HISTORIAN TANER AKCAM SAYS ARMENIAN BORDER SHOULD BE OPENED FOR NORMALIZATION OF RELATIONS
Today’s Zaman, Turkey
April 19 2013
As the anniversary of the forced migration of Armenians in 1915 from
Anatolia to other parts of the Ottoman Empire approaches, historian
Taner Akcam suggests Turkey open its borders with Armenia as a step
to normalize relations between the two countries. Talking to Today’s
Zaman Akcam claims that the Armenian issue cannot be solved unless
diplomatic ties are established.
Akcam, who describes the 1915 events as “genocide,” says that Turkey
should stop wasting its time with the argument that 1915 was not
genocide “by exploiting people’s ignorance about this matter and
creating an unnecessary debate.” He argues that 1.2 million Armenians
were forced to relocate under the rule of the Committee of Union and
Progress (CUP) during the Ottoman Empire.
He also argues that thirst, hunger and diseases were among the main
reasons for the deaths, but the groups that were forced to migrate
were intentionally led to take the longer routes and were not provided
water and food during their journey.
As far as acts of revenge are concerned, Akcam acknowledges that
after the Russians withdrew from Eastern Turkey during the Bolshevik
revolution, some Armenian gangs committed some vengeful acts in 1918
and 1919. However, he believes that they were small in proportion to
the number of Armenians killed.
How many Armenians in the Ottoman territories faced forced relocation
in 1915?
The booklet, attributed to Talat PaÅ~_a and referred to as the “Black
Relocation Book,” gives the number of relocated Armenians as 924,158.
>>From some Ottoman documents, we understand that Talat PaÅ~_a
had completed this booklet possibly in early 1918. Therefore, this
figure should be considered as the most accurate number of relocated
Armenians. But the list has also some major shortcomings. The list does
not include the names of about 15 settlements from which Armenians
were sent to exile particularly including İstanbul, Edirne, Aydın
(Ä°zmir), Bolu, Kastamonu, Canakkale, Kutahya and Urfa. Adding the
Armenians relocated from these provinces to the list, we get an
estimated 1.2 million Armenians who faced forced relocation.
How many people died during the relocation?
The new Ottoman government that came to power after the CUP in November
1918 established a commission to investigate Armenian losses.
This commission made public its findings in May 1919. Thus, the number
of Armenians who died in the process was 800,000. In 1928, the Turkish
General Staff published a book on the casualties during World War Ir.
According to the statistics provided by the General Staff, “Some
800,000 Armenians and 200,000 Greeks died due to killings or relocation
or in labor battalions.” These figures do not include those who died
of hunger, disease or massacres in Caucasus after 1918. If all of these
figures are added together, we get a total number of over 1 million.
How did these deaths occur?
One can distinguish at least four different methods. First, as we know
from the cases in Trabzon, Samsun and Ordu, Armenians were forced to
board small boats and eventually drowned. After the CUP lost its hold
on power in October 1918, the Ottoman parliament started to discuss
this issue openly. For instance, in a session held on December 11,
1918, Trabzon Deputy Mehmet Emin Bey, noting that he was a nationalist,
said that he himself witnessed how Armenians were forced to board boats
and how those boats capsized, killing the Armenians. “I directly saw
this incident, I mean the real Armenian incident,” he said, adding:
“There was a district governor in Ordu. Under the pretext of sending
Armenians to Samsun, he ordered that Armenians board boats, and in
this way, he paved the way for the destruction of Armenians.” From the
eyewitness testimonies made during a trial held in 1919 in Trabzon,
we know that Armenians were killed through a similar method in Trabzon
as well.
Second, in some regions, Armenians were not even forced to migrate,
but they were killed on the spot. Even in some places, they were
gathered together in churches and these churches were burned down. In
a written testimony, Vehip PaÅ~_a, who was appointed as the Third
Army commander after 1916, provided examples of this method, which
he witnessed in Bitlis and MuÅ~_.
Third, the Intelligence Service forces or Kurdish clans attacked the
convoys and massacred people at certain locations. Norwegian Caregiver
Wedel-Jarsberg, who was working in Erzincan, prepared a report of
the accounts of Armenians who survived the massacre by playing dead
and the soldiers who witnessed the massacre.
Massacres continued in Syria and Iraqi deserts, which were identified
as the destination of relocated Armenians. Here, gendarmerie troops
and Circassian gangs played a major role. The number of Armenians who
died in Deir ez-Zor deserts in 1916 is estimated to be around 200,000.
Still, we can say that deaths resulted mostly from hunger, thirst,
disease and climate conditions. Deportation convoys were intentionally
forced to travel along longer routes, and water and food were denied
to people in resting places, and no measure was taken as regards
the ill people who were forced to move on. The Ottoman documents
referred to the epidemics in Armenian convoys by saying: “Do not
bring them closer to military troops. Do not allow them to approach
cities. Make them move on.” In other words, Armenians were destroyed
through intentional use of hunger, thirst and disease.
Do you believe there was genocide in 1915? Why?
Few people know this, but the Armenian genocide was one of the main
reasons why the word “genocide” was first coined. Raphael Lemkin is the
person who coined this word and admits that the Armenian genocide was
decisive in this coinage. In his memoirs, he talks about it. In 1921,
he was a university student in Poland when an Armenian named Soghomon
Tehlirian killed Talat PaÅ~_a. During the trial of Tehlirian, he asked
his professor why a person who was responsible for the deaths of about
1 million people [Talat PaÅ~_a] was not arrested, but a person who
killed one person [Tehlirian] was jailed and tried. His professor’s
answer was interesting. “Think about a farmer who has chickens,”
he said. “The farmer kills the chicken. Why not? It’s none of your
business. If you meddle with it, you go too far.” The professor implied
that the state officials cannot be tried for their actions due to the
principle of national sovereignty. Lemkin’s answer to this was simple:
“But people are not chickens.”
After recounting this story, Lemkin says as he was impressed, he
decided to abandon philology and attend the law faculty. “Sovereignty
does not mean the right to kill 1 million people,” he said, and started
to work on a bill that would allow state officials to be tried for
the murders they committed. In this way, he found a definition for
genocide and exerted great efforts to ensure that this was passed
as law. He eventually became successful. In 1950s, he promoted his
coinage in his writings and speeches.
The drafter of the 1948 Genocide Convention says, “I coined this word
in order to describe what happened to Armenians,” and we still claim
that 1915 was not genocide. Isn’t this a bit odd?
I think we should stop wasting our time and energy in arguing,
“1915 was not genocide.” This insistence is useless. In the end,
those groups who seek to deny 1915 by exploiting people’s ignorance
about this matter are creating an unnecessary debate.
What do you think about Armenians’ killing Turks?
Acts of revenge are known to follow every massive collective massacre.
After Russians withdrew from Eastern Turkey with the Bolshevik
revolution, some Armenian gangs were responsible for actions that
can be described as revenge in Erzurum, Erzincan and Kars in 1918
and 11919. Murder is murder. Revengel acts cannot be justified in any
manner. We feel sorry for any person who dies. But you cannot place
the uncontrolled acts of some gangs against a state’s massacring its
1 million citizens and argue that there was a conflict in which two
sides were mutually engaged. After 1945, there were acts of revenge
targeting Germans in Poland and Czechoslovakia, but no one tried to
argue, “There was no Holocaust,” by using these acts as justification.
The acts of revenge that occurred after 1918 cannot/should not be
used as an answer to the question whether the Ottoman government
systematically destroyed its own citizens. Under the influence of
their nationalist policies, the CUP destroyed about 1 million people
of this country just because their religion and language differed.
This is the main point.
How can the Armenian issue be settled?
I think we should focus on a “Turkish issue” rather than on the
“Armenian issue.” First of all, we, Turks, must learn to talk about
what happened in the past. We must learn both what the truth was and
how we can discuss it. To know the history and to talk about it are
two different things. In my opinion, the first thing to do is to learn
how this can be understand and share sorrows. We must be able to listen
to Armenians as they talk about their heart-wrenching experiences.
On the state level, a government which really intends to solve this
issue must first change its wording and style. The language of peace
and fraternity is different from that of strife. First of all, a
language that would facilitate the settlement must be created. To
this end, the publications including official websites of certain
ministries that are rife with hatred and animosity against Armenians
must be shut down. The Board of Coordination for Combating Unfounded
Genocide Claims, subordinated to the National Security Council (MGK),
must be abolished. As long as there is such a board, it is a fancy
to believe Turkey will launch an initiative about genocide.
The second step is to open up border crossings. We can solve a past
issue only by normalizing ties today. As long as the border crossings
are kept closed and no diplomatic ties are established with Armenia,
this issue cannot be solved. If people don’t know each other and if
they don’t talk to each other, how will they settle a problem among
themselves? Dialogue is a sine qua non component of communication
among people. If Turkey opens up the border crossing with Armenia
and calls it “Hrant Dink Border Gate,” this would be a good gesture.
The third step is to pay an apology. In our time, heads of state and
government pay apologies in connection with past tragedies. When they
do, this does not humiliate them. Rather this boosts their prestige.
Turkey must take this step. Given the fact it expected Israel to pay
an apology for an attack against a vessel, Turkey should know that
Armenians nurture similar expectations about the death of about 1
million people in 1915. This problem cannot be solved if the Turkish
government does not accept the fact that 1915 incidents were a crime
that cannot defended ethically. For two societies and sides to make
peace, Turkey must denounce the crimes against the Ottoman Armenians in
1915 and declare that those crimes were morally/ethically unacceptable.
The third step is to launch a number of moves to compensate for the
past’s losses. In this scope, Armenians who have roots in Anatolia
may be automatically granted Turkish nationality. Another step may be
to recognize and promote the Armenian cultural heritage in Turkey. In
this framework, religious, cultural and historical Armenian buildings
may be renovated. Reviving the destroyed or damaged Armenian cultural
heritage and civilization in Anatolia will be the best response to
the past’s subversive mentality.
Another symbolic yet significant step might be to return the churches,
buildings and fields seized in Cukurova region that belonged to Sis
Katolikos Church, which is of secondary or even equal importance to
Mother Cathedral of Holy Etchmiadzin.
There are also things we, as a society, can and should do. For
instance, we may organize mevlit ceremonies at major mosques such
as Kocatepe of Ankara or Sultanahmet of Ä°stanbul on April 24 to
commemorate the victims of 1915. It is religious duty for everyone
to pay respect to the people who died tragically. Other religious
ceremonies may be organized as well. Religions teach us how to pay
respect to human beings. Therefore, I assume, religious ceremonies
would be very meaningful for the victims of 1915.
Another thing we can do is to raise awareness of people. To ensure
public access to correct information and eliminate the negative
effects of 100-year old brainwashing and denial policies, programs
may be organized to inform the public, through participation of
Armenian scholars, and via the press. Joint committees at various
levels (Parliament, universities, etc.) between two countries may
be established and civilian initiatives to boost relations may be
developed.
The primary purpose is to eliminate prejudices. To this end, we must
learn to develop and use a language that fosters peace and solution.
After these steps, the parties may start to talk about what they can
do to redress the past injustice.
What do you expect to happen in 2015 as the 10th anniversary of
forced relocation?
If Turkey does not seriously change its policies and if the US, the UK
and Israel do not modify their stance, I don’t think anything special
will happen. And there is nothing to suggest that these countries
will change their position. I think people will conduct demonstrations
and repeat the same arguments. And then April 25 will come.
From: A. Papazian