
It is indicative that the female aspects of the Armenian genocide are
much less realized and subsequently much less addressed to. The time
has come to fill this gap, and to do so in a comparative way. For a
start, we recently hold an international workshop 'Gender, Violence,
Genocide' in Berlin, which dealt with the Armenian and Bosnian cases,
with the recent case of Yezidi under the terror regime of ISIS and
with the fate of German women and girls in the end of WW2.
As a German scholar, I feel obliged to contribute to the study of the
German role and position during the WW1 genocide against the Armenians.
- Are you planning to visit Armenia in future?
- I had to decline an invitation for the centenary events around 24
April in Yerevan, due to my many commitments here in Berlin, but I
shall participate in a meeting of the International Association of
Genocide Scholars in mid-July in Yerevan.
Interview by Araks Kasyan
http://armenpress.am/eng/news/801959/return-of-ruins-of-ani-and-of-mount-ararat-could-be-considered-as-convincing-gesture-of-turkey%E2%80%99s.html
From: A. Papazian