It’s hard to start an article about a very sensitive issue. You may go against the world and be right but still people will get angry. Then how can I approach this? Outright denial is never constructive even though when you have enough solid evidences to know that what you believe is the truth. I am writing because I feel the responsibility to represent a different angle to Tufts students, one that is being ignored, either deliberately or out of ignorance.
The issue at hand is the so-called “Armenian Genocide.” Throughout the years that have passed since the World War I, the issue has become a much more of a political and emotional issue rather than that of a historical one. It’s used against Turkey in its attempts to join the European Union or with regards to other political issues. Many nations such as France, Greece or certain US states with considerable Armenian minorities or value leverages against Turkey have acknowledged that such a genocide occurred. It is no surprise that the most vocal US state about this issue is California, which has a sizeable Armenian minority. On the other hand nations such as Israel, Denmark, and United Kingdom rejected to acknowledge the genocide claims.
The international knowledge of the issue is close to minimal if not non-existential. Almost all of the people that are voting for the recognition of the so-called “Armenian Genocide” only know one side of the story while ignoring many facts to keep this story intact. In fact, there are many facts that Western nations are either ignoring or these facts are denied to them.
The reason I bring this issue up is because I came upon an “Armenian Genocide Commemoration” event on TuftsLife, last semester. I attended this event to ask two questions but seeing that majority of the attendees were elders I didn’t want to disrespect their emotions. In addition, the other half of the people in the room were sleeping because the lecturer of the event was practically reading her presentation from a paper which was hardly based on the events of WWI. I left early because I thought that having a poorly presented lecture in a commemoration ceremony is worse than someone confronting it.
I realized that people take this claim of genocide as the truth without questioning its credibility or even trying to learn something about it. I have two very simple questions that alone shake the credibility of the issue and demonstrate that it is not as apparent as the Holocaust is, a claim many “Armenian Genocide” defenders make.
My first question is about the base of the genocide argument. In 1920, Aram Andonian, a French-Armenian, published a book called “The Memoirs of Naim Bey”. This book contained the “Talat Pasha telegrams” upon which the Armenian argument that the Ottoman government ordered the killings of Armenians is based. These documents that are purported to be the proof that the Ottoman government executed Armenians have been proved to be forgeries by Şinasi Orel and Süreyya Yuca in 1983. In their book called “The Talat Pasha Telegrams: Historical fact or Armenian fiction?” they analyze the documents on the basis of signature types, dating and language and found them to be a forgery.
Simply put, why would the Armenians feel the need to forge documents to back up their argument if it’s so compellingly recorded and proven to be true?
The second question regards the history of Armenians themselves. The first prime minister of Democratic Republic of Armenia in 1918, Hovhannes Katchaznouni was a member of Armenian Revolutionary Federation, which served a key role in formation of Armenia as a separate state. He published a critical book in 1923 called “The Armenian Revolutionary Federation Has Nothing More To Do.” In his book he claims that Armenians were as guilty as the Turks were when it comes to escalation of the violence throughout the empire and points out the massacres done by Armenians against Turks. Unfortunately, his book was banned and collected to be destroyed in Armenia. In 2005, this book was found in Russian archives by Mehmet Perinçek and started to be published in many languages. Quite simply, why would the very men that fought for Armenia’s existence deny the “genocide?”
I have no doubt that there are more things that are being “mistakenly” left out. A very brief research on the issue from the web and written sources would show that small but important facts like those that I have mentioned in this article are not pointed out at all. This summarizes the overall treatment of the issue in the Western nations. Only one side is heard and only one side is remembered. It is important to remember contentious events like this one, but we should remember all sides of an issue. We’re living in a world where only the loudest voices are heard. Until all are, I will keep raising questions that need answering.
09/03/2010
No comments:
Post a Comment