Gebruiker:Fruitcake/Kladblok/Ontkenning van de Armeense Genocide

Dit artikel wordt momenteel vertaald uit het Engels van [[:en:{{{2}}}]] Dit artikel kan nog diverse onvertaalde, onduidelijke of foutieve stukken bevatten

Ontkenning van de Armeense Genocide is de aanname dat de gebeurtenissen na 24 April 1915 en de Wet van Tehcir van Mei 1915 geen onderdeel waren van een door de Turkse staat georganiseerde genocide, dat een Armeense Genocide niet plaats gevonden heeft. De Republiek van Turkije accepteert niet dat doden een consequentie(gevolg?) waren van een intentie van het Ottomaans autoriteiten om de Armeense bevolkingsgroep te elemineren. Turkije erkent dat tijdens de Eerste Wereldoorlog veel Armenen zijn gestorven, maar stelt daar tegenover dta er eveneens veel Turken zijn gestorven, en dat massale moordpatijen aan beide zijden plaatsvonden als resultaat van conflicten en geweld tussen verschillende etnische bevolkingsgroepen en als onderdeel van het bredere conflict van de Eerste Wereldoorlog.

Einde van Vertaling. Onderstaande tekst moet nog vertaald worden.

Terminology

Currently, regarding the activities performed under Tehcir Law, May 1915, the Republic of Turkey rejects the use of word "deportation" and "refugee". Turkey uses the terminology "relocation" (resettlement) and "immigrant". Turkey cites that the process was between May 27 1915 to February 8-1916, and all the destination regions were within the Ottoman Empire's borders. According to revisionist historians, the Ottoman government perceived the immigrants as its citizens and took extensive measures to record the type, quantity, and value of the "immigrant" property, as well as recording the names of the owners and where they were sent. Turkey uses the terminology "deportation" for expulsion of foreigners (the expulsion of natives is usually called banishment, exile, or transportation) or extradition which generally means the expulsion of someone from a country.

Late response

Some note that The Turkish government has been very slow in answering to the genocide charges, even though nearly a century has passed since the events. In 1975 Turkish historian and biographer Sevket Sureyya Aydemir summarized the reasons for this delay. He said, "The best course, I believe, is not to dwell on this subject and allow both sides to forget (calm) this part of history." This view was shared by the foreign ministry of Turkey at the time. Zeki Kuneralp, a former Turkish ambassador, had a different explanation, according to him "The liabilities of not publishing the historical documents outweigh the advantages."

With Kamuran Gürün for the first time a controversial period of the Ottoman Empire began to be questioned by the Republic of Turkey. Other Turkish institutions followed Gürün. The thesis brought by Armenian and foreign historians were then answered by analyzing the casualties of deportations, and the alleged casualties of inter-ethnic fighting, etc. Initial studies were basically on aggregated data issues, through classifications and categorizations. These discussions have been moved to issues such as why the Armenian resistance force failed to support a sustainable Armenian state and Ottoman military problems under insurgency. Most of these activities aim to find out and analyze the relationships of the controversial issues surrounding Ottoman state of the time; intending to have a better understanding of "why the choices of the Ottoman system had been shaped as they were". These questions aim to bring the complexity of Ottoman history and dynamics of a blacked-out period beyond the current available arguments to surface so that the correct lessons in prevention of these activities can be taken.

Justifications brought forward

April 24

While World War One was unfolding in the middle east and shattering the Ottoman Empire, some members of the two primary nationalist groups within the state, the Armenians and the "Arab revolt", called for armed struggle against the Ottomans. . Christian Armenians were located in both the Russian and Ottoman Empires. Some Armenians insisted that their people support the Ottoman government, as Armenians were placed in the Ottoman bureaucracy. But other Armenians claimed that only the Russian Tsar, by virtue of shared religion, was the protector of all Armenians. In eastern Anatolia, during the Caucasus Campaign some of the Ottoman Armenian population, often following the Armenian radical nationalists, engaged in open warfare, these activities are under summarized under Armenian resistance. The Zeitun Resistance, which lasted three months from August 30, 1914 to December 1, 1914, resulted in the report that Armenians defeated all the Ottoman troops sent against them. .

In April 1915, shortly after the Van resistance, an Armenian government was proclaimed in Van,, the Administration for Western Armenia. Following these events, April 25 was the onset of the Allied campaign to drive towards the Ottoman capitol, see Battle of Gallipoli. The day before Battle of Gallipoli, Talat Pasha took a decision on April 24 1915 with the internal codes given by the archive code BOA. DH. ŞFR, nr.52/96,97,98. Talat Pasha ordered the governors of the Ottoman Empire to (a) arrest the members of Armenian Revolutionary Federation,Hentchak and other groups that involve with Armenian national liberation movement, (b) collect documents from party houses and (c) destroy all arms seized in the process. Beginning April 24, there were Armenian notables deported from the Ottoman capital in 1915. The Ottoman Empire wanted to destroy the Armenian resistance and the Turkish authorities today hold the position that the deaths incurred on Armenians as a whole were the result of the turmoil of World War I and that the Ottoman Empire was fighting against Russia, Armenian volunteer units, and the Armenian militia. The Turkish authorities further assert that claims of massacre which ignore the actions of the Armenian resistance movements, are not established historical fact, and therefore grounds for denial that the Armenian Genocide ever took place. Furthermore, they contend that there was a political movement towards creating a "Republic of Armenia". The dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the Balkanization process were in the same period, and may obfuscate the actual events.

Deportations

The Turkish authorities claim that the forced migrations cannot be classified as acts of genocide by the state. They note that in 1915 there was only one railway that connects west-east and that the path of what it considers relocation was not a conspiracy to exterminate Armenians. Turkish authorities strongly reject claims that the locations of the camps which are mentioned in some sources are a result of a conspiracy to bury Armenians in deserts. Deir ez-Zor is a district along the Euphrates and one of the unique places far away from any military activity; thus, Deir ez-Zor's selection as a burying site in a deserted location is rejected. They attribute the graves in these areas to difficulties of traveling under very hard conditions. The conditions of these camps reflected the condition of the Ottoman Empire. The Empire was facing the Gallipoli landings in the west, and the Caucasus Campaign in the east.

Ethnic cleansing

Regarding the "process of relocation" under the Tehcir Law, arguments disputing the similarities to the ethnic cleansing (Holocaust) are as follows: (a) there is no record of (neither from origination archives nor from destination archives in Syria) an effort to develop a systematic process and efficient means of killing, (b) there are no lists or other methods for tracing the Armenian population to assemble and kill as many people as possible, (c) there was no resource allocation to exterminate Armenians (biological, chemical warfare allocations), and the use of morphine as a mass extermination agent is not accepted; in fact, there was a constant increase in food and support expenses and these efforts continued after the end of deportations, (d) there is no record of Armenians in forced deportations being treated as prisoners, (e) the claims regarding prisoners apply only to the leaders of the Armenian militia, but did not extend to ethnic profiling; the size of the security force needed to develop these claims was beyond the power of the Ottoman Empire during 1915, (f) there is no record of prisons designed or built to match the claims of a Holocaust, (g) there were no public speeches organized by the central government targeting Armenians.

Security of Deportees

The security of the immigrants were under the responsibility of the Ottoman Empire. The Turkish authorities present the facts that some companies had been attacked before they reached their settlement regions . They summarize these attacks; present the fact that the roads between Aleppo and Meskene resulted in many deaths. Other events were located at Diyarbekir to Zor and from Saruc to Halep through Menbic road . Companies have also faced with local attacks from the local tribes in the Diyarbekir, Mamuretülaziz and Bitlis regions . Various eyewitness acounts of Armenian civilians being killed by the Ottoman soldiers they were under command of are usually discouted by revisionist historians.

The Turkish authorities present two positions regarding on this issue; (1) "Investigation Commissions" during the migration process determined the officers, who showed reluctance or unlawful actions, by visiting to the regions that events occurred and following the decisions they observed the appropriate actions taken The appropriate actions were extended to the Court Martial and in accordance with the judgments at the Court Martial, guilty parts were sentenced to heavy punishments (2) End of the World War One; the issue opened one more time during the Turkish Courts-Martial of 1919-20 under the military occupation of Istanbul, which Ottoman courts generated one more analysis.

Casualties

Based on questionable studies of the Ottoman census by Justin McCarthy and on contemporary estimates, it is said that far fewer than 1.5 million Armenians lived in the relevant areas before the War. Estimates of deaths are thus lowered, ranging from 200,000 to 600,000 between 1914 and the Armistice of Mudros. In addition, it is said that these deaths are not all related to the deportations, nor should they all be attributed to the Ottoman authorities.

Yusuf Halacoglu, President the Turkish Historical Society (TTK), presented even more questionable lower figures of Armenian casualties. He estimates that a total of 56,000 Armenians perished during the period due to war conditions, and less than 10 thousand were actually killed. This study is still absent from Turkish foreign affairs publications.

Assertions brought forward

Inter-ethnic violence

The plight of Ottoman Muslims throughout the 19th and 20th centuries is also mentioned. According to the historian Mark Mazower, Turkey resents the fact that the West is ignorant of the fate of millions of Muslims expelled from the Balkans and Russia, and would consider any apology towards Armenians as a confirmation of the anti-Turkish sentiment held by Western powers for centuries. Mazower recognizes a genocide of the Armenians, but he notes "Even today, no connection is made between the genocide of the Armenians and Muslim civilian losses: the millions of Muslims expelled from the Balkans and the Russian Empire through the long 19th century remain part of Europe's own forgotten past. Indeed, the official Turkish response is invariably to remind critics of this fact — an unconvincing justification for genocide, to be sure, but an expression of underlying resentment" .

The Turkish authorities maintain the position that the Ottoman Empire did not exercise the degree of control which the opposing parties claim. Turkey accepts that there were Armenian deaths as a result of Ottoman decisions, but states that the responsible Ottoman bureaucrats and military personnel were tried.

Famine

Turn of 1919, at best a serious food shortage and famine in the eastern parts of the Ottoman Empire

Regarding the famine and starvation arguments; Turkish authorities acknowledges that many Armenians died, but says Muslim millet (Turks) of the Empire died too. The most horrible cases, which happened to occur around the region that is currently Syria (part of Ottoman Empire until end of war), was covered in a detailed article (the whole of Greater Syria, and thus including Akkar) by Linda Schatkowski Schilcher. This study lists what she views as eight basic factors, contributing to as many as 500,000 deaths of the Syrians in the 1915-1918 period: (a) The Entente powers' total blockage of the Syrian coast; (b) the inadequacy of the Ottoman supply strategy; deficient harvest and inclement weather; (c) diversion of supplies from Syria as a consequence of the Arab revolt; (d) the speculative frenzy of a number of unscrupulous local grain merchants; the callousness of German military official in Syria, and systematic hoarding by the population at large.

In general, beginning with the World War One every situation of the Empire got worse every year, as most of the able man being in the front lines. Signing of the Armistice of Mudros by the Ottoman Empire was related with the breakdown of the public support under very bad conditions.

Conflict resolution

The Turkish authorities seek both historical and political reconciliation with Armenia, but Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 following the Nagorno-Karabakh War between Armenia and Turkic-speaking Azerbaijan. The borders have remained closed because the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute has not been settled to this day, but mostly because of the dispute over a matter of history. Turkey has put forth certain conditions before reconciliation with Armenia.

Documentation and historical study

Historians that used the Ottoman Archives.

From	#
Armenian	190
USA	605
Japanese	203
German	168
French	150
Saudi Arabian	98
Iranian	84
British	74
Jew	70
Libyan	63
Hungarian	58
Argentinean	52
Bulgarian	47
Egyptian	63
Dutch	39
Romanian	36
Algerian	35
Tunisian	35
Canadian	28

As a scholarly study area, the field is highly divided, as the camps on both sides of this issue approach it very strongly.

Every original document of the Tehcir Law is open. The Ottoman Archives were taken over by the Governmental Archives Directorate of the Prime Ministry. Until today, the Ottoman Archives were researched by many historians. Beside the researches made by thousands of historians, these documents were translated in English and published in order to enlighten the public .

Turkish authorities point out that without doing a triangulation, even if the facts were reported correctly, the conclusions drawn can be false. It is also possible to look at secondary sources in the Ottoman Archives of the period such as budget, allocations, decisions/reasons of requests. There are also personal records such as Mehmed Talat Pasha's personal notes. They also point out the general attitude (Sick man of Europe) of the time and how it deforms perceptions. They state that the conclusions reached toward genocide are highly biased.

Some very "central" (most cited) sources are actively questioned on the basis that they do not include a single reference from the Ottoman Archives. Mainly occupying force's sources of the period (British, French) on the basis of their Intelligence (information gathering) issues. There are concerns that these sources may promote propaganda.

Enver Zia Karal (Ankara University), Salahi R. Sonyel (British historian and public activist), Ismail Binark (Director of Ottoman archives, Ankara), Sinasi Orel (director of a much publicized project on declassifying documents on Ottoman Armenians), Kamuran Gurun (former diplomat), Mim Kemal Oke, Justin McCarthy, and others have told that the "Blue Book" (The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915-1916) by James Bryce and Arnold J. Toynbee lacks credibility.

Reverse engineering of activities aimed to provide evidence without covering opposing reasoning, such as "Map of Genocide", contain factual problems according to these historians. In this map, the methodology developed, related to "Centers of Massacre and Deportation" and adding data from three different sources (the data in these sources are also aggregate data), is questionable. This map is used as a source of validation among Western scholars.

They bring up points on arguments that there was a secret arrangement which can be traced through mismatches on orders and distributions of the forced deportations. There are many periphery central transmissions on how to deal with emerging issues, such as allocating more than 10% of the destination population and its consequences to the local economy.

Talat Pasha Telegrams

In many references that cite genocidal intent use "The Talat Pasha telegrams, (The Naim-Andonian documents)", which are a series of documents by the Interior Minister Mehmed Talat Pasha, to constitute as concrete evidence that the deaths were implemented as a state policy. He was notoriously tied with the "Kill every Armenian man, woman, and child without concern" order in these documents (see Aram Andonian's page for more on this topic). The genocidal intent of Mehmed Talat Pasha and even the correctness of this famous sentence is highly dependant on the authenticity of these documents.

Issues regarding deniers

Outlawing

Some countries, including Argentina, Switzerland and Uruguay have adopted laws that punish genocide denial. In October 2006, France passed a bill which if approved by the Senate and president, will make Armenian Genocide denial a crime.

The first person convicted by a court of law for denying the Armenian genocide is Turkish politician Doğu Perinçek, found guilty by a Swiss district court in Lausanne in March 2007. Perinçek appealed the verdict. Ferai Tinç, a foreign affairs columnist with Turkey's Hurriyet newspaper, added, "we find these type of [penal] articles against freedom of opinion dangerous because we are struggling in our country to achieve freedom of thought." After the court's decision, Perinçek said, "I defend my right to freedom of expression."

Advertisement

The Ankara Chamber of Commerce included DVDs, accusing the Armenian people of slaughtering Turks, with their paid tourism advertisements in the June 6, 2005 edition of the magazine TIME Europe. Time Europe later apologized for allowing the inclusion of the DVDs and published a critical letter signed by five French organizations. The February 12, 2007 edition of Time Europe included an acknowledgment of the truth of the Armenian Genocide and a DVD of a documentary by French director Laurence Jourdan about the genocide.

See also

• Armenian Genocide
• Serdar Argic

External links

• Grand National Assembly of Turkey Report:
  • Turks and Armenians: The Ottoman Experience
  • The Political Milieu of the Armenian Question
  • Realities Behind the Relocation
  • The Armenian Problem and International Law
  • The Jewish Holocaust and the Armenians
• Turkish Ministry of Culture Report:
  • Turco-Armenian Relations
  • How the Armenin Issue Came About
  • April 24, 1915
  • Relocation
• Ottoman Archives Document Center
  • Ottoman Armenian Archives Index
  • Armenian Documents
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkey Report:
  • Ambassador Nabi Şensoy about "The Armenian Genocide" on the PBS
• ATAA Index:
  • Hovhannes Katchaznouni on Dashnag experience
  • Bruce Fein on An Armenian and Muslim Tragedy? Yes! Genocide? No!
  • The U.S. Congress and Adolf Hitler on the Armenians
  • Justin McCarthy on Testimony at the House International Committee
• Center for Eurasian Strategic Studies [Main Index]
• Connecting the Dots on the “Alleged" Armenian Genocide
• "Tete de Turc" French site with lots of articles opposing genocide thesis
• Faruk Logoglu's article on Washington Times: To reconcile Turks and Armenians O. Faruk Logoglu is the former ambassador of Turkey to the United States.
• Revisiting Armenian Genocide by Guenter Lewy Guenter Lewy is professor emeritus of political science, University of Massachusetts, and the author of The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide (University of Utah Press, 2005).
• British Sources Refuting the AAG
• American Sources that Refute the AAG
• Israeli and Jewish Sources that Refute the AAG
• Turkish Last Names: Honest History Tellers
• Armenian Terrorism: Then and Now
• Track Two Diplomacy Program in Turkey and the Caucasus by Center for Global Studies, American University

Mutual Perceptions Research (Armenia/Turkey) (*.doc file) "The Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) and the Armenian Sociological Association (HASA) have organized a Mutual Perceptions Research Project. Each group is carrying out sociological research to identify key issues of cultural understanding between the neighboring countries, including the perception of Turks by Armenians and of Armenians by Turks. The study focuses on the perceptions of the majority populations in each country. The combined results will constitute study findings. Representatives from each team met in Yerevan and fieldwork was undertaken in both countries. The results of the research were presented at an international seminar jointly organized by TESEV and HASA in Tbilisi, Georgia (country)."