Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

[gegev]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

It is unbelievable that people who take an Armenian term which means Great Crime, Great Atrocity and turn it into Great Calamity have the nerve to then criticize it in front of the whole world for lack of precision when they are the ones who have blunted it, betrayed it and robbed it of its precision.

America is loosing its face worldwide as a human rights defender.

Just pay attention that in the foreign relations committee all the members in their speeches recognized AG as a historical truth but regardless the fact about half of them openly declared that recognizing the fact is not profitable for the United States.

Eventually unveiling nowadays USA real face world wide. Thus Hillary Clinton on behalf of America declared that (by urging the committee members; vote against AG acceptance) when they judge a criminal: the sentence will depend on profitability of the court decision to USA and if it is not, the victim should be sentenced, instead. Truth doesn't matter.

This proves that for some of the nowadays USA politicians Judah Iscariot’s image is the most typical: 30 silver coins matters most.

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

EU Special Representative for the South Caucasus Peter Semneby called the June 18 Azerbaijani provocation [in which 4 Armenian soldiers were killed in a sneak attack] "a deplorable event". A deplorable event? Not a grave violation that should incur a penalty or at least strong censure ?

The same questions apply to those who blindly and habitually call the Medz Yeghern the 'great calamity'. A deplorable event? Not a grave violation. . . .?

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

It is unbelievable that people who take an Armenian term which means Great Crime, Great Atrocity and turn it into Great Calamity have the nerve to then criticize it in front of the whole world for lack of precision when they are the ones who have blunted it, betrayed it and robbed it of its precision.

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

A Meeting of The Minds? On the cruciality of Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

From Suat Kiniklioglu, Member of Turkish Parliament and Spokesman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, 2009

Obama's statement is interesting from a variety of perspectives, and I believe it is worth examining whether the term "Meds Yeghern" has the potential to become a mutually acceptable term for both sides to commemorate the events in question. As is now commonly known, "Meds Yeghern" denotes "Great Calamity/Great Disaster" in the Armenian language. Although I am not in a position to fully comprehend the context in which this term is being used in Armenian, I am willing to venture into the following.
I believe the events of World War I constituted a Great Calamity for Turks, Kurds, Armenians, Anatolian Greeks and probably other peoples of the Ottoman Empire. Indeed, it was a great trauma for the Turks, who saw their great empire collapse in front of their own eyes and who saw a multitude of peoples rebel against the state and side with the invading enemies of the time. It was a Great Calamity to the Armenians who had to be relocated during harsh war conditions and subsequently suffered immensely. It was a disaster for them as they left behind their homes and memories, similar to the millions of Turks who were chased out of the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East. It was a Great Calamity for the Turks and the Kurds fighting on the eastern front against the invading Russian armies, who were intent on grabbing the eastern part of the remaining territories of the Ottoman realm. It was a true disaster for all involved as the war time conditions of eastern Anatolia were brutal and certainly far from being hospitable to any of the struggling sides. Famine, disease and misery were the order of the day.

Yet, as President Abdullah Gül said in response to Obama's statement, we need to look forward and see whether the Turks and the Armenians will be able to normalize relations in the coming months and years. Therefore, the term "Meds Yeghern" should not be chided right away because it is an Armenian term. I think it harbors the potential to bring all of the aggrieved parties together. "Meds Yeghern" could become the cornerstone of a positive language about the events of 1915, one which signifies the calamity that the competition over the Ottoman realms between the imperial powers brought about, which ultimately led to the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and the loss of the Armenian population. It also resulted in the loss of the empire's Greek subjects. We Turks built a new nation-state from the ashes of the empire, but one consequence of these historic events was the loss of the richness and diversity of the Ottoman days and the change in the social fabric of these lands. Could it be possible to utilize this term as a base around which all of us could mourn the losses we all incurred during the fateful days of World War I?

All interested in the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations should look into the potential of whether the term "Meds Yeghern" could be applied to the wider pain and disaster that occurred in eastern Anatolia during World War I and thus could pave the way for a common language on this painful chapter of history.

http://www.suatkiniklioglu.org/tr/my-today-s-zaman-column/-meds-yeghern.html

From Harout Sassounian, addressed to President Obama in 2009:
You may want to know that "Meds Yeghern" does not mean genocide; it means "Great Calamity." Armenians used that term before the word "genocide" was coined by Raphael Lemkin in the 1940's. "Genocide" in Armenian is "Tseghasbanoutyoun," which is a much more precise term than "Meds Yeghern," in case you decide to use it in the future.

http://www.lemagan.com/newsDet.php?languageid=1&newsid=46&newsType=N

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

Another Positive Example

from http://www.turkishdenials.com/

page for Turkish Denials, a book by John Ahmaranian. The following statement is addressed to the Turkish nation.

"This book is not a call for vengeance. This course of action has always been meaningless and futile in the history of the world. It neither restores loved ones nor erases horrors from memory.

However, the elimination of vengeance does not nullify a need to document these events, nor does it eliminate the requirement that your people admit to their acts and designs in the Great Crime. Unfortunately until this day, both your government and your people have arrogantly pursued a policy of denial."

January 4, 1989

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

From "Arshile Gorky: A kindred spirit" by Tom Teicholz [in the link 3 x's will be the letters j, e, w. Two x's will be the letters e, w.]

Here are some details of Gorky's life. . . :

1. He was a witness to genocide.

Gorky was born Vosdanig Adoian around 1904 (there is some confusion
about the actual date) in the village Khorkom, near Lake Van in
Turkey. In 1915, Turkish troops began a pogrom of murder and forced
deportations of Armenians in the community, an act of systematic and
thorough ethnic cleansing that became known as "The Great Crime" -
for which the term genocide was coined.

http://www.xxxishjournal.com/summer_sneaks/article/arshile_gorky_a_kindred_spirit_just_not_xxxish_20100601/

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

The following is what the self-appointed patriotic spokesman SHOULD have said in his open letter to the President, if he was really concerned with linguistic precision:

"You may want to know that 'Meds Yeghern' is the term Armenians used for their genocide before Raphael Lemkin coined the term. It means "Great Crime" and precisely reflects their understanding of what they had suffered. If you still feel inclined to use the term again next year instead of referring in plain English to the Armenian Genocide, this should be very clear to you."

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

'You may want to know that "Meds Yeghern" does not mean genocide; it means "Great Calamity." Armenians used that term before the word "genocide" was coined by Raphael Lemkin in the 1940's. "Genocide" in Armenian is "Tseghasbanoutyoun," which is a much more precise term than "Meds Yeghern," in case you decide to use it in the future.'

Statements like this in 2009 only encouraged the President to REPEAT his performance in 2010 when he used MY not just twice but THREE times. He was only too happy to use a word that he was assured did not mean genocide, in the hope that some Armenians would think he did. In the process, Medz Yeghern was gutted of its core meaning, reduced to a meaningless Calamity and deprived of its close affinity with the crime named genocide.

This has the effect of distancing the Armenian Genocide from the Jouwish Holocaust, which is of prime importance to AG denialists. They work hard every day trying to demolish the last vestiges of the connective tissue between the two genocides. It is unfortunate that in adopting a cavalier and roughshod attitude toward the Armenian language too many own goals are being suffered.

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

There are two models one can follow:

Model A: The only important thing is whether or not the President utters the G-Word (either in English or Armenian). That is the long and the short of it.

If he doesn't, it doesn't matter at all how you translate whatever Armenian term he uses. You can tell him that it only means calamity, catastrophe, bad luck, etc., but nothing approaching genocide and that he therefore abysmally failed to say genocide. Gotcha! You can say that the true Armenian name for genocide is tseghaspanoutiun and be dismissive of the previous term Armenians used for it (which, after all, was the first major genocide of the century and not one they would have referred to as applying to a host of other people, whose genocides followed). The condescending implication is that they had a pretty good word for what happened to them to serve the purpose until the really right one was given to them! The fact is, they had a very fine name for it, one that served as a perfect precedent for the ultimate concept. That being the case, it shouldn't be corrupted or downgraded for mere rhetorical purposes. It's history is far too important for that.



Model B: It makes a big difference how the first name Armenians used to designate their genocide is translated.

The principal name they gave it designates a crime, not a series of unfortunate events (although there are many names for those other concepts). By "Medz Yeghern" they meant their genocide. It is likely that Raphael Lemkin was well acquainted with the true meaning of the Armenian term and inspired by it to pursue his concept of an international crime against humanity. "Calamity" wouldn't have had that power.

Conclusion: If the President uses "Meds Yeghern" and there are two possible translations of the term into English, one of which is "Great Crime" and the other of which is "Great Calamity", which one of those meanings leaves the President closer to recognizing The Genocide than the other? Why would we choose the meaning that leaves him further from it? Just to make a point? That position is grossly irresponsible and shortsighted.

[Diranakir]

Re: Medz Yeghern: Great Crime vs. Great Calamity

WRONG! ! ! A pathetic mistake! A complete failure to understand the meaning of the term and a consequent blunder of the worst sort! This is precisely why Obama used the term! It's time to get it right and not depend on "patriotic spokesmen" whose acuity goes unquestioned.

http://www.lemagan.com/newsDet.php?languageid=1&newsid=46&newsType=N

You may want to know that "Meds Yeghern" does not mean genocide; it means "Great Calamity." Armenians used that term before the word "genocide" was coined by Raphael Lemkin in the 1940's. "Genocide" in Armenian is "Tseghasbanoutyoun," which is a much more precise term than "Meds Yeghern," in case you decide to use it in the future.