A Little More Respect to Each Other

[Joseph]

I am no Atatürk worshipper but I do respect this guy. Just FYI in the early years of the Republic Mustafa Kemal faced fierce opposition from former CUP members. Any obstacles he faced while head of parliament and later when he was elected to be Commander in Chief in the Sakarya+Dumlupinar battles came from this group who were continuously in touch with Enver who was in Russia and later in Batum in that period. Kemal could not do anything at the time since they were chosen MP's and he needed full support from all fractions which he could only get because they were dire times and they did not have a better choice. If the first few battles with Greeks had been lost Enver would have been back in Turkey to overthrow the Ankara government. Their (ex-CUP members) gradual elimination or subordiantion came after the Greek army was kicked out of Turkey and he became president. So, in short, even though Atatürk had to bear with ex-CUP members for a certain period he really was not on the same political axis, I personally think he was closer to the Turkish Bolsheviks who supported his "war againt the imperialist west" and hence the massive support Kemal got from Russia during this war. Kemal however clear stated many times that he did not see Bolshevism suited for Turkey, even to the Russian envoys and Ambassadors he frequented with very often.

Interesting. Thanks.

[1.5 million]

hitite - your post is not entirely accurate. While your (Atatutk's official) portrayal of events of this time certainly is somewhat accurate what is not said is that for the most part Ataturk welcomed and recieved the support of the majority of ex-CUP memebers. It was only a certain clique who shared Enver's Pan-Turnanic ideals who ever made any overtures against Kemal - again this was never a serious threat. In fact Kemal commented numerous times - concerning the most rapacious ex-CUP members - that they had their uses and he would use them for as long as they were necessesary (to finish elimination of the Armenians and other Christians) and then he would queietly dispose of them. And in fact this is what he did. However he not only went after these Enver supporting ex-CUP types (many who were just murderous thugs of the worst kind) - but he turned on his own long time supporters - because they had become highly suspicious and opposed to his increasing authoritarianism. So he manufactured plots against him and executed some of the most politically promissing (more Democratic leaning) nationalists at the time and made sure he kept a cadre of controllable yes men around him at all times. It is interesting however that Ataturk did refer to the nefarious deeds (against the Greeks and Armenians etc) commited by these ex-CUP thugs as part of his justification for dealing with them as harshly as he did.

[hitite]

hitite - your post is not entirely accurate. While your (Atatutk's official) portrayal of events of this time certainly is somewhat accurate what is not said is that for the most part Ataturk welcomed and recieved the support of the majority of ex-CUP memebers. It was only a certain clique who shared Enver's Pan-Turnanic ideals who ever made any overtures against Kemal - again this was never a serious threat. In fact Kemal commented numerous times - concerning the most rapacious ex-CUP members - that they had their uses and he would use them for as long as they were necessesary (to finish elimination of the Armenians and other Christians) and then he would queietly dispose of them. And in fact this is what he did. However he not only went after these Enver supporting ex-CUP types (many who were just murderous thugs of the worst kind) - but he turned on his own long time supporters - because they had become highly suspicious and opposed to his increasing authoritarianism. So he manufactured plots against him and executed some of the most politically promissing (more Democratic leaning) nationalists at the time and made sure he kept a cadre of controllable yes men around him at all times. It is interesting however that Ataturk did refer to the nefarious deeds (against the Greeks and Armenians etc) commited by these ex-CUP thugs as part of his justification for dealing with them as harshly as he did.

I have read of your above view of Ataturk and how he engineered the hangings of not only ex-CUPS but also Kurds and many sheria supporters. However reading your sources/books specifically for the above would be nice.

[1.5 million]

I have read of your above view of Ataturk and how he engineered the hangings of not only ex-CUPS but also Kurds and many sheria supporters. However reading your sources/books specifically for the above would be nice.

A quick one that comes to mind is Akcam's book: From Empire to Republic - Turkish Nationalsim and the Armenian Genocide. It is well sourced BTW. I also recommend Andrew Mango's biography of Ataturk (for coverage of this issue), also Hugh Poultan's Top Hat Grey WOlf and the Crescent: Turkish Nationalism and the Turkish Republic.

[1.5 million]

This is perhaps related -

Kemal Ataturk Admits Reality of the Armenian Genocide in a 1926 Interview


In June 1926 a group of disgruntled Turks, headed by a certain Ziya Hurshid, planned to assassinate the “father of the Turkish Republic,” Mustapha Kemal. In mid-June, Kemal was scheduled to visit Izmir after an extended tour of the country. The plotters secretly assembled in that city and finalized their plan to the minutest detail. The plot was given away by one of the conspirators, and almost all of them were arrested, tried and punished. Kemal arrived in Izmir and personally took charge of the arrests. He himself interrogated a few of the prisoners, who were his former friends. The infamous Independence Tribunal was summoned from Ankara, and at the conclusion of the mock trial, fifteen conspirators were sentenced to death. Those who belonged to the former Union and Progress (Ittihad ve Terakki) Party of the Young Turks, were later tried in Ankara, found guilty and executed.

In July of the same year, a Swiss journalist, Emile Hilderbrand, interviewed Kemal, who openly blamed the Young Turks for the massacre of “millions of our Christian subjects.” The interview originally appeared in the August 1, 1926 issue of the Los Angeles Examiner. This newspaper interview is an important document, since, in the ninth paragraph, Kemal Ataturk admits the reality of the Armenian Genocide.

The text below is corrected and reprinted from the Armenian Mirror-Spectator, March 16, 1985.

Kemal Promises More Hangings of Political Antagonists in Turkey

I shall not stop until every guilty person, no matter how high his rank, has been hung from the gallows as a grim warning to all incipient plotters against the security of the Turkish Republic. Since the very hour of its reincarnation in the rejuvenated body of the Republic, our nation has endured travails no other nation has ever experienced.

When we were fighting external enemies, or enemies whom we were certain were sympathetic with foreign intriguers, nearly all of the rank and file of our population were enthusiastically, even fanatically, united to deliver the nation from the multiple foreign yokes. But no sooner had the nation proved its worth to its foreign detractors than certain elements, bred in the old school of political intrigue, began to show their claws. We were face to face with a menace to the life of the republic from two elements.

One was the group who combined religious fanaticism and ignorance with political imbecility and who, in the past, under different Sultans had come to believe that the state was an organism to be exploited through debauchery, corruption and brazen bribery for personal ends. I put the ax in the dual root of this sinister and reprehensible theory of government by destroying the Khalif and the Sultan. I sent into exile the persons in whom this theory was personified. Large numbers, adherents of this school of politics, attempted to interpret any act as atheistic, and, under the aegis of religion, began to intrigue against the life of the republic.

Sixty Leaders Hang at Dawn

In several instances in the past when, in Kurdistan and other interior regions of Anatolia, they showed a disposition to challenge the will of the republic, I crushed them with an iron hand, and for example, had over sixty of their leaders hanged at dawn.

That element had its lesson and will not again attempt to measure swords with 'me.

The second element, I am now about to deal with ruthlessly, is the group of men who in the pre-republic days were known in the world as the Committee of the Union of the Young Turks. The ranks of this element were recruited from a questionable assortment of political adventurers, half-educated progressives and men of dissolute habits. In the days when we were battling against foes from within and without, this element joined us and fought in our ranks. Yet from the early days I had misgivings as to their motives. But I wished, hoped and then prayed that once our country was redeemed from the foreign yoke, this element would mend its methods and become infused with the seal of patriotism. I soon began to realize that my hopes were doomed to be disillusioned and my prayers were [not] to be answered. I patiently waited, keeping a sharp eye on their movements.

Seditious Movements Cloaked

They formed themselves into a political opposition. I do not pretend to be a dictator, bent to suppress sincere and honest political opposition, because a republic is a misnomer when it ceases to brook criticism. But when a group of dissolute, corrupt and unscrupulous political adventurers begin to organize seditious movements under the cloak of political opposition, it becomes the sacred duty of those who are in charge of the machinery of the government to suppress it and suppress it with an exemplary ruthlessness that will prevent the eventual shedding of rivers of blood.

I am about to show these plotters that the Republic of Turkey cannot be overthrown by murderers or through their murderous designs...

These left-overs from the former Young Turk Party, who should have been made to account for the lives of millions of our Christian subjects who were ruthlessly driven en masse, from their homes and massacred, have been restive under the republican rule. They have hitherto lived on plunder, robbery and bribery and become inimical to any idea, or suggestion to enlist in useful labor and earn their living by the honest sweat of their brow.

Under the cloak of the opposition party, this element, who forced our country into the Great War against the will of the people, who caused the shedding of rivers of blood of the Turkish youth to satisfy the criminal ambition of Enver Pasha, has, in a cowardly fashion, intrigued against my life, as well as the lives of the members of my cabinet.

I would have more respect for them had they planned an armed revolution, taking the field in a manly fashion, to overthrow my government. But being conscious of the fact that they could not muster out even one regiment to give battle to the zealous adherents to, and upholders of, the glorious republic, they have resorted to beastial methods of assassination. They have hired murderers and even debauched women to commit their murderous acts.

In the middle of June last I had planned to make a tour of the country. My itinerary was published. A group of these assassins, placed on the route of procession, were to “rain” hand grenades at the automobiles which were to carry me and my staff.

They went even further and seduced a woman who had been for years identified with my cause and who had been my loyal political friend and on occasion, even adviser. They induced this woman to accept the reprehensible assignment to present me with a bouquet which concealed a bomb that would, on my receiving it, explode and obliterate everyone in sight. This ill-advised woman deserves pity, for she was made to believe that she would thus sacrifice her own life for the good of the fatherland. I was the enemy of the nation. She will be forgiven for her part in the plot, for she conscience-stricken, confessed to the proper authorities in time for me to cancel my intended tour.

[hitite]

I have read this many times and am highly scpetical about it. Not because he admits to the genocide but because of the overall style, the language. It sounds far away from the usual Kemal.

[muratkanat6907]

Yavrum, Hovik, Elendidl - all very good points...been a long time since this forum had 3 posts (from diff authors) in a row that were halfway decent...

Oh and Emrah - still no hate - but I should have added comical/foolish and insensitive to my description of you...

And by your logic I supose that the Europeans cannot be held account (or should even acknowledge or be apologetic) for any of the evils they inflicted upon the natives of the Americas, Africa, Australia and Asia because of all the nasty things the Mongols had done to other peoples at some time or another - eh?

So if we take the Turks and Armenians and compare them to White Americans (former masters) and Black Americans (former slaves) - considering their relative power positions in society and considering which group had commited abuses upon which other - whom do you might think might be the counterpart of the other?

As far as I know Mongols are not Turk!
just for your attention...

[muratkanat6907]

This is a variation upon an old post.

For me, it is inconsequential whether Turks call it genocide or another name. What many Armenians realize on this board, and reading about recent events, is that I think there is a wilingness for is growing Turks to revisit history and look at the history in a critical way. We will probably never come to an agreement and it is an important step.


For Armenians:

1. Turks are not subhuman.
2. There are good Turks and bad Turks just like any other nation.
3. Whether we agree or not, Turks, by their frame of reference, suffered the dissolution of an empire and feel surrounded by hostile enemies or are atleast told so (Serves Syndrome- it is also a way for the government to control the masses). They still have the feeling that people want to carve them up and are not trusting of outsiders and they feel ganged up on. Many see this a paranoia while Turks see this a caution. What happened to the Turks in the Balkans prior to WWI was tragic.
4. They see that there are Armenians with land claims and this is threatening
5. Just as there are some Turks today who deny the Genocide and have ancestors who took part in those events there are also Turks whose ancestors helped save their Armenians friends and neighbors and yet still deny the Genocide.
6. Turks do not learn very much about Armenians. Their textbooks which are uniform and government approved say very little and it is mostly negative. They hardly know us anymore if at all. Thus we are seen merely as guests in what is our original homeland.
7. When Turks come into contact with Armenians, it is usually the Istanbul Armenians (bolsahay) and they have varying degrees of outspokeness on the issue depending on how secure they feel - think of canaries in a cage.
8. The first that many Turks learn about the Genocide is when the travel outside of Turkey and suddenly see their people being accussed of something that most Turks know nothing about, something from the past they don't feel repsonsible for.
9. The ASALA did not help this issue. It may have alerted the world to the issue but it only hardened the offical position of Turkey and gave the Turkish authorities even more of an excuse to stonewall the issue.
10. Turks have just as much pride and love for their families as Armenians.
11. Most people do not like to focus on the negative events of their nations history. Nobody wants to re-visit a nightmare. Although I believe all humans/nations/races, etc. can at one time or another act as beasts, nobody will ever willingly admit that they are capable of this or even fathom such capability.
12. The Turks who are not the first or the last to commit a genocide. It has most certainly happened since and will continue to happen because while human beings can demonstrate acts of love and compassion so can we also commit acts so cloaked in hate and savagery. Many of the EU states who remind Turkey of Armenian Genocide had themselves comitted genocide at one time or another but it should also be noted that by and large, they openly discuss it and when they deny it they look petty and stupid.
13. Culturally Turks take a more collective view and are more oriented towards the group and Armenians are fiercely individualistic. Both traits have advantages and disadvantages.This is a very significant characteristic that should not be overlooked.
14. Turks tend to be very nationalistic and have a lot of pride in their country to the point or worship. This is a good and bad thing (great if you're nationalistic and horrible is you're a liberal)
15. Many Turks don't really care about the issue because it means nothing to them as they struggle to make it day to day.


For Turks:

1. Whether you agree it was genocide or not, Armenians were murdered and cast out of their homeland; the place where their language, church, and culture was born and a place where they lived for thousands of years and this is extremely traumatic. Many of our family structures were ripped apart or destroyed wholesale.
2. The overwhelming majority of Armenians did not commit treason against the Ottoman state. It should also be noted that in certain areas in the Empire things denigenerated to the point were Armenians had no choice but to be slaughtered or defend themselves and many were eventually killed anyway.
3. Armenians, Assyrians, and Anatolian Greeks became scapegoats during the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. This is almost an enevitable consequence especially as reactionary and ultra-nationalist elements took control of the CUP.
4. Contrary to Turkish belief, all was not well in the Empire prior to the 1870's, at least if you were a relgious minority. It mostly depended on who was the Sultan at the time and how benevolent they were (an also on the disposition of local vali's and kamikams). Let's not forget that Armenians were dhimmis, paid three times the amount of taxes not including taxes that had to sometimes had to be paid to Kurdish brigands. Armenians were at best, second-class citizens and in the east, were generally robbed and harrassed with impunity. They were expected to be loyal (read: "servile") even under the worst harrasments.
5. Armenians are mercantile people and this has always produced jealousy and hatred among others, especially in Anatolia.
6. The vast majority of Armenians are not Dashnak of Humchak. Most are apolitical. We may not love the Turks but we don't preach hate either.
7. The Armenians view the Russian as the lesser of two evils.
8. Armenians have just as much pride and love for their families as Turks.
9. Just because a Turkish Republic was founded in 1923 as the successor state to the Ottoman Empire, does not mean that the past ceases to exist or is suddenly erased or that some of those responsible did not take part in Ataturks government.
10. There are quite a few Turks who have Armenian grandmothers and other relatives whether they know it or not. The result of the Genocide produced thousands of orphans who were brought into Turkish families.
11. Armenians are not fanatical Christians. We take pride in our own church but as a cosmopolitan and mercantile people, have generally gotten along with Muslims and Jews and respect them. In the past we have had communities in such places as Amsterdam, Madras, Calcutta, Ulan Bator, Crimea, Isfahan, etc. Armenians get along just fine with Persians and Arabs.
12. Armenians have a right to be paranoid of Turkish intentions since any sign of pan-turanism is to them certain death.
13. There are good Armenians and bad Armenians just like any other nation.


The emnity between Turks and Armenians will not fade out soon and sometimes I think it may even grow. Such is life. Heaven will never be created on this earth. Perhaps one day we will have a magnanimous relationship as we are doomed to be neighbors (yes, doomed). But as Emrah stated in his first post where he basically states that such -hatred would lead to war- I would have to counter this by asking what does it say about the Turkish nation that they would attack another nation just because the attackee does not like them?

That was the greatest text ever I've read in this forum.
If both sides change their shoes, this will be a good starting point.

[Gavur]

There are Turkish citizens of all extractions Tatar,chinese,mongol even Black!
we might be forgetting that Turk is not a race but a concept which became an ideal that was invented by Europeans to refer to the non-distinct minoritys of the Ottoman empire and it was adopted by the padisahs who often used it as a slur word like nigger.

[muratkanat6907]

There are Turkish citizens of all extractions Tatar,chinese,mongol even Black!
we might be forgetting that Turk is not a race but a concept which became an ideal that was invented by Europeans to refer to the non-distinct minoritys of the Ottoman empire and it was adopted by the padisahs who often used it as a slur word like nigger.

So all central Asian are Turks?
If yes please tell this to Chinese and Japanese, too.
In Ottoman empire there were Turks, Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, Assyrian, Tatar, Kazakhs, mongols etc... "Turk" is a race coming from Central Asia, it's true that for Europe to name every public coming from east as "Turks". But this is not true.