From the 11th to the second half of the 19th century, Turks and Armenians of Anatolia led a peaceful coexistence. In the entire history of the world there are no two other peoples with different languages and religions, who have managed to live together for such a long period.
Our intention in writing this Viewpoint is not to create tension but rather to illustrate how the friendship between two nations is falling victim to political ambitions. This unfortunate situation can only be overcome by unbiased research that nourishes objective points of view. Benefiting from only one perspective is disgrace for the rational human being, since this only creates prejudice and bias on one's part. Therefore, we feel obliged to present the following arguments from two different perspectives to illustrate the fact that there are always two sides to history. It is true that one would use the "proof" that benefits one's own condition. Unfortunately, this is a misfortune on behalf of history as a social science.
It is argued by those who recognize the so-called Armenian genocide that the number of deaths amount to 1.5 million. It should not be forgotten that any number in this case is falsifiable and varies according to different sources. For instance, the official number presented by the Encyclopedia Britannica is 600,000, contradicting the former.
Another fact that is used to support the Armenian point of view is a quote by Adolf Hitler: "Who after all speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?" However, Dr. Robert John, a historian and political analyst of Armenian descent, declared that this commonly used quotation of Hitler was a forgery and should not be used.
Additionally, the US Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Henry Morgenthau, wrote a book documenting the tragedy in the dark year of 1915. However, it should be remembered that he and his successors who happened to be in Istanbul back then, had the possibility to obtain irrefutable proof certifying the responsibility of the Ottoman rulers in the said "genocide". But nothing of the kind happened, not even after all the Ottoman archives came under the control of the European occupying military forces.
As you can see by the above facts, any argument that the Armenian side offers can be refuted. It is imperative to emphasize that the same exact case applies to the Turkish arguments as well. Our aim in proving some of the facts that are presented by the Armenian side false, is to demonstrate that this discussion can go on for years and years with each side presenting its own chosen "proofs" of their side being the correct one. It is important to note that many of the facts are not facts anymore: they are the photographs of photographs.
In addition, every sensible person knows how the lobbies behind governments work and how politicians do not hesitate to use history as a political tool. For instance, although firmly pushed by the powerful Armenian lobby and the senators of states with large percentage of Armenian populations (such as Massachusetts), the US Senate refused to recognize what happened in 1915 in the Ottoman Empire as genocide. Although under such immense pressure, the US Congress refused to pass the resolution simply because of its strong political ties to Turkey.
On the contrary, as France is one of the countries with the largest number of Armenians residing outside of Armenia, it is not surprising to see it pass a resolution that recognizes the incident as genocide. This is just another example of how history is used as a political tool, since the French parliament voted for the resolution just before elections. To make our point clearer, we would like to quote a French politician: "I am not a historian. I am a politician and I have political goals that I have to reach. For that, I need votes and I am interested in the Armenian population's vote in France". These examples illustrate how sensitive historical issues can be used as political weapons in the arena of balance of power.
For the sake of the discussion, we would like to point out a historical fact - an unarguable fact that cannot be distorted for any political ambition. The Republic of Turkey was founded by Ataturk in 1923. From the 14th century until 1922, the land of Turkey was part of the territory encompassing the multi-national, multi-religious state known as the Ottoman Empire. It is wrong to equate the Ottoman Empire with the Republic of Turkey in the same way that it is wrong to equate the Habsburg Empire with the Republic of Austria. Therefore, it just becomes a deep technical flaw when the name of Turkey is used when talking about the unfortunate incidents of 1915.
In order to make use of the liberal atmosphere our university provides us, we should never blindly depend on testimonies of any side even though it may seem coherent within itself. We, as open-minded university students, should do our best to come up with our own independent opinions after having digested all possible perspectives. In the specific case of the Armenian-Turkish conflict, we encourage all to explore more about this particular subject so that the goal of education -which is to eliminate opinion without comprehension- is fulfilled.
The crucial aim is to let those who are interested in the subject solely for the sake of history- and not for any political ambitions- be able to see that there are two very strong sides to this argument. The Armenians have succeeded in presenting their side of the case dominantly for a long time, mainly due to socio-economical factors. However, in a university the free flow of information should be dominant over any economic or social factor. Tufts has always prided itself in being respectful to diversity and we are honored to take this opportunity to express our view that the aim should not be to win an argument, but to discover the truth. Lack of information brings bias and prejudice which are threats to friendship and peace.
Zeynep Mededi is a freshman majoring in International Relations and Economics. Esra Yalcinalp is a sophomore majoring in International Relations and History.
