Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Jan 31 2007
Turkish-Armenians’ pivotal role in Turkey’s history revealed
Newly revealed documents prove that there were patriotic
Armenian-Turkish citizens during the War of Independence who risked a
backlash from their community.
Prominent examples of this are Muslim Armenians Hasan and Necati, two
members of the Mim-Mim Group, which shipped arms to Anatolia from
Istanbul; naval soldier Pandikyan, an operative in the British
intelligence service who leaked classified information to Turks about
security controls; and singer Madam Blanþ, who collected money for
the Red Crescent after performances. New findings revealed by the
four-year study of Dr. Cafer Ulu opens a different and solemn window
to the Armenian problem. Ulu reveals that Armenians played a
significant role in giving the surname "Ataturk" to Mustafa Kemal,
penning a signature for him.
At a time when Anatolia was engulfed in its battle for independence,
a delegation from the Black Sea region met with Armenian David
Sahakkulu, who was working as a translator for a group monitoring the
straits set up by the occupying Allied Forces, and asked for help
with an arms shipment. He was asked to inform Turks of the Allied
forces’ guard hours and numbers in order to safely ship Turkish arms
from Istanbul to Trabzon. He was even offered money. He agreed to
help but rejected the money, saying he owed what he possessed to
Turkey and its schools. However, many other Armenians, particularly
Armenian Patriarch Zaven Efendi, were acting against the Anatolian
liberation movement at that time.
Sahakkulu is one of the Armenians who helped the self-proclaimed
Turkish government during the War of Independence between 1919-1922.
The efforts of Sahakkulu and other Armenians are important at a time
when debates over Turkish-Armenian relations are reduced to the
forced migration of Armenians in 1915, Armenian massacres and the
so-called genocide, although they have a 400-year history. Even so,
documents about such people and their activities have not been
disclosed until recently.
Armenian singer took stage with the Turkish flag
Newly revealed documents prove that there were patriotic
Armenian-Turkish citizens during the War of Independence who risked a
backlash from their community. Prominent examples of this are Muslim
Armenians Hasan and Necati, two members of the Mim-Mim Group, which
shipped arms to Anatolia from Istanbul; naval soldier Pandikyan, an
operative in the British intelligence service who leaked classified
information to Turks about security controls; and singer Madam Blanþ,
who collected money for the Red Crescent after performances.
New findings revealed by the four-year study of Dr. Cafer Ulu, a
historian from Fatih University in Ýstanbul, opens a different and
solemn window to the Armenian problem. Ulu’s findings suggest
debating the issue separately from the 1915 forced migration act. He
also reveals that Armenians played a significant role in giving the
surname `Ataturk’ to Mustafa Kemal, penning a signature for him, and
had significant involvement in linguistic studies during initial
years of the Turkish Republic.
Madam Blanþ, an Armenian-Turkish singer in the early 1920s, was known
for collecting money for soldiers at the front following every
concert she performed. She would take to the stage with Turkish
flags. The Red Crescent volunteers, which included Greek, Armenian
and Jewish girls, would collect donations, and people who had no
money would donate their jewels.
There were many non-Muslims in the Karakol Cemiyeti and Mim-Mim
Groups, two organization that shipped arms into Anatolia during the
War of Independence. Hüsamettin Ertürk, a leading figure in the War
of Independence, described the activities of Hasan and Necati: `There
were non-Muslim supporters of our cause who worked for us in the
offices of the Allied countries in Istanbul. They were working for
the lands they lived on despite the difference of religion. Necati,
who was working for the British intelligence service, was one of
these people. He spied on the British for us.’
Another patriotic Armenian was Pandikyan, who was rewarded for his
work by then-Defense Minister Marshal Fevzi Çakmak. Panidkyan was the
head of the Galata Intelligence Service, which was affiliated with
the British intelligence service, and he leaked a great deal of
information to the Turks. He contributed to releasing people detained
for supporting the Anatolian liberation movement, informing those who
were certain to be captured, returning or destroying classified
documents seized by British authorities that could be used against
the movement and smuggling ammunition and other military equipment.
Ulu noted that this was the first time such information was made
public. `The Armenian problem has so far been restricted to events in
1915. There are certainly events and players beyond those events. In
this regard, it is not appropriate to ignore or reject contributions
of Armenian-Turkish citizens during the War of Independence and after
the establishment of the republic,’ he said.
Armenian-Turks suggested `Ataturk’ surname for Mustafa Kemal
Agop Martayan Dilaçar was enlisted in the Ottoman army at the age of
19 when the World War I broke out. He first served on the Caucasus
front and later on the Damascus front when the forced migration act
was approved. He met Mustafa Kemal in Damascus. They established good
relations in the following years, and Dilaçar was appointed chief
expert at the Turkish Language Association (TDK) during the Second
Turkish Language Assembly held in August 1934. Ataturk appreciated
his contribution and gave him the surname Dilaçar in 1935.
The Armenian Church in Istanbul published an almanac titled `Turkish
Armenians in the 75th Year of the Republic.’ It is stated in the
almanac that Dilaçar suggested the surname Ataturk during a meeting
of the TDK and that it was accepted. This point is agreed on by the
majority of Armenians even though it was not revealed until recently
but only voiced by Armenians. Turkey’s second president, Ýsmet Ýnönü,
and 22 lawmakers presented a bill to the Turkish Parliament on Nov.
24, 1934 granting the surname Ataturk to Mustafa Kemal. According to
Ulu, it was Armenians who penned Ataturk’s signature. He said: `There
is no strong objection at this point. This topic was brought up by
Armenians in the past but was not explored by our researchers and
historians. Moreover, there is no point in wailing over an Armenian
citizen’s having suggested it.’
Kasým Gülek and Ecevit’s teacher was Armenian
When Mustafa Kemal expressed his wish to use Latin characters in his
signature, Hagop Vahram Çerçiyan, then-calligraphy teacher at Roberts
College, was asked to draw a signature. He prepared five different
signatures and sent them to Mustafa Kemal. Three days later, Mustafa
Kemal conveyed his thanks to Çerçiyan with a letter saying he had
chosen one of them.
Çerçiyan was famed not only for designing Mustafa Kemal’s signature
but also for teaching leading Turkish politicians. Bülent Ecevit,
Kasým Gülek, Selim Sarper, Ömer Celal and Behçet Aðaoðlu were all
instructed by Çerçiyan during his 50-year teaching career.
A decade after the establishment of the republic, there were still
opponents of Mustafa Kemal’s reforms. On Oct. 21, 1935, Mustafa
Kemal’s radical opponents were mobilized to assassinate him. The
plot, which was claimed to have been led by Çerkez Ethem, was foiled.
After the foiled plot was made public, protests were held nationwide.
There were Armenian-Turkish citizens among the protestors because the
target of the assassination attempt was the president of their
country.
Following the foiled attempt, the Armenian community in Turkey
organized a meeting at the Armenian church in the Galata district of
Istanbul. Top Armenian clerics attended the meeting and expressed
their anger at the attempt. Along with this meeting, the Armenian
community held services at all Armenian churches located in Istanbul
to express their support for Mustafa Kemal.
Ulu noted that research on this issue would deepen due to the newly
disclosed documents: `The documents we used during our studies prove
that Turkish-Armenian relations have a deep-rooted background and
show that the two societies could not be easily separated from each
other. What should be done for the future is that both sides should
express only the facts, leaving aside prejudices and fears.’
01.02.2007
HAÞÝM SÖYLEMEZ, SEDAT GÜLMEZ, Ýstanbul Today’s Zaman