While the ruling AK Party in Turkey continues to sing the same old tune on the genocide, it is trying out a new style. Our minister of foreign affairs, Ahmet Davutoglu, is one of those testing out this new style with the concept of “just memory.”
Davutoglu explains the concept in this way: “If [Armenian Foreign Minister] Edward Nalbantyan had agreed to it that day [the protocols were signed, Oct. 10, 2009], I had prepared a speech for after the signing… I had rested that speech upon one single concept: just memory…a key concept. In other words, to not look at that entire history from a single-sided point of view. We should be empathetic to what the Armenians lived through, what they felt, and what followed for them afterwards. But while expecting respect for their memory, they in turn should show respect for ours too. We shouldn’t construct a one-sided memory… 1915 may be the year of the deportation for them. For us, it is at the same time the year of Canakkale and of Sarikamis” (Murat Yetkin, Radikal, March 26, 2010).
In the press conference organized by Davutoglu in March after the decision by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee for Foreign Affairs on the Armenian Genocide, he expressed the same ideas: “1915 represents the deportation for the Armenians but at the same time it represents Canakkale for us… It was a period of time marked by the great defense for the endurance of a nation. It was a period marked by great suffering in Anatolia. A time when two million people migrated from the Balkans and from the Caucasus. In the wake of the disintegration of an empire, chaos reigned. We have always sympathized with the suffering of that time” (see http://haber.sol.org.tr/devlet-ve-siyaset/davutoglu-1915-bizim-icin-canakkale-dir-haberi-24901).
What Davutoglu is trying to do is actually quite simple. He’s trying to follow a kind of “balancing” policy. To put it in a nutshell: “If the Armenians had their suffering, we had ours too.” It may sound like a new statement, since he seems ready to accept what happened to the Armenians in 1915. However, the precondition for accepting it is that “Muslim suffering” must be equaled with “Armenian suffering.” In reality, therefore, there is nothing new in his statement. The reasoning behind “just memory” and “mutual suffering” has a second and perhaps even more important aspect to it: It views recent history as having been shaped by actors from two different sides—“Muslim” and “Christian.” And these “two sides” developed different “histories and memories” in a state of conflict. This is a serious distortion of history, and for this reason it is worth taking a closer look at it.
First, the “just memory” and “mutual suffering” thesis is an extremely stale one. It’s been repeated over and over again in Turkey for years. Justin McCarthy, Sukru Elekdag’s history consultant, has written books on it. It represents a violation of a simple rule that shouldn’t even need to be mentioned, but here it is: You can never, ever, present civilian and military deaths that occurred during a war as equivalent to the annihilation of a population upon the orders of a party or government. This is a very ordinary denialist tactic. The fact that the civilian and military deaths during World War II in Germany far exceed the number of Jews who were destroyed is a fact known by every school child there. However, today, outside of a few leftover Nazis and some extreme German nationalists, you will not find a single German citizen opposed to acknowledging the Holocaust based on the notion of “just memory” and “we suffered too.” Anyone doing that would be shamed into silence. In a similar vein, if you were to take the deaths caused by Stalin’s massacres against civilians during World War II, and equate them to the losses suffered by the Soviet Army and civilian population while combating the Nazis, that would again be considered shameful. For a less known example, in the genocide perpetrated by the Hutu government against the Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994, 800,000 Tutsis were killed. If you were to compare those 800,000 deaths with the deaths of Hutus by the Tutsi independence organization called the Front for Rwanda Nationlovers (RPF), you would have again committed a grave injustice. Today the Hutu nationalists being prosecuted by the Rwanda International Criminal Court are making those very same arguments in their defense.
This tendency, unfortunately, remains unexamined in Turkey. Whenever the subject of the Armenians’ annihilation in 1915 comes up, the civilian Muslim and military losses from the Caucasian and Balkan wars and World War I are presented as an equivalent. Our so-called “liberal” writers engage in the same exercise. Sometimes you can’t get away from all the “mutual suffering” literature being printed everywhere. Since everyone has suffered and everyone needs to understand the other’s suffering, a deep sense of “peace” settles into every corner. One can’t ignore the comfort in replacing “accusations” and “conflicts” and “battles,” with “harmony” and “serenity” and “understanding.” Since “everyone has suffered,” we gain a tremendous sense of peace by “understanding each other’s pain.” Therefore there is no “perpetrator” in our midst, no “malfeasor,” and no “victim.” We are all in the same position, so why fight? We need to accept the fact that when “someone is feeling blamed” rather deeply, turning it around and making themselves feel like the victim is actually quite comforting to them. It’s a general rule: When cornered, make yourself the victim and get instant stress relief.
From this point on, when we discuss 1915 we need to get away from this statement that “All of us suffered.” What we are talking about are examples of violence that carry different characteristics. Civilian and military losses during wars and the deliberate destruction of a civilian population by the decision of an administration are not crimes that can be examined on the same level, and cannot be considered equivalent. If you are going to take examples of violence with completely different causes and different results, and label them equivalent in degree, one can only conclude that you do not want to understand what happened and that you would prefer to sweep things under the rug.
Why bring up Turkish losses suffered during the war whenever the question of Armenian losses—as a result of centralized decision-making—comes up? Isn’t this a rather strange exercise in logic? By taking two completely different events, different both in the players involved and their causes (in fact in the Caucasian migrations, occurring in different centuries), and placing them side by side and then asking us to consider them together, this isn’t just some silly distortion of history. It is something far worse. It is trying to get us to make what the old folks used to call an “illiyet rabitasi,” or “causation connection.” And it wants us to place the Armenians on one side of those events—if possible, the opposing side. Fine, but there is just one simple question: What possible connection did the Armenians of Anatolia have with the Balkans or with the migration of Muslims from the Caucasus, which started around 80 years before 1915? And more importantly, wasn’t the Union and Progress Party responsible for the losses suffered during World War I as well as what happened in 1915?
This question brings us to the second aspect of this issue: The softness of that phrase “We’ve all suffered” carries within it a deep-seated nationalism and a distortion of facts regarding our recent history. This sentiment views recent history as one marked by two separate collective actors—the “Muslim Turk” and the “Christian Armenian.” The “Muslim Turk actors” and their “history and memory,” and the “Christian Armenian actors” and their “history and memory,” developed different “suffering” within the context of their relations, maybe with clashes with each other, according to this view. For this reason, when looking backward one shouldn’t be confined to just one side’s history and memory. Both sides’ histories and memories need to be honored. This is a very serious distortion of history. The facts don’t bear out this version of history.
This manner of thinking that Davutoglu has been trying to develop is both a manifestation of the deep-seated Muslim identity within the AKP and a reflection of another phenomenon described by the French historian Renan, that is, “a state can only be established upon the deformation of the past. One can’t create a nation without deforming the past.” In other words, 95 years of lies and denial politics have created this mindset of “sides” and “memories” of the issue. This mindset is where the self-belief and self-concept of the Muslim identity in Turkey meets with the secularist-nationalist interpretation of history. This is why the AKP (and Davutoglu) continue the usual denialist policies.
Let’s start from the Balkan wars. The facts are really quite simple. The Balkan wars took place against the Serbian, Greek, and Bulgarian states. One quarter of the army that was mobilized by the Ottomans consisted of Christian Ottoman citizens. As Ottoman citizens, the Armenians’ role in the war wasn’t simply limited to serving in the army. They were active in soliciting donations for it. For example, the director of the Pangalti branch of the Mudafaa-i Milliyet Cemiyeti (Society for National Defense) was Dikran Allahverdi. Dikran bey was successful in procuring 3,000 Ottoman gold coins in donations for support of the army, which even got his name mentioned in the daily newspapers of the time. Dikran Allahverdi was one of the intellectuals who was arrested on April 24, 1915 and taken away. Now, Mr. Davutoglu, where in your “just memory” is there a place for Dikran Allahverdi? Isn’t it just a little bit strange to sit there and pronounce the “Balkan Wars” as belonging to “our memory”—meaning “Muslim memory”—and present it as a contrast to the “Armenians’ history,” especially what happened in 1915?
The Sarikamis example isn’t very different. According to Davutoglu’s “just memory,” on one side is “our” (meaning “Muslim”) suffering over Sarikamis, and on the other side is the Armenian suffering of 1915. Can Davutoglu explain to me why Sarikamis is on one side of history while the Armenians are on the other side? No doubt this is because of Davutoglu’s version of history, which places Muslims on one side and Christians on the other side. Therefore the Muslim losses at Sarikamis get compared with the Armenian-Christian losses of 1915, and presented as “different memories.”
Can there be a more meaningless “compare and contrast” method than this? Anyone with an understanding of history would realize that Sarikamis and 1915 do not represent “two different sides” that reflect “two different memories.” I didn’t compose the folk tune “Askeri kirdiran Enver Pasha” (“Enver Pasha Who Destroyed Soldiers”). This nation did. Enver is both the murderer of Sarikamis and the murderer of Armenians in 1915. Just a simple understanding of history would make us realize that we shouldn’t contrast Sarikamis and 1915; it would remind us to record both on the crime ledgers of Enver and Talat Pasha.
Isn’t this actual history? Wasn’t the Union and Progress party responsible for both the Muslim losses during World War I and the murders of Armenians? With what sort of logic—and why—are two crimes of different characters enacted by the same government both treated the same and also contrasted with each other? Why place one crime by the Union and Progress Party on one side, and the other crime with the other side’s pain and memory? Shouldn’t we put an end to the meaninglessness that hides behind bright words like “just memory”? If Davutoglu had read the indictments of the prosecutions against the Unionists in 1919, he would have seen that the Unionists were prosecuted for these two different criminal episodes, and he would stop this strange business of comparing Sarikamis with the attempted annihilation of the Armenians in 1915.
The situation doesn’t change when you consider Gallipoli. In fact, it presents a much more serious different set of historical facts. It is a situation that is symbolized in the personality of Captain Sarkis Torosyon, as related by Ayhan Aktar (TARAF, March 22, 2010). The battle of Gallipoli doesn’t fall neatly into different memories and suffering between “us” and “Armenians,” as described by Davutoglu. Actually, it reminds us of a horrible and different reality behind it. There were Armenians fighting in the Ottoman army in both Sarikamis and Gallipoli, and when these soldiers were fighting on the battle front, their families were being deported and destroyed. Gallipoli is not marked by Muslims Turks on one side and the history and suffering of Armenians in 1915 on the other. Quite the opposite. Gallipoli stands as a history where the families of those Armenian soldiers battling in the Ottoman army were destroyed.
During the mobilization of Aug. 2, 1914, Armenian citizens between the ages of 18-45 were conscripted in the army like other citizens. After the defeat at Sarikamis on Feb. 25, 1915, by secret orders sent personally by Enver Pasha, all the Armenians were stripped of their weapons and most were placed in labor battalions. During the deportation, these soldiers were systematically murdered. This wouldn’t be limited to the murder of Armenians in the military, either. There was a much more painful aspect to this. The families of the Armenian soldiers who survived and continued serving in the army were also deported and killed. Sarkis Torosyan is not an exception. The Prime Ministerial Ottoman Archives are filled with the correspondences of Armenian soldiers serving in the army who wished to learn of the whereabouts of their deported families. Parsih, an employee of the Ministry of War’s quartermaster general’s department, fourth branch construction squadron; Minas Efendi, son of Nasib, a physician’s assistant with the Dar-ul Muallimin Hospital, from the Bilecek community; Kiragos Efendi, the provisions official with the Jerusalem First Station Hospital; Nersis Mikailyan of Bursa; the first lieutenant Agop from Bolvadin; Aram Asador Demirjiyan of Izmit; Dikran Artun of Konya; Artin, son of Ohannes from Balikesir; Sirakan, son of Papas from Istanbul; Kirkor Efendi, son of Haji Serkis from the township of Arslanbey in the district of Izmit, are just some of the names.
I won’t even bother going any deeper into the subject, knowing that these Armenian soldiers who remained alive were from western Anatolia; that not a single piece of writing can be found from the Armenians of eastern Anatolia; and that almost all of the writings one encounters date from after August 1915…
Mr. Davutoglu, does your “memory of Gallipoli” have room for the Armenian soldiers fighting in the Ottoman army and the destruction of their families?
Mr. Davutoglu, history wasn’t experienced with the Muslims on one side and the Christians on the other.
Mr. Davutoglu, Gallipoli isn’t “ours” and 1915 “the Armenians’.” The Ottoman state and its ruling party, the Union and Progress, ruthlessly oppressed its own Muslim and Christian citizens. The Muslims perished by way of war and sickness. The Armenians were removed from Anatolia by a policy intent on destroying them. It’s as simple as that. Why are you having such a hard time admitting that? Is it because you don’t see the Christian-Armenians as “one of us”? Maybe that’s why you still can’t seem to find a resolution to the ordinary matter of the foundation properties of Christian citizens. You realize, I’m sure, that in modern terms, this is what is referred to as discrimination and racism.
The Turkish version of this OpEd appeared in Taraf on May 11, 2010. Translated from the Turkish by Fatima Sakarya.
Bedrosyan: Searching for Lost Armenian Churches and Schools in Turkey (1,391)
Erdogan ‘Apologizes’ for Dersim Killings, Insults Diaspora (548)
Mouradian: Voir Ani et Mourir: Dispatches from Turkey (Part V) (518)
Katia K.
July 14, 2010
Thank you Ragnar for answering some of our questions. Considering the fact that you are not a historian or Genocide scholar yourself, I have to be sincere and acknowledge that these questions are not being directed to you because we do not know the answers; they are being asked for the sake of rebuttal to prove our points.
I second the contradictions, the distortions and puzzling underlying prejudice that Msheci highlighted in your answers.
Some of your contradictory comments and my reaction to them:
CON:” If Armenians had continued to expand and had founded and empire, and had faces the same kind of situation as the Ottomans faces, they might have reacted in the same way.
” Armenians “had” an empire; they never ethnically cleansed. This prejudiced assumption shows how much you are influenced by Turkish mentality.
CON:”By the way I think you make Turks much worse than they are in reality”. This is a very subjective and irresponsible comment, considering I have myself said several times that I honor Turks who saved Armenians during the Genocide, and Turks who are showing integrity and courage now by acknowledging the Genocide. You should not take “the bad things” we are saying “about the Turks who killed us” or the “Turkish State” out of context and apply them to regular Turkish citizens. I somehow doubt that you would have a good impression about people who slit open the bellies of pregnant women, drew out fingernails with pliers (esp of the Armenians they arrested and tortured), hung folks upside down in dung, drowned babies in rivers, beheaded the so called “rebellers” and took many pictures with the chopped off heads (plenty in archives). Would you still have had a good impression of those Turks if it was your grandmother they burned alive?
PRO:”Armenians have been treated very unjustly and this should be rectified”. Good, reasonable.
CON: “I did not [do fieldwork with Armenians]“. This is contradictory to your own idea that “you should be listening to both sides”. Don’t you think your deficiency in fieldwork with Armenians predisposes you to be more influenced by Turkish prejudice?
CON: “…that recognizing the suffering of Turks may be one road to influence Turks to go into their black spots”. We do not owe the murderers of our ancestors and a State that stole our homeland from us ANYTHING. We are not obligated to show sympathy for what the Balkans did to the Turks, when the Turks have not shown any remorse for what they have done to us. What the Balkans did to the Turks had nothing to do with our women, men and children. Why don’t you ask the people of the Balkans to acknowledge and apologize for what they have done to the Turks.
CON:”The majority of the Turks lived in Anatolia, so this was the place they would defend the most”. In an indirect way you are accepting Ackam’s theory that they had to get our lands because they mostly lived in Anatolia. Losing our lands would have dealt them a big blow. They might have needed to consider going back to their historical lands in Central Asia. “They lived there” is deceiving. “Those were lands they occupied” would be more correct. Your sentence should be rephrased to read, “… so this was the place they needed to keep“.
PRO: “But needless to say, the catastrophe thet befell the Armenians was by far the worst and the governmental responsibility clearest, I believe”. Isn’t “clearest responsibility” kind of synonymous with “intent”?
CON: “The Armenians were seen as a dangerou fifth columns” Are you saying that Armenian women, men and children were dangerous? “Losing Armenia” was dangerous to the Turks.
PRO: “Yes, the Turkish government and the Turkish public at large minimize, deny and distort”. I agree 100%.
CON: ”Because I hold that a terrible crime was perpetrated by the ittihadists, but genocidal intent in the sense of the 1948 convention is so far not proven”. ?
CON: ”I do not deny genociodal intent. Try to read and remember what I say! I hold that it is not satisfactorily proved.” Time and again you have ignored the fact that Raphael Lemkin said he invented the word to describe what happened to the Armenians. You are dismissing all the witnesses who testified that the Ittihadists did not make a secret out of their intention to annihilate the Armenians. You are also dismissing the recently published Talaat’s Black Book, a very damning evidence of how intentionally planned the Genocide was. I have to agree with Boyajian that your claim that the genocidal intent is not proven satisfactorily is baffling! What would satisfy you? How were 1.5 million Armenian citizens killed? Accidentally, without intent? If there was no Genocidal intent and the State just felt like going into a deporting and killing spree, than the entire Turkish population without regard to ethnicity should have been deported and killed.
CON: “Because I hold that a terrible crime was perpetrated by the ittihadists, but genocidal intent in the sense of the 1948 convention is so far not proven”. I am afraid that you are wrong. The Genocide Experts have long established the Ittihadists’ Genocidal intent.
Your contradictory comments give me the impression that there are two Ragnars: One who is logical and sees the obvious and one who feels the need to repeat the illogical rhetoric of his Turkish friends.
Thank you for finally answering the 60 million dollar question of what your Version of what you thought happened was. I am afraid to say that I am majorly disappointed. Instead of announcing a well thought out, researched, elaborated and fact laden version, you are listing 11 “possibilities”, some of them I am afraid borrowed from known Turkish phony excuses. It is obvious that you have no Version! Focusing on some possible isolated marginal details does not change the main event: The Armenian population was exterminated for political reasons=Genocide.
I would like to instead refer to your post of July 12th, where you made a comment that finally had substance in it. You said “ The Turks have the burden of proof that the iIttihadists did not launch an extermination campaign”. I think this came from the Ragnar who accepts the Genocide. I couldn’t agree with you more. The Armenian Genocide is a huge Elephant that no matter from what angle you look at, you cannot ignore. It is a fact that the “Ottoman Armenians were annihilated”. A fact that anyone can see and no one can question. Where there were once 2-2.5 million Armenians, whose numbers should have been in the 20 million by 2010, now there are only 70,000. The Turks have the burden to explain how these people disappeared and why their lands and properties were taken from them. So far, they only threaten the countries that acknowledge the huge Elephant. The reason is very simple. They wanted our lands and they have no intention of returning them. I am tired of people who make the Armenians feel bad about asking for what belongs to them and what is rightfully theirs. If the Turks are upset and don’t want to return our lands and make restitutions for our people whom they massacred, they should have thought about what they were doing in the first place. Our population was terribly diminished by the Genocide. Most of our homeland was taken away. The oppressive Soviet Regime gave away our Kars, Ardahan, Ani and Ararat to the Turks, and our Karabagh and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan. Seventy years of Soviet Regime passed and the orphans grew up and told their stories to their children. We are now here to say: “It is time for a reckoning”.
Can you please tell us if you are talking about a book other than Talaat’s Black Book when you mention “a friend of mine who is genocide researcher claims that Talaat were following the death rate of Armenian deportees in detail by telegrams. These findings are now published by a Turkish researcher. If this is true it is an indication of genocidal intent.a” Talaat’s Black Book which was published recently has lists of each Armenian village, how many were deported from them, what percentage of Armenians remained and what their conditions were. If this is the book you are referring to it definitely is an indictment of what we already knew.
You should also watch “Aghet” by Eric Friedler which debuted on NDR German Public Television in April of 2010, and was just shown yesterday in Washington DC with English subtitles.
Your Answer 19:”The main points are 1) that all the perpetrators are dead, 2) laws do not work retroactively“ Are you sure the laws do not work retroactively? Can you please specify what “laws” you are talking about? If not retroactively, can a Genocide be punished before it was committed? Is there a statute of limitation on Genocides? If the statute of limitation is the 100 year mark, then how can you claim that you are not being an instrument in delayed justice? We are nearing the 100 year mark not because the Armenians failed to demand justice, but because Turks were successful in manipulating the world into postponing justice. The Turks have been using the Genocide as a bartering chip with the world leaders they are dealing with.
Ragnar, the perpetrators may be dead but ALL THE VICTIMS ARE ALIVE, VERY ALIVE. We, the descendants of the Genocide Victims are asking for Justice for our grandparent and for our inheritances back from the Turkish state which inherited the burden of its ancestors wrong doings, and which has chosen to keep our inheritances. The entire Armenian people is owed reparations for the homeland that was taken from them, all the potential possible contributions and wealth that the 1.5 million people could have generated over a period of 95 years by multiplying and producing services, goods and inventions. The entire Armenian people is owed restitutions for the desecration of its churches, monuments, identity and history. It is true that the loss of a nation is priceless, but if the Turks show a good will, I am sure that a reasonable settlement can be found, and then we can all close the page on this atrocious episode in the history of human kind.
I am not a materialistic person, but I would have wanted to have my grandmother’s jewelry and gold English coins that she had sewn into her belt, and that the chettehs snatched from her. I would have also liked to have at least seen the home they lived in, the stables and garden they tended to.
In closing, I agree with you that this is “an important conversation”. It might be important for you, but can you imagine “how much more important” it must be for us since it involves our families?
You are free to do things “according to your conscience”, but be careful not to hurt the rights of thousands of people “unconsciously” (without intending it). Anytime you bring our plight to your Turkish friends, you do a service to humanity and civilization. I hope you will make closer Armenian friends so that you may judge us with your eyes and not those of your Turkish friends.
By the way, Carl hasn’t written in a while… I do not know why but you kept on attributing my comments to Carl and Msheci in your July 12th post. With all these humongous posts, how can you ignore me? I hope you don’t think I am being “obnoxious”! Again, none of this is your fault, you are free to have your opinions and ideas about what happened if the subject interests you… and we have the right to fight for the TRUTH.
ragnar naess
July 14, 2010
Boyajian
your answer to my answers – to the questions so diligently enumerated by Msheci – contain many important points. You write:
I want to acknowledge that your position on intent not being satisfactorily proven was made clear by you from the beginning of this dialogue. This has never sat well with me. I don’t understand what proof you are looking for, or why it is important when the genocidal results are so evident.
Comment:
Neither do I think that the question of genocidal intent is of paramount importance. The moral issue is evident, and as I have said earlier, the impunity with which people on the ground (gendarmes, military and civil officials, common people) could kill Armenians and put them in a life endangering situation is one of the best illustrations of the moral issue. The responsibility is obvious.
The reason why I repeat my phraze about not agreeing with the thesis that genocidal intent is proven is the following:
1) I am very often being asked about this
2) If I just say that the word genocide applies without qualifying it, I create a spurious agreement because many I discuss with, above all Armenians, hold the fact of genodical intent in the top echelons of CUP, indeed genocide being clear policy by vote in the CC of CUP or even broader, to be a proven fact. So it is right of me to mention this, I believe.
3) The Armenian side has unfortunately claimed too much without proper evidence and this harms the Armenian cause. Support of works like the Mevlanzade book, which is even cited in publications by the Armenian Council of Sciences, harms the Armenian cause once Turks realize that they must argue, and start seeling out the weak points in the Armenian version.
You write:
Turkey has inflicted immeasurable harm on the Armenian people, both real and potential and the crime was not a crime against Armenians alone but also against all mankind. This crime cannot be satisfactorily expressed in numbers of dead, or wealth stolen, or churches desecrated. One must also consider the lost potential in the form of cultural growth, scientific and artistic contributions to mankind, population growth that foster vibrant cities and economies in Asia Minor.
Comment: I agree to a certain extent, but we also have to consider the potential situation of Turks and Kurds if the six vilayets had been able to realize the Wilsonian promises. Very7 probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the inhabitants in these vilayets.
You write:
I still hold that you are missing the bigger picture here.
Comment:
That is a possibility.
you write:
Turkey must be pressured to face this not helped in its defense against facing this. But if your efforts lead to Armenians formulating a stronger proof for intent, than I will have to thank you.
Comment:
In the seminar in the University of Utah in april this year I made a presentation with the titel “Polarization of discourse and quality of dialogue”. My point here is that the deficiciencies in dialogue on both sides is one of the a obstacles to a closure of the conflict (the situation taken as a conflict regarding facts with moral implications).
If the Armenian side continues to use questionable evidence, dismissed by the scholarly community, they indirectly help the Turkish denialists. The Turkish side, which has the greater responsibility for making their moves towards recognition of moral responsibility, has taken some steps in the right direction in the last years, but evidently are far from realizing the full responsibility.
So yes, criticising the Armenian version in a friendly way is an act of solidarity on my side.
ragnar naess
July 14, 2010
Of course I mean to say “a disaster for THESE inhabitants in these vilayets.
msheci
July 14, 2010
Ragnar – I noticed in your comment addressed to Boyajian that you’re now focusing on the Rifat Mevlanzade’s account after our discussion of the Andonian papers in which both you and I appear to have come to an agreement that allegations that these papers as outright forgeries are, at best, dubious, and that many diplomatic and consular dispatches and some Turkish Interior Ministry’s materials to some degree confirm their authenticity. If you’re ready, I could take up the challenge and proceed with the argumentation for the Mevlanzade’s account.
While reading the comment, I couldn’t but notice this repulsive remark of yours: ‘[b]ut we also have to consider the potential situation of Turks and Kurds if the six vilayets had been able to realize the Wilsonian promises. Very probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the inhabitants in these vilayets.’ But, Ragnar, just a couple of posts earlier you contended that ‘[l]evels of violence between different groups must be explained by social and historical influences, [not by peculiar national characteristics].’ Yet, now you state that ‘very probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the inhabitants.’ How do you know? What social and historical influences that brought about violence you use as evidence supporting your argument that Armenians would most probably cause disaster for Turks and Kurds inhabiting the six vilayets had the Wilsonian Armenia materialized? Any evidence of widespread forced expulsions and mass extermination that Armenians have ever perpetrated against those two ethnic groups? I’d be curious to know.
You know what you’re essentially doing? You’re parroting yet another Turkish denialist cliché that had the Armenians been in the same situation they’d likewise mass murder the Turks. At this point comes my point that in addition to social and historical influences that bring about violence, there exist peculiar national characteristics that allow some nations to commit wholesale massacres of fellow human beings, but are repugnant for many others. Armenians have for the most part peacefully co-existed with those two ethnic groups during the Ottoman centuries until CUP has decided to wipe out their Armenian objects in 1915. What evidence do you use to hurt us again in these pages in that ‘very probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the [Turkish and Kurdish] inhabitants’? This unnecessary and unsubstantiated juxtaposition of the traits typical for the descendants of Seljuk-Mongol savages with the descendants of 3000+ years old civilization is despicable, just despicable. I should like to think that you’d need to either provide historical evidence to support such a statement or offer us an apology.
Boyajian
July 14, 2010
Ragnar, I felt oddly sad after reading your last comments addressed to me. It seems that you take in very little that commentators offer to you. You are consistently inconsistent and only marginally empathic toward Armenians, despite the fact that you say otherwise. You also appear far from neutral despite the fact that you say you are. Strangely, I made the same remarks regarding the lost potential of Armenian life in the vilayets in another conversation on the AW site and a very open-minded Turk who goes by the tag of Memik responded:
Besides what currently exists, as Boyajian mentioned, thinking of what could have been is even more painful. I also don’t wish to value human life in terms of utility, but imagining the state of those lands today had Armenians (been) left unharmed is very very sad (just to give an example like comparing the theatres, families like Fabrikatöryans and lively cultural athmosphere of Kharpert before and the state of the region now).
I was moved by Memik’s willingness to be empathic with the Armenian perspective. His simple human expression touched my heart and helped me to imagine the possibilities for rapprochement and forgiveness.
Here is how you responded to the same comments by me about the lost potentials of Armenians following the genocide:
Comment: I agree to a certain extent, but we also have to consider the potential situation of Turks and Kurds if the six vilayets had been able to realize the Wilsonian promises. Very7 probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the inhabitants in these vilayets.
It really is very difficult for you to turn off your Turkish apologist’s mind, isn’t it? Not knowing you, I can’t be sure what motivates you, but is your wife Turkish? Or did an Armenian steal your lunch money as a child? How can you state that life in the vilayets would have been disastrous for Turks and Kurds had Armenians been granted control under the Wilsonian plan? What evidence do you have to make such a claim? Or is this your way of saying that after what the Armenians endured you would not be surprised if a campaign of revenge took place under Armenian control? What a despicably biased statement from someone who poses as a neutral academic trying to bring out the truth on both sides. You needn’t worry about revenge from the mere remnant of my people that remained. Besides, in 95 years, how much revenge have you actually seen occur?
Just when I was beginning to believe you were sincerely interested in moving the issue forward… I don’t know what is worse: the root canal I just had or finding out how futile our efforts to be heard by you have been.
ragnar naess
July 15, 2010
I will comment on your comments, Msheci, to my answers to the list of questions you put together. But first I’d like to comment on the alleged direct documentation , forwarded by the Armenian side, that had best be forgotten because it is dubious. By direct documentation I mean those that claim that there exist statements directly attributable to the inner circle of ittihadists where they in clear words say that their aim is to exterminate the Ottoman Armenians. You brought this alleged documentation into the debate in a post on june 24. I cite: “…documented minutes of the CUP leaders’ meetings, Tallat’s Black Book revelations, Andonian’s Papers” Unquote. The “documented minutes” you refer to I believe is the Mevlanzade book.” Talat’s Black Book” that you refer to must be the “Kara kapli defter” published by Bardakci. The last one does not contain any statements about the need to exterminate Armenians, if I am not mistaken. But the Mevlanzade Book is, as I have said earlier, a wildly improbable text, according to Gwynne Dyer. But my point is not that these texts have been shown to be forgeries, I believe Zürcher overstates his case. My point is that these texts should be disregarded because they are dubious. It is not necessary to prove them – or show them, I take the two expressions more or less as the same – to be false.
Later you write: then the Andonian papers should be considered amongst many other corroborating documents supporting the papers, such as secret reports of German and Austrian diplomats and consular workers.
Comment: the charge is that the Andonian papers were produced afterwards to fit to what one believes took place, much in the same way as the Mevlanzade book and the “Ten Commandments”. These works cannot be considered corroborating evidence because they may be later concoctions.
Of course there are what I would call substantial evidence for genocidal intent, that is evidence that tend to lay the burden of proof at the door of the Turks. I am very interested in investigating whether genocidal intent can be proved or not. The fact of impunity for perpetrators, as I have said many times, is such an indication. But documents about which one may with some reason hold to have been produced afterwards in order to present evidence for a certain thesis are just the same as any produced evidence in any mystery case. They should simply be dismissed.
To take another point, I also have mixed feelings about the German resolution because it may be interpreted as saying that it disregards the assertion that the events of 1915-16 constitutes genocide according to the definition of 1948. If I were to produce a statement I would say that the Turkish government must allow a free investigation into this question. This allegation has been made by Armenians and by genocide scholars and it should not be overlooked.
Now to your comments to my answers to your long list of questions. I will only answer a few of them in this post.
I agree the first one is very central:
Do you agree that massacring nations might be alien to some nations and typical to others? Armenians have no record in their history of committing a crime of such a magnitude and degree of barbarity as the Turks have. Don’t you think there exist peculiar national characteristics that restrain many nations in committing barbaric acts?
Answer1: No, I would not formulate it in this way. For me to try to have an opinion you would have to formulate the question in something more precise than “alien” and “typical”. Levels of violence between different groups must be explained by social and historical influences. If Armenians had continued to expand and had founded and empire, and had faces the same kind of situation as the Ottomans faces, they might have reacted in the same way.
Then you mention Tigranes who founded an empire, but his situation cannot be equalized with the situation of the Turks in the late Ottoman Empire. Tigranes did not face the same kind of situation as the Ottoman Empire which was threatened both by 1) partition by the powers, 2) internal rebellions by peoples who generally were championed by the same powers, 3) concrete examples that such wars and rebellions – led to direct or indirect mass murder of one’s own (the 250.000 turks who died in the winter of 1877-78 and the possibly even higher number who died in 1912-13. Standing with the back against one’s wall against a weaker opponent whose leadership you know is in partnership with a mighty enemy in the distance, you have an inducement to kill off the weaker opponent. In this case, demography had also become a political argument, so the very existence of the Armenians on the soil they wanted to defend was a threat in itself. According to this general logic, the group standing with its back against the wall may retaliate in a terrible way. In the same way Hartunian in his book “Neither to laugh nor to cry” tell about Armenians who killed off Turks who lived in their midst for fear of their being traitors, as a pre-emptive strike. These action, to my mind, were created by the situation. This does not imply condoning the acts, it explains them by factors of a social and hiswtorical kind.
In this sense I would explain the acts of the ittihadists as acts created by the circumstances. I do not agree that acts of violence may be typical of some nations and not others, unless you mean that they typically found themselves in certain types of situation. The Vikings massacred people indiscriminately in many instances, and recently a book was published by a friend of mine, Robert xxx, who holds that the violence may have been caused by experiences of violent Christianization, that Nordic people wer offered to choose between death and assuming Christendom. This is an explanation about social and historical factors leading to violence.
Now in early june you gave what I take as an explanation of why the Turks at a certain junction in their history condoned and perpetrated massacres. I cite:
We’re dealing with the Turks, a nation-state that appeared on the world map, as a result of nomadic invasions from Mongolian steppes and destruction of the natives in Asia Minor, only in the 11th-14th centuries AD. Their’ modern’, as they call it, state was formed only in the beginning of the 20th century. Essentially, these people, not all of course, INHERITED IN THEIR GENES (my emphasis) the mentality of their savage forefathers: kill to gain new pastures; demolish ancient structures of the natives and build mosques; present ancient indigenous artifacts as their own; ennoble their genes by interbreeding with settled, more civilized natives; steal their females, convert their children; and ultimately mass annihilate all the remnants of indigenous peoples in order to distort the history and prove that the Turks inhabited those lands for all times. However brutal and racist the German Nazis were, as a civilized European nation Germans could overcome the murderer complex and live up to the high intellect and culture they’ve developed throughout millennia of their existence and apologize to the Jews. Do you think we could expect the same from the Turks even if we note their grievances and support the process towards their admitting the guilt? I strongly doubt.
Comment: your reference to genes are not substantiated by modern genetics, and your point of view smacks of types of ideologies that I believe you do not want to be associated with.
How can some Turks escape the influence of these genes and others not? What kind of genetics is this?
Regarding the end of your statement, I wonder how you foresee any victory for the Armenian cause, if the Turks are never to be expected to admit anything because they “simply are like that”
Gayane
July 15, 2010
Msheci is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT asking for an apology from Ragnar for his ignorant comment below.. Absolutely…
very probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the [Turkish and Kurdish] inhabitants’
This goes to show everyone as to why I imposed the question of whether or not Ragnar did any fieldwork or spent as much as time with the Armenians as he did with Turks … above is the perfect example of having very little or no KNOWLEDGE about Armenians and who they are.. I am sure your Armenian friends will be thrilled to know that you think their ancestors were killers and murderors and terrorist who would have attacked and wiped out the Turks living on their lands at those times…..
Like Katia beautifully stated in her last post, you Mr Ragnar with your little knowlege of our history from OUR side puts you very very close to being Turkified individual with Turkish mentality and made up stories… i am just not sure if you even comprehend some of the things you post on these pages..
Confused person indeed…
Gayane
Gayane
July 15, 2010
Also.. i have not gotten a strong and direct answer to my question..
Do you believe there was a Genocide or not? I know you have been giving us this and that and how is this and how is that, when is this and when is that.. but i did not see you specifically answer this question..from my last post…
Ragnar you are not fooling anyone… there is only TWO sides to this: YES or NO… Now there are a whole bunch of degrees of “No” but there is only one “Yes”… I am on the side of “YES”.. yes there was a Genocide..
German Parliament’s side- one degree of NO- no matter how much they want to show they support our cause
Your side- another degree of BIG NO.. no matter how you spin this matter
Turks side- different degree of HUGE NO.. no matter how many political games they organize to fool the world…
At the end of the day Ragnar.. it is either YES OR NO.. so which side are you RAGNAR???
Thank you
Gayane
ragnar naess
July 16, 2010
Msheci
I believe the end of my last message to you – of yesterday – did not get into the system. Here it is:
Now in early june (june 6 i Believe) you gave what I take as an explanation of why the Turks at a certain junction in their history condoned and perpetrated massacres. I cite:
We’re dealing with the Turks, a nation-state that appeared on the world map, as a result of nomadic invasions from Mongolian steppes and destruction of the natives in Asia Minor, only in the 11th-14th centuries AD. Their’ modern’, as they call it, state was formed only in the beginning of the 20th century. Essentially, these people, not all of course, INHERITED IN THEIR GENES (my emphasis) the mentality of their savage forefathers: kill to gain new pastures; demolish ancient structures of the natives and build mosques; present ancient indigenous artifacts as their own; ennoble their genes by interbreeding with settled, more civilized natives; steal their females, convert their children; and ultimately mass annihilate all the remnants of indigenous peoples in order to distort the history and prove that the Turks inhabited those lands for all times. However brutal and racist the German Nazis were, as a civilized European nation Germans could overcome the murderer complex and live up to the high intellect and culture they’ve developed throughout millennia of their existence and apologize to the Jews. Do you think we could expect the same from the Turks even if we note their grievances and support the process towards their admitting the guilt? I strongly doubt.
Comment: your reference to genes are not substantiated by modern genetics, and your point of view smacks of types of ideologies that I believe you do not want to be associated with.
How can some Turks escape the influence of these genes and others not? What kind of genetics is this?
Regarding the end of your statement, I wonder how you foresee any victory for the Armenian cause, if the Turks are never to be expected to admit anything because they “simply are like that”
ragnar naess
July 16, 2010
Katia K, thank you for commenting on my answers to the questions.
Here are my comments. In some places I have not commented because I have commented before. You can find my arguments why genocidal intent in the top ittihadists, among them Talaat, is not sufficiently proven. I know that you disagree but see no reason to repeat myself.
You write:
Some of your contradictory comments and my reaction to them:
CON:” If Armenians had continued to expand and had founded and empire, and had faces the same kind of situation as the Ottomans faces, they might have reacted in the same way.
” Armenians “had” an empire; they never ethnically cleansed. This prejudiced assumption shows how much you are influenced by Turkish mentality.
Comment: See my answer to Msheci. Unfortunately you are not right. The Armenians did ethnical cleansing at certain junctures
You write:
Comment: I did not notice that you said this, but I am happy that this is your opinion
CON:”By the way I think you make Turks much worse than they are in reality”. This is a very subjective and irresponsible comment, considering I have myself said several times that I honor Turks who saved Armenians during the Genocide, and Turks who are showing integrity and courage now by acknowledging the Genocide. You should not take “the bad things” we are saying “about the Turks who killed us” or the “Turkish State” out of context and apply them to regular Turkish citizens.
Comment: I did not notice that you said this,possibly I overlooked it, but I am happy that this is your opinion
You write:
CON: “I did not [do fieldwork with Armenians]“. This is contradictory to your own idea that “you should be listening to both sides”. Don’t you think your deficiency in fieldwork with Armenians predisposes you to be more influenced by Turkish prejudice?
Comment: yes, you are right, but I try to rectify it by having Armenian friends, study literature and discussing with you. Since you have not done any fieldworks with Turks, is it possible that you may still be prejudiced towards Turks?
You write:
CON: “…that recognizing the suffering of Turks may be one road to influence Turks to go into their black spots”. We do not owe the murderers of our ancestors and a State that stole our homeland from us ANYTHING.
Comment: No, you don’t owe it but if it would give better results in convincing some turks, why not do it? What do you loose?
You write:
CON:”The majority of the Turks lived in Anatolia, so this was the place they would defend the most”. In an indirect way you are accepting Ackam’s theory that they had to get our lands because they mostly lived in Anatolia. Losing our lands would have dealt them a big blow. They might have needed to consider going back to their historical lands in Central Asia. “They lived there” is deceiving. “Those were lands they occupied” would be more correct. Your sentence should be rephrased to read, “… so this was the place they needed to keep“.
Comment: See my posts at the very beginning of our dialogue about the rights of domicile of people who have lived in a place for hundreds of years. Eastern Anatolia was the home of many Turks and Kurds. I am actually shocked by your idea that the simple Turkish and Kurdish farmer and nomad living in the six vilayets in 1914 should be an aggressor. What about the Armenians living in areas that earlier were predominantly Lydian or Phrygian or Greek? Should they be thrown out?
You write:
CON: “The Armenians were seen as a dangerou fifth columns” Are you saying that Armenian women, men and children were dangerous? “Losing Armenia” was dangerous to the Turks.
Comment: No, but the Armenian leaders were a fifth column in 1913-14 in the ordinary sense of the word. They had their reasons, some of which were quite plausible but so have many fifth columns
you write:
Thank you for finally answering the 60 million dollar question of what your Version of what you thought happened was. I am afraid to say that I am majorly disappointed. Instead of announcing a well thought out, researched, elaborated and fact laden version, you are listing 11 “possibilities”, some of them I am afraid borrowed from known Turkish phony excuses. It is obvious that you have no Version! Focusing on some possible isolated marginal details does not change the main event: The Armenian population was exterminated for political reasons=Genocide.
Comment:
I believe you do not appreciate scholarly method. This is what scholarly do. They say “assuming that it was like this…”. Then they enumerate a number of possibilities together making a possible version. Or this is what scholars should do if the do work in a field marked by controversies.
No, the Kara Kapli defter is about deportation not implying anything about extermination. The statistics I am talking about is something else. They are found in ciphered telegrams recently presented by a Turkish researcher. They are not published yet, I believe
You write:
Your Answer 19:”The main points are 1) that all the perpetrators are dead, 2) laws do not work retroactively“ Are you sure the laws do not work retroactively? Can you please specify what “laws” you are talking about? If not retroactively, can a Genocide be punished before it was committed?
Comment: With all due respect, Katia, here you are mixing things. You cannot prosecute a crime before it is committed, but if you prosecute it , it should be according to existing law, not a law made after the crime. But the crimes of the ittihadists were committed by existing laws, I believe, so I cannot see the point of this. They were responsible for a terrible crime.
Finally: I want to comment on an article made by an Armenian friend of mine. It is about the massacres and politics of the Hamidian era. So I hope we can conclude our discussion in an orderly way. With my other work and obligations to my daughter my time is not sufficient to go on. If I meet you again in another place of comment, we can go on.
ragnar naess
July 16, 2010
Msheci, you write:
This unnecessary and unsubstantiated juxtaposition of the traits typical for the descendants of Seljuk-Mongol savages with the descendants of 3000+ years old civilization is despicable, just despicable. I should like to think that you’d need to either provide historical evidence to support such a statement or offer us an apology.
Comment:
I apologize if I could be interpreted as saying that Armneians had committed equally horrific crimes as the Turks. This was not my intention. My point is that the acts both of Armenians and Turks are best understood as outcomes of social and historical processes.
An Armenian friend of mine has wriotten a sketch on the masasacres of the Hamidian era. I promised to comment on it before he sends it for publishing. Together with my obligations in work and my other responsibilities I ask that we now conclude this discussion in an orderly manner. Maybe we will discuss again at a later date.
ragnar naess
July 16, 2010
Boyajian
the sadness is reciprocated. If we agree that justice in universal, should we not also think about the consequences for Turks in the six vilayets? Have you read Justin McCarthy’s “Death and exile”? Have you read about the Turkish refugees in the winter of 1877-78? Or the effects of the Balkan war?
You write that no people or country is blameless, and it goes also for Armenians, or?
What happened to the Muslims in the Yerevan area?
I am sad because it is so evident that if the potentials for a new country in an area with ethnically mixed population are realized with some inhabitants being branded as invaders several hundred years ago, the results might have been catastrophic? Dont yoiu see how the zionists in the name of jewry has created an undignified and impossible situation for both the Jews and the Palestinians?
Now it may be that you will simply hold that you are not thinking of the Kurds and Turks and their potential destiny in an area ruled by the Dashnaksiutun or by persomalities like Dro? If you dont, if you exclude the considering of the potentilas for people who had been tilling the soil and grazing the cattle for hundreds of years, OK, so much for universal justice, but permit me to think about the potential consequences for Muslims, if you onesidedly will think about potentials for the Armenians.
ragnar naess
July 16, 2010
Msheci,
I am waiting for your explanations about your philosophy regarding the genetical determination of Turkish violence. I see no reason to go on in the discussion for the time being unless you comment on this
ragnar naess
July 16, 2010
OK Msechi, another comment
Mzheci you write
While reading the comment, I couldn’t but notice this repulsive remark of yours: ‘[b]ut we also have to consider the potential situation of Turks and Kurds if the six vilayets had been able to realize the Wilsonian promises. Very probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the inhabitants in these vilayets.’ But, Ragnar, just a couple of posts earlier you contended that ‘[l]evels of violence between different groups must be explained by social and historical influences, [not by peculiar national characteristics].’ Yet, now you state that ‘very probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the inhabitants.’ How do you know? What social and historical influences that brought about violence you use as evidence supporting your argument that Armenians would most probably cause disaster for Turks and Kurds inhabiting the six vilayets had the Wilsonian Armenia materialized? Any evidence of widespread forced expulsions and mass extermination that Armenians have ever perpetrated against those two ethnic groups? I’d be curious to know.
Comment1:
I fail to see any contradiction here. I stick to a social and historical explanation, not to a genetical one which you seem to subscribe to. What does the “But, Ragnar..” mean?
Comment2:
In 1916 some 1.2 million Kurds and Turks fled the areas occupied by the Russian army. Such a big flight, inducing people to leave their homesteads must have had important reasons; panic, examples of Armenians massacring Turks and Kurds. There are of course examples of Armenians massacring Turks and Kurds. It was done in Van after the ottoman army withdrew on may 17, 1915. Even the missionary Ussher mentions this. There are also witness accounts of Armenians massacring inhabitants of the village of Zeve in the Van vilayet. There are the complaints made by the French about the behavior of the Armenian Legion in 1919. Going back to the 1.2. million who fled in 1916, their flight is the natural outcome of a state in which a cycle of violence was operative. The Turks massacred Armenians because they feared another Bulgaria, the Armenians massacred Turks as revenge. We also have the fate of the Muslims in the Yerevan area, driven out because the Armenians expected them to collaborate with an invading Turkish army. The situation was one of a cycle of violence. This also answers Katia’s claim that the Armenians never did any ethnic cleansing. But the itthihadist Turks committed by far the worst crimes and moreover built a new society which denied the crimes committed against the Armenians. This is why I emphasize the Armenian genocide and not the genocide against the Bulgarian Turks which the Turks do not emphasize so much anyhow. And Turks and Kurds had all reason to expect ethnic cleansing and massacres if the Armenians had taken over the six vilayets.
ragnar naess
July 16, 2010
Boyajian,
I cannot help distrusting your words: now that we seem to be moving forward. In what way have we moved forward? I have held that the ittihadists committed a great crime against the Ottoman Armenians, that the crime with some qualifications may be called genocide, that the Armenians deserve an apology, financial compensation and maybe land reparations, that I will work to further my view on this with my Turkish friends and by handing out leaflets to Norwegian tourists going to Turkey. But it seems that unless I agree with all you say you are not able to accept my views as a view of solidariy. You let the question of potential gains and losses overshadow everything else, and you see my apprehensions about what might have happened to the Muslims in the six vilayets as Turkish apologism? Have you read history?
What standards of solidarity are you operating with? Are you sure you are on the right track in considering how to further the Armenian cause?
Again I hope we may part in a dignified manner after two months of intensive discussion
Boyajian
July 18, 2010
As the descendant of an Armenian grandfather and uncle hung by Turks in their own barn outside of Yerevan during the period you mention that Muslims were being driven out, I know only too well the violence of the period. However, I still hold that you have no real basis to suggest that life for Turks and Muslims would have been disastrous under Armenian rule. It is pure conjecture. I do not deny that there were uprisings and revenge attacks carried out by Armenians. As you point out violence begets violence. But to suggest definitively that Armenian rule would be a “disaster” is to foment hatred. You lose scholarly credibility when you do this.
Have I read history? Yes, however, I am careful to avoid Turkish misinformation.
Also you misread me here:
“I cannot help distrusting your words: now that we seem to be moving forward. In what way have we moved forward?”
I never said “now that we seem to be moving forward…”
What I said was: “Just when I was beginning to believe you were sincerely interested in moving the issue forward…”
I will clarify: You are very inconsistent in my opinion. On one hand acknowledging the genocide. On the other hand trying to convince Armenians that the history they have learned is tainted and dubious. Whether or not you admit it, you are not serving justice and that is the reason I say you are not moving the issue forward. You are delaying justice and I find that reprehensible, no matter how scholarly you believe your efforts to be.
I am sorry if you believe that I am behaving in an undignified manner toward you. My intent is to be honest in my response to someone who obliviously offends my moral sensibilities.
I wish you well in your life but I pray you give up this vain endeavor to teach Armenians a truth they know only too well. You should withhold judgement on both sides if you are truly interested in acquiring a balanced view. Maybe you are trying to do this, but in my opinion you are overly swayed by Turkish propaganda. Your lack of self-examination in this area, despite the fact that many have suggested this too you, is very dubious and offensive, as well. I guess we mistrust each other.
Boyajian
July 18, 2010
Again, prejudice Ragnar! You point to the Jewish relations with Palestinians as defense for your provocative suggestion that Turks and Kurds would have suffered under Armenian rule. Really?
Why not use your many talents to help your Turkish friends recognize the need for an apology to the Armenians in order to begin a rapprochement based on honesty, empathy and forgiveness. Do we really need to dissect and reexamine the history when we agree that genocidal results occurred? How does this serve the Turks? How does this help them to see the truth of their history? And please refrain from mentioning the Turkish losses in the Balkans, as if they are valid justification for the actions the Turks took against the Armenians. I sympathize with the lives lost and with the innocents that were driven from their homes. How could I not. But this Balkan tragedy should not be placed on Armenian shoulders. This only serves those in Turkey who do not want to recognize the immorality of the Turkish atrocities. I do not blame average Turks living today for what befell my ancestors. And I also understand that most are only now becoming aware of this dark chapter in Turkish history. But I cannot excuse the Turkish government for its 90-95 years of denial and distortion, attempts to create a false history, efforts to destroy remnants of Armenian culture in Asia Minor, suppression of our religious and cultural freedom, and arrogance in the face of world recognition of the genocide.
I don’t suggest that it is wrong for you to have sympathy for Turks and Kurds, only that you are wrong to presume that Armenians are not capable of a fair minded approach to Turks and Kurds just because we doggedly pursue our cause against the Turkish government. No one is saying that Armenians never took revenge against Muslims. Several cases are documented. But nothing resembling the full scale annihilation of Turks took place. And in 95 years few reprisals have occurred. We Armenians have primarily attempted to achieve our goals through politics, literature, academia, public demonstrations and religious commemorations. And in the case of Artsakh/Nagorno-Karabagh, Armenians were not the aggressors, but were forced to defend their rights against the Azeri-Turk attacks. To this day the Armenians have respected the cease fire, and advocated for a negotiated, non-combatant, mutually agreeable resolution to the conflict. The same cannot be said for Aliev the Azeri president who regularly threatens renewed combat.
You really are missing the larger picture and your place in it. The Armenian Republic is under threat from her neighbors from the east and west, but awaits a normalization of relations without preconditions even regarding admitting the genocide or engaging in provocation with Azeris. Armenians want the right to live in dignity, with self-determination and mutual respect with her neighbors. This cannot be achieved until Turks give up their exaggerated national pride and begin to view Armenians as human beings who they wronged and must make atonement toward.
You must view the German made documentary “Aghet” now available on youtube with English subtitles. You will not only witness the documentation of eyewitness accounts but you will undoubtedly notice the courage of the German filmmakers who acknowledge the German complicity in the Genocide. This mature self-awareness can only happen in Turkey once Turks come to terms with their history as the Germans have with respect to the Holocaust. Why not do your part to help make this happen rather than be a pawn for those Turks who try to avoid responsibility by pretending that something already known has to be proven again. You may be surprised at the power of repentance and forgiveness that can occur.
As for solidarity, how can i feel solidarity with someone who spends his time trying to discredit my history for a purpose I still do not understand.
Katia K.
July 18, 2010
Ragnar,
Your last posts have churned my stomach. Making a mockery of evidence and denying the truth of what our grandparents have felt, breathed and lived through are by themselves discriminitory and extremely reprehensible. Two months of discussions later, in my mind I still see you as a Turk. Now more so, after I read your last posts. It pains me that we took you as a reasonable/scientific man who happens to be influenced by Turkish denials. You do a disservice to science Sir. It pains me that my people yearn, cry, tells their story, ask for justice…. and are hurt again and again by cold, unfeeling deniers such as yourself (you are a denier for me because you have now dismissed all existing evidence). Denying our Genocide is killing us again and again. I congratulate you for your complete, one-sided loyalty to your Turkish friends. Thank God for the thousands of friends who fight with us for justice.
I am very glad, that you have not studied criminal justice. It is disgusting to me the way you completely dismiss the most important components of this most heinous crime: the evidence and the testimony of the eyewitnesses/foreign diplomats/survivors. You seem to focus all your attention on the anecdotes told by your Turkish friends, and all the “imaginary bad things” the Armenians could have done to them “if this and that happened”. The arabs ruled over the Iberian Peninsula for hundreds of years also, but when the time came the Spanish threw them out of their lands. The Armenian Vilayets were called the Armenian Vilayets because they were Armenian lands. We wanted our freedom and our homeland back. How dare you make it sound as if it was a good idea that we were not given our homeland back. Good for who sir? What kind of a justice are you ascribed to? You Sir, are no objective scientist. And now you decide that this conversation is over…. what arrogance.
I ask you, as a departing request, to watch “Aghet” from end to end. The Youtube link below consists of 10 videos. Each video will link to the other. Please watch it till the end. The documentary reveals witness testimony that you are chosing to ignore. When you watch the footages of the Armenian Genocide victims, look them in their eyes… no one deserves to have their nation and identity be erased. Those poor souls… you are not worthy to talk about them… they are angels for us. Their souls live in us. They were kicked out of their homeland, denied food and killed by a thousand deaths so that the Turks build their new Republic with their lands. Regular women, men and innocent children whose parents took every care to raise the best they could… how dare anyone treat children like that. We will fight you and anyone who works to distort this sad sad story of the human race. We owe it to our grandparents. We owe it to humanity.
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B4306054D5680A18
If the link does not work, please look for Aghet with English subtitles on Youtube.com
Farewell
gayane
July 18, 2010
Boyajian jan.. well said..
We will wait for Msheci’s and Katia’s responses because as I see that Ragnar is really pushing my hot buttons and I refuse to express anger because then he will take that and run to his Turkish friends yelling bloody murder and how ARmenians are genocidal .. however, what he will miss expressing to them while he is yelling bloody murder is that he consistently spits out wrong information, offensive comments, incorrect data, messed up ideas, enigma opinions to make Armenians express their anger…… that is how Ragnar is.
It is absolutely disgusting to see how he response to the questions.. HE HAS NOT REPLIED TO MY QUESTION YET.. still waiting… i see that you refuse to answer that question Ragnar… and i thought you were the one who told me that I refuse to answer your question… well I did … and I had a question for you??? are you going to answer my question or are you going to hide behind your empty scientific studies…???
You are not a scholar sir.. not even close… you are swayed by the Turks and that is just sad..truly sad..i am not a scholar myself which means i don’t have to spend time with Turks to learn the Turkish history.. actually even if was a scholar i would not want to learn from Turks because we already know how well they hide their true history.. so the farther I stay away the better for me…because this way I will be able to come up with a more accurate and clean data by studying and doing fieldwork with NON-ARMENIAN and NON-TURKISH people.. this goes to you too.. however, it is too late for you because your brain cells have been manifested with the poison filled Turkish side of the history.. and it is very hard for you to get rid of this poison..
I told you MILLION TIMES already..DO NOT and you SHOULD NOT represent anything that deals with the Armenian Genocide or any Genocide… PERIOD.. you are not the greatest representative for this.. anyone who does not believe in whatever they are promoting or selling will never be able to sell it or be successful at it.. that is SELLING 101…
So drop this fake ” I want to help” crap and go eat your Turkish delights…I am sorry but you are definintely raising my blood pressure with your comments…but don’t worry no matter how high my blood pressure rises, I won’t get genocidal…you can count on that..but then again I don’t even know you believe in that because according to you, Armenians are like the Turks who massacred and killed..
That said… as many of us here suggested you to do is GO LEARN FROM NON-ARMENIANS and ARMENIANS alike to be able to come in here and present a more balanced arguments and theories because right now I see you as a denialist Turk..
Remember: There is only two answers to this equation.. YES- There was a Genocide OR NO, there was not.. you are on the NO side of the spectrum… …
Have yourself a great evening SIR.
Gayane
Boyajian
July 18, 2010
Also, Ragnar, if you sense that Armenians commenting here tend to be “one-sided” please recognize that this is not due to lack of compassion for innocent Turks. This is due to the fact that the genocidal attitudes present at the end of the Ottoman empire are still at work today in some sectors of Turkish society and that Armenians find themselves mostly abandoned by world powers as they await the justice due them. It is unreasonable to ask Armenians to weigh their losses against Turkish losses and then lessen their demands because of it. Turkey is guilty of heinous behavior both in the genocide and its cover-up. Armenians are fighting for recognition of truth and a right to their heritage. Please pick up your poorly formulated speculations and get out of our way. Our train is coming down the track and you are standing on it.
boyajian
July 18, 2010
Sorry, one more thought. The time for those who wish to arbitrate a reconciliation between Turks and Armenians to bring up the notion of Turkish suffering is after the admission and apology have been extended by Turkey. When my child hits another child, I do not allow him to make excuses before he apologizes, no matter how tired, cranky, or mistreated he perceives himself to be. We do not practice conditional morality. Wrong is wrong. However, I have no doubt that Armenians are capable of understanding (while not condoning), the Turkish desperation that led to the genocide and can take that, as well as many factors, into consideration when negotiating a rapprochement with a repentant Turkish nation. First comes the repentance, than comes the forgiveness and mutual empathy.
Scattered cases of Armenian revenge and uprising cannot and should not be placed on the same level as a governmental policy of inhumane deportation and exposure to attack, starvation and disease of an entire ethnic group. (Check your definition of genocide and you will see this as one of the aspects of genocide delineated in the 1948 convention.)
msheci
July 18, 2010
Ragnar,
On this final note, I hope you now realize that with your despicable phrase ‘Very probably victory for Armenians would have been a disaster for the inhabitants in these vilayets’ you crossed the line of decency, judgmental equilibrium and impartiality, however Turkish-tilted it has always been. God as my witness, I was ready to carry on the debate on the issue of genocidal intent, but to juxtapose isolated cases of uprisings and revenge operations staged by Armenians against the loathed colonial rule with the Ottoman state policy of genocidal extermination, and, most appallingly, to suggest that Armenians would do the same for the Turkish and Kurdish inhabitants in the [Armenian populated] vilayets had they won the independence struggle, for the representatives of an ethnos who are known throughout their long history as being creative, industrious, and contributive to the treasury of world civilization in arts, literature, theology, sciences, architecture, trade and commerce, is inexcusable. You clearly crossed the line of decency because you upset the judgmental balance as a result of your proclivity towards the Turks and their propagandistic denialst clichés.
As a representative of the world’s first official Christian nation, I believe all I’m left to say is to repeat Jesus’ teaching: ‘Judge not, and ye shall not be judged; condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned; forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.’ With this eternal truth, I wish you well. As I said at the outset of this discussion, I just pray to be able to meet face to face when the Turkish government will apologize to the Armenians for committing genocide. And this will happen, Ragnar. Make no mistake…
Be well.
ragnar naess
July 19, 2010
I am sorry that my words caused you sadness, Boyajian! I am sad too. I learned a lot from this exchange of words, but I shrug my head at the misrepresentation of my position which all of you, in spite of attempts at the opposite, have forwarded. I believe you have quite a way to go to be able to influence honest Turks so that they, as you rightly say, can honestly go into black spots in their history. Without this dialogue process based on attempts at a proper conceptualization of past and present events, which people like Baskin Oran and Ara Sarafian are pursuing, the process is not likely to move forward. By the way I still miss Msheci’s answer to my question about the allegedly genetical determinants of Turkish violence. None of you, Gayane, Katia or Boyajian, have commented on this.
My last point about the fate of Turks and Kurds who might have ended up in a territory occupied or liberated – the two words may be used interchangeably in an ethnically mixed area in the context of the Late Armenian violence, it depends on the position of the eyes that see – is that this was more or less my first remark in our dialogue: the experiences from Bulgaria and Macedonia as an explanation, for God’s sake not any condoning, of the ittihadist crimes. Are you at all ready to try to convince Turks?
Now I believe you will be able to do this. I challenge you to join me in arguing with Turks. The day before yesterday I posted a comment to the article in “Todays Zaman” on the decision of the Turkish authorities to have a cross properly placed at the church of Akhtamar. (see http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/yorumDetay.do?kn=46289). There was no answer as of today, but you will find me in debates in “Daily Zaman”, “Daily Hurriyet”. I note as you would have noted that these gestures in regard to Akhtamar are totally insufficient, but with the proviso that I believe this is an aspect of an ongoing process. I do not see it only as an “abuse” of the church, as Harut Sassounian sees it. I see it as a real but very small step forward on the road to reconciliation between Turks and Armenians.The rest is a task of dialogue and of persuading. The chances of moving Turks by force or universal defamation are illusory.
Sylva-MD-Poetry
July 19, 2010
*The Martyrs’ Day, May 6,1916 Jamal Pasha,alssafah, the Butcher
Hatred Versified by Arab Poets
Jamal Pasha: alsaffah hanged thirty- two educated nationalists, writers
and poets in consequent years in two quarters: El-Burj in Beirut and
Al-Marjah Square in Damascus.
On August 21, 1915, the first group of eleven martyrs was hanged
in Beirut. They were Abdul Kareem al-Khalili, the two brothers
Muhammad and Mahmud el-Mahmassani, Abdul-Qader el-Kharsaa,
Noor-aldeen el-Qadi, Saleem Ahmad Abass el-Hadi, Mahmood
Naja Ajam, Muhammad Abdeen, Naïf Tllalo, Salih Hayder, and Ali
el-Armanazi.
On May 6, 1916, less than one year from the first, the second groups of
twenty-one innocent nationalist were hanged, seven of them in Damascus:
Shafeek Beck el-Muayed, Abdul-hammed al-Zahawi, Prince Omar
al-Jazairi, Shukri el-Asali, Abdul Al-Wahab, Rafiq Rizk Salloom,
Rushdi al-Shamaa and the rest fourteen martyrs were hanged in Beirut:
Bator Wobouly, Jerji Hadad, Saeed Aqel, Omar Hamad, Abdul-alghani
al-Uraysi, the prince Aref al-Shahabi, the sheik Ahmad Tayara,
Muhammad al-Shanti el-Yafi, Tawfiq al-Basat, Sayf-aldeen al-Khateeb,
Saleem al-Jazairi, Mahmood, Jalal el-Bukhari, Ali al-Nashashibi (after
Ali was hanged his sister Nuzha thrived for seven years by drinking milk
only); the last one was Amen Lotfy al-Hafez, who refused to be hanged by
a Turk hangman—instead he placed the noose around his neck, strapped it,
and jumped off the execution chair thereby suffocating himself till end. The
two Squares, El-Burj square (Beirut) and Al-Marjah Square (Damascus)
later were named “Martyrs Squares.” Each year on May 6, Lebanese and
Syrian people commemorate the date.
When the poet, Assad Rustom, who lived in Washington, USA, heard
that his friends were hanged, he wrote the famous poem, sharply criticizing,
insulting Jamal the butcher:
The Sons of Turks You are Never Muslims
“Jamal – Sir! your name means beauty
But you’re awfully ugly
Your tongue and palms are fully dirty.
You are senseless, criminal, full of sins
You have no spirit, no clean soul,
Deficient of manhood humanity.”
The Syrian poet, Nasseb Areedah (1888-1940): living in America wrote
his untitled poem:
“Coffin his body
Bury his soul
In the deepest grave
Don’t feel sorry
Don’t lament
Who is disloyal
Remain soulless dead
Can never woke up to feel
Yet to regret.”
The poet, Khayr-eldeen Al Zarkali, wrote his titled poem:
The Arabs and the Turks
“Those Turks the grandsons of Genghis Khan.
Took young Arabs pushed them to a slave bazaar.
Promised statements changed abruptly,
Acting exactly the opposite for those held in custody
Torturing, humiliating, insulting the braves.
Yet on what they swore, pretending agreed.
They are dishonest, soulless, enjoys greed.”
The Lebanese poet, Fuad Al Khateeb (1880-1957), wrote his untitled
poem, blaming the Turks,
“You Turks harmed our people in their joints so hard
Till swords blade awoke to vengeance sharply shard.”
The Armenians helped Jamal the so-called alsaffah to reach high rank in
the Ottoman Empire-Astana. Later he betrayed not only the Armenians
but also the entire nationalists of the Middle East. He started killing them
from Anatolian mountains reaching Yemen including holy land of Muslims,
the Arabia.
______
The poetry book exists in Syria in an Arabic language.
The Image of Turks by Recent Arabic Poetry (1870- 1920)
From poets lived in Syria and in Diaspora
By Naeem Al-Yaffi and Maher Al-Munjid
gayane
July 19, 2010
AMEN Boyajian jan, Katia Jan and of course Msheci jan…
Thank you for all your hard work and your dedication to bring the truth to the surface no matter how much of ugliness, fakeness, false pretense, false history, false opinions and false reference exist in some of the people’s heads and brains… unfortunately Ragnar was one of them.. however, i am extremely thankful for this discussion because now if one to read all 400+ comments, they will understand how Turkish state brainwashes not only its citizens but also scholars who wrongfully fall under their ugly web… once they get you, they will suck the blood out of you and inject their blood into them… this is how they take over and this is how they will continue to do things .. but thank God to brave and intelligent individuals such as you amazing people here, i know for a fact that we will win…and shut the denialist up..
To me, this is a victory.. no matter how informal this discussion was.. and as i said in my previous posts.. we will NEVER EVER STOP … and we kept our promise…
The lost soul is a sad soul.. i hope that Ragnar’s soul does not get lost forever….
God Bless…
Gayane
gayane
July 19, 2010
AMEN Boyajian jan, Katia jan and of course our hero himself Msheci jan..
Without your intelligence, tireless efforts and dedication to bring the truth to light, we would not be able to succeed… As I said in the past, we will never ever stop and we did not… we will continue to work together and stay strong to shut the denialists up…
To me…. lost soul is a sad soul…. and Ragnar’s soul has been lost due to having it sucked out of him by his Turkish state…..that is how they do it.. if you are weak or gullible, they will trap you in their ever ending web and then suck your blood out then replacing it with their own poision.. it is absolutely sad and disgusting…
Ragnar.. you are leaving without answering my question? well that is not cool…
Gayane
gayane
July 20, 2010
AMEN Msheci jan, Katia jan, Boyajian jan…
And of course Ragnar is going to leave..because he lost… his soul has been snatched out of him by his beloved Turkish state.. it is absolutely sad…
but i hope he learned his lesson.. the Armenian leasson.. .and hope that he will continue to learn the Armenian history and drop his scientific crap….and truly look deep into the souls and minds of those who try to show him the way, and to teach him the truth… otherwise, the Turkish poison will continue to eat his soul away.. i just hope he realizes sooner or later.. and no matter how you spin it Ragnar, you are wrong…
May God give you strength and knowledge to move to the right side…
Gayane
Sylva-MD-Poetry
July 20, 2010
Janig Gayane
Every time I read your name reminds me of Khachaturian Symphony and Sabre Dance.
Please don’t tell scholars all, I have now many Internet non-Armenians literate friends.
They were not aware about Armenian genocide, But when I communicated with them,
They regret what they don’t know about, now when they travel to Turkey they come out with different opinion some Turkish they confess to them that all genocide was true.
Thanks for all Mechetsi, Katia, Boyajian…and many other colleagues,they put a lot of dedication on this site from them I learned so much.
Their written English articles made me proud how Armenians are so Intelligent to know so many languages accurately. Also I do congratulate for your tolerence.
I am extremely passionate person I can’t be patient like all of you.
Hope we all meet one day.
Sylva
ragnar naess
July 20, 2010
I have a number of posts that still are at the moderator
ragnar naess
July 20, 2010
I have used time dedicated to the Armenian cause on my commentaries to my Armenian friend’s article on the Hamidian violence, and I have explored the possibilities of launching a debate in Turkish papers. I believe in influencing Turks because there is a considerable section of Turkish people who are willing to listen to arguments and who have a conscience. But if you approach them with allegations that they are genetically determined to be violent, or with hate poetry of the kind Sylvia is broadcasting, you will never influence them. And Turkey has an increasing range of possibilities today. So I believe there is very little real basis for your self congratulary tone now. If there is a last question I have not answered please state it, but honestly I am not impressed by your arguments.
ragnar naess
July 20, 2010
I looked at some of the Aghet videos. But honestly you cannot take this as relevant to the scholarly question of what happened? This is like your comments now, a premature celebration….if you want to convince quite another approach is needed
ragnar naess
July 20, 2010
Gayane, for Gods sake what question have I not answered? I answered a long list of questions. And you have reverted to the crazed style you had at the beginning of our discussion. Is this style needed to bolster your conviction?
Boyajian
July 20, 2010
Well of course, Ragnar, I don’t subscribe to a genetic component that predisposes a people to genocidal actions. But I have no doubt that cultural and social determinants play a large role in this propensity. I believe certain religious beliefs of superiority can make the way from peace to violence much more likely, such as the jihad philosophy of Islam. And anytime a people see themselves as a master race, than we can see oppression and abuse of the “lesser” groups.
As far as the issue at Akhtamar goes, I am in agreement with you that Armenians can see this as an opportunity to begin a process of reconsecrating this church and also creating an awareness of its place in the world and in Armenian history. Participation in this event is an opportunity we need to harness to our benefit. I don’t know if you and I would agree on how or what actions we should take. I have written about this issue elsewhere on this site.
It appears you still feel that you have been misunderstood by many commentators here. I apologize again if I have been guilty of this. I really don’t know you or feel even at this date that I know your motives. You have been very confusing to me at times (as I have said, inconsistent) and not always as clear as you might think. Perhaps my English and your English consist of different vocabulary/definitions.
This particular paragraph from your July 19 post is quite unclear to me:
“My last point about the fate of Turks and Kurds who might have ended up in a territory occupied or liberated – the two words may be used interchangeably in an ethnically mixed area in the context of the Late Armenian violence, it depends on the position of the eyes that see – is that this was more or less my first remark in our dialogue: the experiences from Bulgaria and Macedonia as an explanation, for God’s sake not any condoning, of the ittihadist crimes. Are you at all ready to try to convince Turks?”
What are you trying to say?
Boyajian
July 20, 2010
Hi to Sylva. Thanks for sharing the poetry from the Arab perspective. It appears that the Turks have well earned their ruthless reputation over the course of several centuries of domination, oppression and cruelty. I hope and pray that there is a new Turk emerging today that wants to break free from the shackles of trumped up superiority and is willing to join the rest of the “lowly” family of man as co-citizens of the world.
Boyajian
July 20, 2010
Ragnar, one more question which I hope you will indulge:
What is it that makes you insert yourself into the dialogue between Turks and Armenians? I really don’t understand the place you see yourself as filling in the ongoing struggle. If you recognize the evil of genocide as a crime against the whole world, than I could understand you to be moved by a humanitarian desire to ensure that this crime never happens again. However, you seem mostly interested in telling Armenians that they must accept some blame for what happened to them. I completely disagree with this, as you know. There is no justification for the actions of the Turks either as an excuse or explanation for why they did what they did to my people. If we as a society can’t agree that there are certain lines ( like genocide) that must never be crossed and cannot be tolerated when crossed and must be punished when crossed, than we are doomed to watching such evils repeated endlessly.
Currently, it appears that the Turks are slowly and insidiously inching toward this same offense against the Kurds. Which in my opinion makes it all the more imperative that Turkey be brought to justice for its crimes against the Armenians. I really don’t see how making Armenians understand Turkish motivation or recognize what “provocations” they contributed, can do to help resolve the Armenian Question (or save the Kurds).
First, Turkey must be held accountable for its crime in a clear and decisive manner, because it was wrong and can’t be condoned by humanity. Period. Why are we kow-towing to Turkish “sensitivity” regarding insults to Turkishness and their over-determined sense of national pride or racial superiority. This is a pathology in their society that must be challenged, not coddled. I have little tolerance for this attitude.
I feel that we all (not just Armenians) have a duty to each other to make sure that Turkey be stopped from hiding from its past and avoiding responsibility for the genocide. It is for humanity that we should do this and that includes the Turks.
gayane
July 20, 2010
Silva jan..
I am maybe as passionate as yourself and i have no patience… which is why you can feel the frustration in my last few comments.. Boyajian, Msheci and Katia are my role models.. i definintely look up to them.. they are my heros… (by the way, i was having system issues when i typed the last three comments.. it did not seem to go through and the system timed out on me).. Now i see all of them appeared.. I apologize for the repeat thoughts and comments…
I had the pleasure knowing Katia off line and I just hope that I get to speak with Msheci and Boyajian and yourself…if you like to e-mail me.. you may do so at gayanevoskanyan@yahoo.com.
I have started to watch “Aghet” .. and my eyes filled with tears…tears of not only sadness and heartache when i watched the sad history of my people but also they were tears of joy and pride.. I am soooooooooooo greateful for every single person who worked on this documentary… I will be sharing this documentary with everyone on my list..
genetical determinants of Turkish violence- I agree with Msheci… there are plenty of studies done to understand the minds of criminals and how their brain works.. and genetics is part of what makes up the person…there was a recent radio show where they had a doctor who dedicated his entire life to study criminal genes/minds…i can’t remember when it was and specifics.. i will have to find this conversation and share it with you.
however, you have not answered my question Ragnar….
have a great day..
Boyajian
July 20, 2010
Sorry for this clumsy sentence:
“I really don’t see how making Armenians understand Turkish motivation or recognize what “provocations” they contributed, can do to help resolve the Armenian Question (or save the Kurds).”
Should read:
“I really don’t see how making Armenians understand Turkish motivation or recognize what “provocations” they contributed, can help to resolve the Armenian Question (or save the Kurds).”
Just want to be clear!
ragnar naess
July 21, 2010
Regarding my role: 1) partly this is very universally accepted: OTHERS SHOULD care, I cared about Turkish immigrants in Norway, then about human rights in Turkey, now about the Armenian cause. This is my way of living 2) in the same way as you I was sucked into the discussion which increasingly has focussed on what we disagree on.
Look at my earlier posts.
the Turkish newspapers are not nearly as focussed on discussion as “Armenian Weekly”. This is sad, but unfortunately how it is. My other Turkish friend with whom I planned a seminar is in Turkey. His mother resently died. I will contact him and tell him about the leaflets and my impatience with the two of them who have done so little to make the seminar materialize.
there are posts of mine that are laying with the moderator. I dont know what they think. You must specify the question, Gayane, not play the game of asking for answer and not repeat the question
Sylva-MD-Poetry
July 21, 2010
Lastly, If I Am Killed
‘Killing even a single person means to kill unreplaceable genes— is genocide’
Lastly, if I’m killed. I don’t regard myself
As exceptional, I have only a tiny brain.
I was a newborn, a child, a teenager,
Bride, mother and now a thinker for spirits in pain.
I have millions of DNAs in my body, in this mind of mine.
All will vanish, as expected, like ashes gyring to reach the sun.
Yet, more than ten thousand sighted words uttered as stanzas,
Volcanoed from my searing passionate heart to the mind
For the innocent human souls, unmourned, unfound!
Their voices are in me, still raising fiery sounds—hymns
In educating generations to prevent every sort of slaying,
Seen still in the scene; their injured spirits can’t wane in vain.
Those poems will be marked by a bleeding red pen,
To be judged by the arriving Internet cohorts’ chains.
Those genes evolved after stirring in strain,
Eager to read, and hence with praise to crane,
Chant poems to serenade eternally; hence, surely will remain.
Who writes for human souls selflessly, never for gain—,
There to elucidate to some senseless, what ‘genocidal pain’ means.
Once you read the above verses, you will breathe with feeling,
Why do we still stay screaming, bounding in the lane?
How the events have left us under scorned rain!
Genocide flesh has lost the power to battle again; however,
Ours are unhealed mental scars, still acting proudly sane.
2007
“Who has born with no principles will die with his dirt”
Sylva-MD-Poetry
July 21, 2010
I was already already threatened by Turkish Ambasador, I refused to meet him.
Please hear BBC today only one hour ego. Kurds are complaining that their Bashmargas
As other call them rebel killed by Tukish soldiers mutilated their organs, pulled their eyes out the flesh.
Please open BBC radio and hear.
Katia K.
July 21, 2010
Gayane, Sylva, Msheci and Boyajian jans… you are terrific! Gayane… is a beautiful person, inside and out. Boyajian, you consistantly bring a professional, refined, eloquent elegance to these posts… I appreciate the efforts you put into making sense out of some of these comments…
I agree with you Boyajian about the possibility that there might be a language barrier between us and Ragnar. He is Norwegian, we happen to be fluent in English… It has crossed my mind several times during the course of this discussion that maybe some of our confusions by his statements and his frustrations in response to them might be due to some language problem… if that’s the case I also apologize to you Ragnar… However, some of your statements and in particular your adamant repetition of “no reliable evidence of Genocidal intent” cannot be mistaken.
You say: “I looked at some of the Aghet videos. But honestly you cannot take this as relevant to the scholarly question of what happened?” Statements like this are extremely perplexing!… First of all I asked you to please watch Aghet from end to end. Secondly what do you mean by they “are not relevant to the scholarly question of what happened?” This is so bizarre! How can witness testimony of that time, memos of personal experience, the testimony of the victims themselves and pictures of the mutilated, burned and drowned victims cannot be considered relevant to the scholarly “question of what happened”? 1.5 million people were massacred for belonging to a particular ethnic group… that is “what happened”. If you deny that… than we are not living on the same planet!
You are time and again coming from a place where you have already decided to agree with the Turks that “our” evidence is irrelevant. If you have already made up your mind that “we have no evidence” and that 1.5 million people were killed because they chose to leave their homes on their own, march on foot to the desert without food, subject themselves to people who did not allow them to purchase food even when they could afford it, etc … than why are you on this site?… Why are you having this discussion with us?… If you are convinced that there is no evidence that there was a Genocide, why are you here? We have time and again asked you this question… We are getting tired of you telling us that all this evidence is useless and that what our grandparents experienced on their flesh and saw with their own eyes was… NOTHING.
If you want to carry a DIALOGUE, you need to make an effort to LISTEN. You cannot conduct an adequate inquiry, or a “scientific research”, if you fail to listen! Listen to the witness testimony…
Here’s what we have been trying to tell you:
The Ottoman Empire system was an unpleasant arrangement to most of the nations that it imposed itself upon. The superiority complex of a “master race” that the Ottomans possessed made them abuse and discriminate the people they ruled, which fostered hatred and resentment throughout the lands they controlled, including Armenia. Yes our freedom fighters did kill Muslims out of self defense, revenge and shear retaliation, but this did not happen in a vacuum. It was because of hatred festering through years of being “subjects of the Sultan” with unreasonable taxation, low class citizenship status on their own historical lands, no civic/legal equality, regular massacres and rapes being imposed on them with no resolution in sight. The “dialogue/understanding/sympathy” that you are suggesting NOW as facilitators of a reconciliatory tone, HAVE ALL BEEN TRIED BEFORE BY OUR ANCESTORS who were still betrayed and murdered. Turks are masters of evasion and dancing around… Do you understand this? It has been 95 years… That is why we are convinced, based on our past experiences with the Turks, that for a productive and effective reconciliation to start taking place, we need to have a formal apology and repentance by the Turks as a starting point. The mutual understanding, forgiveness and healing stage will follow naturally. We do not blame the regular Turkish Citizen, whose alphabet has been changed, and who has been made purposefully “clueless” about this crime committed by his ancestors. We blame the Turkish State for being an accomplice in this crime by pursuing a deliberate cover up, evidence destruction, rewriting of history, distortion of facts, relying on forgetfulness with the passing of the time, offering no apology/restitution/reparation of personal property/inheritance/public historical monuments etc, and for brainwashing its own population through censored academia and propaganda.
Why are you describing a “possible liberation” of our Western lands as “occupation”? These were lands that the Turks themselves called the “Armenian Vilayets”. Time and again you evaded my question as to why you are not labeling the other liberated countries, ex: Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Serbia, Romania etc.. as OCCUPIED territory? You said “…the fate of Turks and Kurds who might have ended up in a territory occupied or liberated – the two words may be used interchangeably in an ethnically mixed area in the context of the Late Armenian violence, it depends on the position of the eyes that see..” Why this double standard? Do you mean to consider the other countries that I mentioned as “occupied Ottoman territories”? They were ruled by the Ottomans for the same exact amount of time as Armenia. What in your mind differentiates our lands and our struggle for self determination and independence from those of these other countries? Why do you see us as traitors worthy of mass murder and not the Lebanese, Syrians etc who also fought for their freedom… ? From what you have written so far, it seems to me that you are justifying our ethnic extermination as an understandable retaliation for our demands for freedom. By doing so, you are yourself accepting the racist superiority of the Turks. Aren’t you European? Don’t you believe in equality among different races?
As far as the question of “genetic predisposition to violence” is concerned, I have to side with Boyajian on this issue. I do not think that people are genetically predisposed to be violent. I think that they are “conditioned” or “thought” to be violent, and that violence in some instances, such as “religious” or “nationalistic” are permissible. Can this become a “genetic trait” through the years, one can always wonder. I personally think that it can very well be “unthought” by new “societal conditions”. The fierceness of Mongolian and Seljuk Turk warriors are legendary in books. I do not know where in the history of their race or what conditions in their existence have permitted this to be so, or if this was in result to a survival issue. However, from what I have read, it seems that their way of existence was by “raiding” and taking over other tribes’ possessions, women and lands. Why this is recorded so, I do not know. There is also the religious difference. Islam has allowed or has been erroneously interpreted to allow “Jihads” which are basically religious calls to kill “infidels” or “enemies”, which apply to their populations in general. This is nonexistent in Christianity. Christian States have massacred in the name of Christ during the Crusades, but there is nothing equivalent to “Jihad” that creates uprisings amongst regular Christian folk. What I know, is that the mass murder of the Armenians and the unimaginable ways that they were tortured/killed, were BARBARIC for the 20th Century. (Some of the pictures in Aghet are witness to this). Also, the way the entire world walks on egg shells, and takes care not to awaken the bad temperament of the Turks say a lot in this regards too. Somehow, subconsciously, even the Americans and the Europeans are somehow wary of their temperament. The way the Turkish State threatens and recalls its ambassadors does not project a civilized levelheadedness… what does recognition of a past historical event have to do with its current ambassadors? Now, can this change?… absolutely… it is up to the up and coming Turks to remedy what their ancestors have done, acknowledge it and become active players in the healing of the region and in the changing of their attitude and tone. There is promising movement in this direction… however; there were many promising movements right before the Ittihadists took control too! I welcome the renovation of Akhtamar and the work on the upcoming Armenian pilgrimage there, but at the same time it is like being invited to see the renovation of your home being done in the taste of strangers who will bid you goodbye at the end of your tour and close the door on you. It is all too perplexing of an arrangement.
The bottom line remains the same to me: our lands were taken away from us not by an honorable war, but by a Genocide.
Ragnar, with all due respect… you are a puzzle!
sylva-MD-Poetry
July 21, 2010
Why Should I Hate?
To Mr. R.N
How can you use a word defining me?
If you don’t know
My honest heart.
Why should I hate
A human I never met!
I have Strong Untreatable Anger
Stagnated in my innocent mind
Since my childhood days
Then I was only five.
That anger fires in me, until this day
Why my grand father was killed and all his kin.
He never carried a gun
He was head of office, educated man
He went to work early morning
and never came back
My grand mother was only 24 years
With four kids
The last one, a newborn few months old
She did not have enough milk to breast feed
She use to close his mouth with cloth
So gendarmes will not hear his hungry voice
And take all with them to slay.
I can feel my grandmother’s tears
Till this minute wetting my face.
There is no hate in my heart
and never will be
I want only to understand
Why my dears were slayed!
Why we lost every thing!
To start once again… walking on empty roads.
You used all the bad phrases on Armenians
That others fed you
If you were clever like Pamuk Orhan
You could gained a Noble Prize
But you converted to hear deniers
Who is cheating you
By many ways
Feeding you Turkish delights
Till you get diabetes
And needs tablets
Later insulin injections
Just to live few sick years.
I will give my heart for transplant
To a human…Who
Only cares for human right.
July 21, 2010
Written instantly
Armenian Sylva and not Sylvia from the name of our Poetess Sylva Kabudigyan
I have signed photo from her on my table.
ragnar naess
July 21, 2010
the Turkish “Daily Zaman” had an article on july 19 about a dialogue intiative by Harvard University regarding Turks and Armenians, commented upon by a Turkish author, who, among other things, said that “both parties are traumatized”. I wrote the following commentary which was printed:
“The situation between Armenia and Turkey regarding the events of 1915-16 is that Armenians for many years have held that the ittihadists launched a program of extermination. Turkey has denied this. This is the core of the historical conflict. For a Turkish writer to point to the fact that both countries are traumatized, which obviously is true, isnt that beside the point? Isnt it better to say that the dialogue on exactly this point should go on, and possibly give some arguments why the author thinks it was not genocide?”
gayane
July 21, 2010
Ragnar..
If you think your involvement will help the Armenians and Turks to become friends, please know that you are wasting your time.. as your help will never serve justice to the Armenians… we said this before gazillion times.. please if you DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE CAUSE< DO NOT HELP… just stop sharing your stories of how you want to organize this and that, how your ARmenian friends are thankful for your leaflets.. ect.. ect..ect… all your efforts mean nothing to me… because i see you as someone who will deny till the end.. no matter how much facts you present.. your side of the proof and words is like having the Turkish State and officials just talking to us…not someone who lives and eats and sleeps in Norway.. I am sorry but you have pulled my last nerve with your arrogance and ignorance.. I may not be as diplomatic as many of my collegues here; however, I want to express how frustrating it is to deal with someone who is confused and inconsistent with his comments, and expressions and STAND…
We told you many times about your vagueness as to why you are here..why stay here for such a long time then decide to leave … maybe you finally understood that you are not going to win… and your efforts are not going to accomplish whatever your Turkish friends wanted you to accomplishi.. do you understand that now?
Rangar.. THE QUESTIONS WERE.. and i am putting in caps so you can see it clearly. not shouting at you …cause as I see it you are very bad at reading everything in the comments… FINAL ANSWER PLEASE: DO YOU BELIEVE IT WAS A GENOCIDE OR NOT???? ARE YOU ON THE NO OR THE YES SIDE? there is no yes but……………that is not an option..
As I said before.. anyone who does not have a strong stand on a matter can be bought in a second when the opportunity arises.. and i see you someone like that… therefore, my questions above is to show that no matter how you spin the discussion… you will end up either here or there..so. WHICH SIDE ARE YOU?
Thank you
Gayane
msheci
July 21, 2010
Armenian commentators,
“AGHET: A GENOCIDE,” a documentary by German filmmaker Eric Friedler will be shown today at 6:00pm in Room no. 2325 of the Rayburn House Office Building Room, U.S. Capitol. I live in California and unfortunately can’t attend, but already informed my friends living in Washington, DC about the event. If you have a friend or friends living in greater DC metropolitan area, do please let him/her/them know about this important event.
ragnar naess
July 22, 2010
Gayane!
I have left the discussion about these points. regarding your question on Genocide/not genocide, look at what I said about using words with certain qualifications (Genocide? “Yes”, if you mean it in this way, only “maybe” if you mean it in another way). If you do not find the post I talk about, I can find it for you. Are you sure you have looked through my posts and seriously tried to understand my position?
In the Daily Zaman july 19, a Haroun has the following message about the church at Ahtamar:
Just ONE DAY in the life of Sourp Khatch church on the island of Akhtamar”!!!I think after spending $2M renovation dollars on this world class wonder architecture, allowing it just ONE DAY for worship in itself,it is an insult to turkishness, that is if Turks are civilized people.
Haroun july 18
ragnar naess
July 22, 2010
Sylvia
you write:
I want only to understand
Why my dears were slayed!
Here is an attempt at an answer, written by professor Gerard Libaridian:
What the Armenian side must realize is that, first, the Turkish position is based on willful
ignorance, one that is promoted by the state for reasons that must also be understood.
There is an ideology of statehood and nationhood that is at the foundation of the central
value of the Turkish War of Independence in Turkish collective memory. That ideology
relies on a well known theological model: No sins were committed during the process,
and the purpose of the newborn was to save the world, in this case the world of Turks.
This is a most comfortable past, a most blissful birth.
Second, the Armenian side must recognize that the Great Powers did in fact prey upon the Ottoman Empire; until the rise of the Kemalist Movement the rivalry between Great Britain and Russia was probably the main reason why Anatolia did not suffer the same fate as Africa in their hands. The importance of the centrality of Great Power threat to the Ottoman state cannot be underestimated; nor can one underestimate the role of that threat in the rise of the modern Turkish state and in Turkish perceptions of the past.
ragnar naess
July 22, 2010
to make clear, Sylvia, what Libaridian has in mind here I would like to add what Ronald Grigor Suny has said (I recount it from memory): THE GENOCIDE WAS A KIND OF PERVERSE SECURITY OPERATION (in the light of the external threat, I woul add and then again add that this is NOT A CONDONING OF THE CRIME, it is an explanation – what the Armenian side must realize, in Libaridian’s words.
In case you do not know Libaridian I add the following note on him. The article I cite from is
Libaridian, Gerard J. ’The Past as a Prison, the Past as a Different Future’, in Turkish Policy Quarterly 4: 4, winter 2005,
On Libaridian:
Professor Gerard J. Libaridian teaches in the History Department of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
From 1991 to 1997 he was advisor to the first President of Armenia, Levon Ter-Petrossian, and chief negotiator with Turkey.
Sylva-MD-Poetry
July 22, 2010
Please Armenian Weekly don’t send more letters from this site to me.
I will close this site completely.
I only believe in two Jewish people, their tremendous honesty and contribution should be praised always.
American Ambassador Henry Morgenthau he saw by his BOTH EYES the genocide
and named <A Campaign of Race Extermination> adding Turkey is a country of horror
and Lawyer Rafael Lemkin who really worked hard to prove and defined the genocide.
Not to forget my grandmother Zohrah Dabbaghian.
All said the same and lived before any one on this site.
The others who wrote to gain spoiled fruits are all false.
Arab proverb says,
“from a pill who make a ball… is a sin”
(from nothing to make something is a sin)
This site will not end till we sigh!
Goodbye
Sylva
Boyajian
July 22, 2010
I can’t help but notice that this ongoing contentious debate with Ragnar, in which both sides feel misunderstood, mislabeled, disrespected and frustrated, appears to be a metaphoric microcosm of the debate between Armenians and Turks. We are playing it out right on this site: the mutual distrust, the sense of being unjustly accused, the feeling that one’s rights are being violated, the somewhat paranoid defensiveness that follows the feeling of being “ganged-up on” or feeling that you are alone in your struggle. No wonder, so many experienced Ragnar as Turkish. I need a little distance to gain a better perspective and consider how best to respond to this.
Ragnar, though I haven’t agreed with much you have written, and still feel confused by what you are doing, I will admit that you have succeeded to make me think more critically about the Turkish perspective on the issue. You have given me more depth of understanding of the Turkish denial. I hope you have also gained a deeper understanding of the Armenian perspective. If you walk away from this discussion merely convinced that Armenians are inflexible in their anger ( no matter how justified) and unwilling to see the other side’s perspective, than you are missing a big piece.
Armenians are desperate for a resolution to this struggle on the most basic level: identity. Who are we? Where do we belong? Why were we victimized? Who are we if our truth is denied or minimized? What does it say about our worth when others (the world/bystanders and Turkey/perpetrators) ignore our pain?
If you miss the identity imperative, if you miss the fact that after 95 years, Armenians perceive their basic identity in jeopardy, their history denied, their very existence threatened by current political power plays from their neighbors, and their basic human rights ignored, than you will have a very incomplete picture. I hope you can also consider how trivial your focus on certain questionable written documents appears in the face of indisputable genocidal results to people feeling this sense of desperation and whose patience for resolution is being pushed to its limits. Whether you call it genocide (I do), massacres, civil war, or the “unfortunate results of poorly executed deportations ordered for security purposes,” Turkey is culpable for failing to protect her Armenian citizens. Anything or anyone who acts to delay Turkey from simply apologizing and recognizing her guilt is preventing this much needed resolution to take place. I agree with Katia, mutual empathy and respect will rise naturally from this starting point and a long awaited, mutually beneficial rapprochement can begin to take place.
If you have trouble empathizing with the picture of Armenians that I am trying to draw for you, you need to simply remember the desperation you described the Young Turks feeling after the loss of territories in the Balkans, middle east, etc., and the sense that world powers were waiting to carve them up. Now step back and ask yourself why should Armenians have to suffer for this Turkish pain? Why this extreme, unwarranted backlash directed at a people simply because they wanted self-determination within a country who occupied their traditional homelands and historically denied them equal rights? I get the Turkish desperation. I get the mania that Armenian desire for self-determination evoked in the Young Turks. I just draw a very clear moral line at the point at which this desperation causes a dominant group to treat an entire subjugated group as disposable and unwanted. This is the line that we as humanity must insist, unequivocally, cannot be crossed. No excuses. No passes. Say sorry. Accept responsibility. Take your punishment. Make restitution. Re-establish relations. Set ground rules for mutual respect and security and go on peacefully. This is what this Armenian wants.