 "Photo: Courtesy Arevik Garamova, CC")
It's hard to start an article about a very sensitive issue. You may go against the world and be right, but still people will get angry. Then how can I approach this? Outright denial is never constructive, even when you have enough solid evidence to know that what you believe is the truth. I am writing because I feel the responsibility to represent a different angle to Tufts students: one that is being ignored, either deliberately or out of ignorance.
The issue at hand is the so-called "Armenian Genocide." Throughout the years that have passed since World War I (WWI), the issue has become a much more of a political and emotional issue rather than that of a historical one. It's used against Turkey in its attempts to join the European Union or with regards to other political issues. Many nations such as France and Greece, and 44 U.S. states which have considerable Armenian minorities or value the opportunity to get leverage against Turkey, have acknowledged that such a genocide occurred. It is no surprise that the most vocal U.S. state about this issue is California, which has a sizeable Armenian minority. On the other hand, nations such as Israel, Denmark and the United Kingdom are not among the countries to acknowledge the genocide claims.
The international knowledge of the issue is close to minimal, if not nonexistent. Almost all of the people that are voting for the recognition of the so-called "Armenian Genocide" appear to only know one side of the story while ignoring many facts in order to keep this story intact. In fact, there are many facts that Western nations are either ignoring or these facts are denied to them.
The reason I bring this issue up is because I came upon an "Armenian Genocide Commemoration" event on TuftsLife last semester. I attended this event to ask two questions, but seeing that the majority of the attendees were elders, I didn't want to disrespect their emotions. In addition, the other half of the people in the room were sleeping because the lecturer of the event was practically reading her presentation from a paper which was hardly based on the events of WWI. I left early because I thought that having a poorly presented lecture in a commemoration ceremony is worse than someone confronting it.
I realized that people take this claim of genocide as the truth without questioning its credibility or even trying to learn something about it. I have two very simple questions that alone shake the credibility of the issue and demonstrate that it is not as apparent as the Holocaust is, a claim many "Armenian Genocide" defenders make.
My first question is about the base of the genocide argument. In 1920, Aram Andonian, a French-Armenian, published a book called "The Memoirs of Naim Bey". This book contained the "Talat Pasha telegrams" partially based on the Armenian argument that the Ottoman government ordered the killings of Armenians. These documents, which are purported to be the proof that the Ottoman government executed Armenians, were suggested to be forgeries by Şinasi Orel and Süreyya Yuca in 1983. In Orel and Yuca's book called "The Talaât Pasha Telegrams: Historical Fact or Armenian Fiction?" they analyze the documents on the basis of signature types, dating and language and found them to be forgeries.
Simply put, why would the Armenians feel the need to forge documents to back up their argument if it's so compellingly recorded and proven to be true?
The second question regards the history of Armenians themselves. The first Prime Minister of the Democratic Republic of Armenia, Hovhannes Katchaznouni, was a member of Armenian Revolutionary Federation, which served a key role in the formation of Armenia as a separate state. He published a critical report in 1923 called "The Federation Has Nothing More To Do." In his report, he claims that Armenians had a part in the escalation of the violence throughout the empire and points out the massacres done by Armenians against Turks. Unfortunately, his report was banned and collected to be destroyed in Armenia. In 2005, this book was found in Russian archives by Mehmet Perinçek and started to be published in many languages. Quite simply, why would the very man who fought for Armenia's existence undermine the "genocide" claim?
I have no doubt that there are more things that are being mistakenly left out. A very brief research on the issue from the Internet and written sources would show that small but important facts like those that I have mentioned in this article are not pointed out at all. This summarizes the overall treatment of the issue in the Western nations. Only one side is heard, and only one side is remembered. It is important to remember contentious events like this one, but we should remember all sides of an issue. We're living in a world where only the loudest voices are heard. Until all are, I will keep raising questions that need answering.
--
Kerem Sahin is a junior majoring in electrical engineering.
is a member of the 
36 comments Log in to Comment
Now I want to ask the Armenian diaspora:
‘If all the scholars of the world, including the international scholars of genocide, support your thesis of genocide, then WHY HAVE YOU SPENT THIS EFFORT TO FALSIFY ALL THESE DOCUMENTS? WHY HAVE YOU NEEDED LIES? WHY ARE YOU AFRAID OF DOCUMENTS SO MUCH? What is the reason of your strict resistance to present your thesisin historical commissions made up of historians from both sides and other countries?
What kind of a truth are you seeking? The one which exists or the one you want to imagine?And I want to ask the world opinion:Your sensitivity about the news condemning genocides, mass murders is appreciable. But while doing this, are you ready to be unbiased? Will you be able to discard all the prejudices the history has instilled you up till now? Will you be able to prefer scholar research rather than your prejudices? Will you be able to acknowledge the great massacres inflicted on the Turks and Muslims by the Armenians before and after 1915 and condemn the Armenians who slaughtered the Turks and Muslims and buried them into large holes and even threw alive children into these holes in the Eastern Anatolia?(see diary of Russian Lieutenant Colonel Twerdo-Khlebof 'I wittnessed and I Lived Through Erzurum, 1917-1918'; www.tsk.mil.tr/ermeni_sorunu/arsiv_belgeleriyle...).
(Ahmet Refik Altınay. İki Komite ve İki Kıtal. İstanbul, 1919;p.71-72; 321-23).
So, I am afraid, it is actually you the world opinion who should face himself and review his identity and missions
6) Falcified allegations of speeches attributed to Atatürk: The first claim about Atatürk was that he was one of the witnesses, who supported Armenians in the “Court Martials” in İstanbul. In this claim, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was confused with the Chairman of the “Court Martials”, Mustafa Kemal, whose nickname was Nemrud. During the trials in İstanbul, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was in Ankara as a leader of the national struggle. James H. Tashjian, the Armenian editor of the Armenian periodic ‘The Armenian Review’ stated that Mustafa Kemal, then a Pasha, never appeared before such a tribunal, nor did he render such a statement (The Armenian Weekly Boston, Mass, USA, March 20, 1982 and The Armenian Review Volume thirty five, Autumn 1982); however James H. Tashjian was fired from his work later on.The second claim was about the statement, which attributed to Atatürk, given to Los Angeles Examiner in 1926. However, it was proven that this claim, which was made by Armenians in various platforms, was false. There was no evidence that a Swiss journalist, who was called Emile Hilderband, came to Turkey. Moreover, it was not found a journalist named Hilderband in the documents of Swiss authorities.The third claim about Atatürk was put forward in Yeni Binyıl newspaper on 8 October 2000. According to this claim in his speech in Turkish Grand National Assembly, on 24th of April 1920, Atatürk condemned the leaders of Jön Turks for their genocide policies. After the research of the speech records of Turkish Grand National Assembly in both open and secret sessions, it was proven that Mustafa Kemal did not make such speech.
One of the last claims about Atatürk was put forward by European Parliament, Foreign Affairs Committee’s report on Turkey on 22nd of November 2001. In the footnote of this report claimed that Mustafa Kemal gave a speech in Turkish Grand National Assembly on 10th of April 1921, in which he said Jön Turk regime followed genocide policy against Armenians in the First World War. After the research of the speech reports of Turkish Grand National Assembly, it was seen that Mustafa Kemal did not speak in Turkish Grand National Assembly in April 1920. He even did not attend any session of Assembly during April 1920.
If The Blue Book, the telegrams of Aram Andonian and the diary of Ambassador Morgenthau (which had already been published then) were reliable proofs, why did the English, French and Americans not use them ?
Additionally, during the trial in Berlin of the Armenian assassin Soghomon Tehlirian, who had murdered Talat Pasha in Berlin on March 15th, 1921, none of the Andonian documents was allowed to be entered into the court proceedings as evidence (Dashnakists’ book Justicier du Genocide, 1981, p.213).4)The cover photograph of the book of Tessa Hoffmann: German Greek scholar Tessa Hoffmann printed the painting of Russian artist Vasili Vereshchagin entitled ‘The Apotheosis of the Franco-Prussia War of 1871, depicting a mass of skulls which was probably painted after 1878, as if it were the photograph of 1915 Armenian genocide, in the cover of his book and had to admit her forgery during the trial of Doğu Perinçek held in Switzerland in March 2007, in which she was listened as a wittness.
Interestingly, Tessa Hoffman is a scholar of genocide.
The Armenians vehemently resist to present their thesis in historical commissions or even to admit international courts. It is simply because of that their thesis depend on forgeries and lies and they know it very well. If the protocols are substatiated and if all their lies are displayed in historical commissions, how can they look at the face of their youngsters whom they fed with Turkish hatred and how can they live? Here are a few of these forgeries, lies and falsified documents: 1)The number of Armenians who were relocated: The number of the Armenians who were relocated was reported as 600-700 thousand by Bogos Nubar Pasha who attended to the talks of Sevres Treaty as a chief of Armenians; however this number is given as 1.5 million, 2 and even 2.5 million by different by some Armenian sources. However, 1.5 million was the total number of Ottoman Armenians including those who live in the West Anatolia (therefore who were not relocated) according to Encyclopedia Britannica’s 1910 edition which was edited by an English editor. It is another striking point that the total number of Ottoman Armenians was increased to 2.5 million in 1953 edition of the same encyclopedia which was edited by an Armenian editor.2) Aram Andonian’s book (The telegrams which were claimed to have been sent by Talat Pasha to order the massacre of the Armenians which were pressed in the book of Aram Andonian in 1920, in three languages): It was proven by both the Turkish and foreign historians that these telegrams were fake too.
After these telegrams were published in Daily Telegraph in England, in 1922, the English Foreign Ministry made a scrutiny and denounced that they were prepared by an Armenian association.
3)Diary of American Ambassador Morgenthau published in 1918. Professor Heath Lowry, an American historian from Princeton University displayed that the events depicted in the book depended on lies or half true events, by comparing the information Ambassador Morgenthau sent to American Foreign Ministry, with those written in the diary, in his book entitled ‘The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’, in 1990.
As if killing the innocent in war is okayI would say that an overwhelming majority of Turks are probably proud of the genocide committed against Armenians and they dont see anything wrong with it.
When Turkish society develops enough to realize that genocide and killing in general is not good than maybe comparing facts is plausible
then why is it illegal to talk about the Armenian genocide in Turkey? Sounds like the Turkish government fits exactly that description.
You must be logged in to comment on an article. Not already a member? Register now