Tweet
THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE - THE GUARDIAN BRIEFING
14:03, 17 Apr 2015
Siranush Ghazanchyan
Turkey has never accepted the term genocide, even though historians
have demolished its denial of responsibility for up to 1.5 million
deaths.
The Guardian
What's the story?
On 24 April, Armenians in Yerevan and around the world will mark the
centenary of the genocide of 1915. That is the date when Ottoman
authorities began arresting the leaders of the 2 million-strong
minority Christian community. It is widely accepted that 1 million
to 1.5 million Armenians died in the ensuing years until 1922, though
there are no indisputable figures.
The Turkish government has never accepted the term genocide. It
recognises killings that occurred in wartime but denies Armenians were
systematically targeted and emphasises their links with enemy Russia
as well as Armenian attacks on Muslims. Modern historical research
has demolished the Turkish case, establishing intent, organisation
and responsibility.
Turkey's position has softened in recent times. In 2014 Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, now president, described the killings as "inhumane" and sent
condolences to the descendants of the victims. But tempers flared when
Turkey announced it would mark the centenary of the Allied landings
at Gallipoli on 24 April. Critics say the intention was to deflect
attention from and limit attendance by foreign VIPs at the memorial
ceremony in Yerevan.
Armenians and others argue that impunity for the Turks, despite
international outrage at the time, was one of the factors that allowed
Hitler to exterminate the Jews of Europe a quarter of a century later.
How did this happen?
Armenians, an ancient people who converted to Christianity in the 3rd
century AD, were persecuted in Ottoman Turkey in the late 19th and
early 20th centuries. There was anger about the way Europe and Russia
had intervened on the Armenians' behalf as the empire lost territory.
Anti-Armenian violence occurred in the 1890s and in 1909.
The wartime mass deportations and killings were orchestrated
by the TeÅ~_kilât-ı Mahsusa (meaning "special organisation"),
which sent coded orders to local governors. Armenians (in eastern,
Russian-controlled Armenia) did fight with the tsarist forces and
some Armenian nationalists helped precipitate the brutal Ottoman
response. But most victims were civilians.
Much of the killing was carried out by Kurdish tribesmen. Many
Armenians died from starvation and thirst on death marches in the
Syrian desert. Rape, torture and other atrocities were common.
Children, especially girls, were abducted and forcibly converted to
Islam. Property was expropriated and churches destroyed.
The US was neutral at the time and its diplomats, as well as American
and other Christian missionaries, witnessed and documented the
killings. Washington condemned "crimes against humanity" - the first
time that now common expression was used.
The Armenian republic that emerged at the end of the first world war
represented only a small part of historic Armenia. It was briefly
independent before becoming part of the Soviet Union until 1991, when
it regained its independence. Turkish (western) Armenia disappeared
from the maps.
Awareness of the genocide grew because of the focus on the Nazi
Holocaust in the US and Israel in the 1960s and 1970s. Access to
Ottoman archives has allowed scholars, Turkish and other, to deepen
understanding of what happened. Experts argue that, if there is
hope for change, it will come from shifting attitudes inside Turkey,
not from Armenian or international pressure on Ankara.
What are the issues?
Recognition and denial
Armenians demand Turkish recognition of the genocide, though the UN
genocide convention of 1948 is not applicable retroactively. Of the
22 countries that have formally recognised it, the most important are
Russia and France. The US employed the term under President Ronald
Reagan but has retreated since in the face of anger from Turkey,
a Nato ally. Barack Obama uses the term Meds Yeghern - Armenian for
"great calamity" - akin to the Hebrew word shoah for holocaust. But
he will not use the G-word.
Britain adopts a similar position, condemning the massacres but
arguing that the Armenian case has not been legally tested. Still,
along with statements by the pope and the UN, national legislation
criminalising genocide denial, and recognition by nearly all US
states and many parliaments - including the European parliament -
a quarter of the world in effect recognises the genocide. Outright
denial is rare except in Turkey and Azerbaijan.
Armenian-Turkish relationship
The genocide issue hangs heavily over bilateral relations. Armenians
say recognition is about their security, not only history and justice.
Turkey closed the border with Armenia in 1993 because of unresolved
conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, a region of Azerbaijan with an ethnic
Armenian majority, in which Ankara and Yerevan are on opposing sides.
Armenia has tried pragmatically to improve relations and achieve
reconciliation without setting preconditions, even on genocide. A
draft Swiss-brokered agreement in 2009 was never ratified because of
Turkish demands for movement on Nagorno-Karabkh. Thus two difficult
issues have become intertwined. The result is deadlock.
Change in Turkey
Attitudes to the Armenian question have changed in Turkey in recent
years, with liberal intellectuals questioning official narratives and
recognising the genocide. Many books have appeared on the subject,
which is researched and taught in universities. Reconciliation
ceremonies have been held in formerly Armenian areas with Kurds
whose ancestors slaughtered their Christian neighbours. Some Armenian
churches have been restored.
There is also growing recognition of the existence of many thousands
of "Islamised" Armenians, descendants of the survivors. Prosecutions
for "denigrating Turkishness" have diminished. Despite conciliatory
messages such as Erdogan's last year, Ankara refuses to apologise or,
crucially, to budge on the genocide question. Still, the Turkish thaw,
argues expert Thomas De Waal "is the only good news in this bleak
historical tale".
Armenian diaspora
Up to 10 million Armenians live outside Armenia, concentrated in
Russia, the US and France.
Many are direct descendants of genocide victims. Diaspora organisations
tend to be more militant than the republic itself on this question and
are suspicious of moves towards normalisation with Turkey. The two main
organisations in the US have made recognition their raison d'etre. This
helps them preserve a collective identity and resist assimilation.
A recent pan-Armenian declaration focusing on the genocide was
criticised by Levon Ter-Petrossian, the country's former president,
reflecting the view that Armenia needs to focus on its current problems
and not be obsessed by a painful past.
Where can I find out more?
Peter Balakian's The Burning Tigris is a readable account emphasising
US testimony. For forensic research by a Turkish historian, try Taner
Akcam's A Shameful Act. In An Inconvenient Genocide, the British lawyer
Geoffrey Robertson makes the human rights case. The wider background
of the first world war has been recently retold in The Fall of the
Ottomans by Eugene Rogan. Other accounts include Thomas de Waal'sGreat
Catastrophe: Armenians and Turks in the Shadow of Genocide and Vicken
Cheterian's Open Wounds: Essays on Armenians, Turks and a Century of
Genocide. The website of the Gomidas Institutefocuses on historical
documentation about the genocide and current campaigns.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/apr/16/the-armenian-genocide-the-guardian-briefing?CMP=share_btn_tw
http://www.armradio.am/en/2015/04/17/the-armenian-genocide-the-guardian-briefing/
From: A. Papazian
14:03, 17 Apr 2015
Siranush Ghazanchyan
Turkey has never accepted the term genocide, even though historians
have demolished its denial of responsibility for up to 1.5 million
deaths.
The Guardian
What's the story?
On 24 April, Armenians in Yerevan and around the world will mark the
centenary of the genocide of 1915. That is the date when Ottoman
authorities began arresting the leaders of the 2 million-strong
minority Christian community. It is widely accepted that 1 million
to 1.5 million Armenians died in the ensuing years until 1922, though
there are no indisputable figures.
The Turkish government has never accepted the term genocide. It
recognises killings that occurred in wartime but denies Armenians were
systematically targeted and emphasises their links with enemy Russia
as well as Armenian attacks on Muslims. Modern historical research
has demolished the Turkish case, establishing intent, organisation
and responsibility.
Turkey's position has softened in recent times. In 2014 Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, now president, described the killings as "inhumane" and sent
condolences to the descendants of the victims. But tempers flared when
Turkey announced it would mark the centenary of the Allied landings
at Gallipoli on 24 April. Critics say the intention was to deflect
attention from and limit attendance by foreign VIPs at the memorial
ceremony in Yerevan.
Armenians and others argue that impunity for the Turks, despite
international outrage at the time, was one of the factors that allowed
Hitler to exterminate the Jews of Europe a quarter of a century later.
How did this happen?
Armenians, an ancient people who converted to Christianity in the 3rd
century AD, were persecuted in Ottoman Turkey in the late 19th and
early 20th centuries. There was anger about the way Europe and Russia
had intervened on the Armenians' behalf as the empire lost territory.
Anti-Armenian violence occurred in the 1890s and in 1909.
The wartime mass deportations and killings were orchestrated
by the TeÅ~_kilât-ı Mahsusa (meaning "special organisation"),
which sent coded orders to local governors. Armenians (in eastern,
Russian-controlled Armenia) did fight with the tsarist forces and
some Armenian nationalists helped precipitate the brutal Ottoman
response. But most victims were civilians.
Much of the killing was carried out by Kurdish tribesmen. Many
Armenians died from starvation and thirst on death marches in the
Syrian desert. Rape, torture and other atrocities were common.
Children, especially girls, were abducted and forcibly converted to
Islam. Property was expropriated and churches destroyed.
The US was neutral at the time and its diplomats, as well as American
and other Christian missionaries, witnessed and documented the
killings. Washington condemned "crimes against humanity" - the first
time that now common expression was used.
The Armenian republic that emerged at the end of the first world war
represented only a small part of historic Armenia. It was briefly
independent before becoming part of the Soviet Union until 1991, when
it regained its independence. Turkish (western) Armenia disappeared
from the maps.
Awareness of the genocide grew because of the focus on the Nazi
Holocaust in the US and Israel in the 1960s and 1970s. Access to
Ottoman archives has allowed scholars, Turkish and other, to deepen
understanding of what happened. Experts argue that, if there is
hope for change, it will come from shifting attitudes inside Turkey,
not from Armenian or international pressure on Ankara.
What are the issues?
Recognition and denial
Armenians demand Turkish recognition of the genocide, though the UN
genocide convention of 1948 is not applicable retroactively. Of the
22 countries that have formally recognised it, the most important are
Russia and France. The US employed the term under President Ronald
Reagan but has retreated since in the face of anger from Turkey,
a Nato ally. Barack Obama uses the term Meds Yeghern - Armenian for
"great calamity" - akin to the Hebrew word shoah for holocaust. But
he will not use the G-word.
Britain adopts a similar position, condemning the massacres but
arguing that the Armenian case has not been legally tested. Still,
along with statements by the pope and the UN, national legislation
criminalising genocide denial, and recognition by nearly all US
states and many parliaments - including the European parliament -
a quarter of the world in effect recognises the genocide. Outright
denial is rare except in Turkey and Azerbaijan.
Armenian-Turkish relationship
The genocide issue hangs heavily over bilateral relations. Armenians
say recognition is about their security, not only history and justice.
Turkey closed the border with Armenia in 1993 because of unresolved
conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, a region of Azerbaijan with an ethnic
Armenian majority, in which Ankara and Yerevan are on opposing sides.
Armenia has tried pragmatically to improve relations and achieve
reconciliation without setting preconditions, even on genocide. A
draft Swiss-brokered agreement in 2009 was never ratified because of
Turkish demands for movement on Nagorno-Karabkh. Thus two difficult
issues have become intertwined. The result is deadlock.
Change in Turkey
Attitudes to the Armenian question have changed in Turkey in recent
years, with liberal intellectuals questioning official narratives and
recognising the genocide. Many books have appeared on the subject,
which is researched and taught in universities. Reconciliation
ceremonies have been held in formerly Armenian areas with Kurds
whose ancestors slaughtered their Christian neighbours. Some Armenian
churches have been restored.
There is also growing recognition of the existence of many thousands
of "Islamised" Armenians, descendants of the survivors. Prosecutions
for "denigrating Turkishness" have diminished. Despite conciliatory
messages such as Erdogan's last year, Ankara refuses to apologise or,
crucially, to budge on the genocide question. Still, the Turkish thaw,
argues expert Thomas De Waal "is the only good news in this bleak
historical tale".
Armenian diaspora
Up to 10 million Armenians live outside Armenia, concentrated in
Russia, the US and France.
Many are direct descendants of genocide victims. Diaspora organisations
tend to be more militant than the republic itself on this question and
are suspicious of moves towards normalisation with Turkey. The two main
organisations in the US have made recognition their raison d'etre. This
helps them preserve a collective identity and resist assimilation.
A recent pan-Armenian declaration focusing on the genocide was
criticised by Levon Ter-Petrossian, the country's former president,
reflecting the view that Armenia needs to focus on its current problems
and not be obsessed by a painful past.
Where can I find out more?
Peter Balakian's The Burning Tigris is a readable account emphasising
US testimony. For forensic research by a Turkish historian, try Taner
Akcam's A Shameful Act. In An Inconvenient Genocide, the British lawyer
Geoffrey Robertson makes the human rights case. The wider background
of the first world war has been recently retold in The Fall of the
Ottomans by Eugene Rogan. Other accounts include Thomas de Waal'sGreat
Catastrophe: Armenians and Turks in the Shadow of Genocide and Vicken
Cheterian's Open Wounds: Essays on Armenians, Turks and a Century of
Genocide. The website of the Gomidas Institutefocuses on historical
documentation about the genocide and current campaigns.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/apr/16/the-armenian-genocide-the-guardian-briefing?CMP=share_btn_tw
http://www.armradio.am/en/2015/04/17/the-armenian-genocide-the-guardian-briefing/
From: A. Papazian