Tweet
Coming to terms with the events of 1915
President Serge Sargsian categorically rules out historians' commission for 1915
The election of Barack Obama and Joe Biden as president and vice president of the United States has raised the prospect that the United States will stop equivocating about the Armenian Genocide.
Having chosen to resist, tooth-and-nail, acknowledgement of the Genocide, Turkey has used a range of methods. One has been a crude attempt to promote a false, alternate reality. Another has been to use blackmail and intimidation tactics against entities that acknowledge or consider acknowledging the Genocide.
Another method has been to suggest that the jury is still out on whether the events of 1915 constitute genocide. As far back as 1989, when crude denial was still the norm, then-prime minister Turgut Özal promised to open the Ottoman archives. ''We will accept whatever reality emerges from the Ottoman archives,'' Mr. Özal told a news conference on January 4, 1989.
The reality that emerged from the half-hearted opening of the archives was further confirmation of the fact of the Armenian Genocide. It was seen, for example, how Talaat Pasha in 1915 systematically followed the death caravans along the ostensible deportation routes, confirming the numbers of Armenians who had been killed or who had wasted away as the caravans made their way from one district to the next.
Still unwilling to "accept whatever reality emerges," the current prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, tried to use the same tactic again 16 years later. In an April 10, 2005, letter to then-president Robert Kocharian, Mr. Erdogan suggested establishing "a joint group consisting of historians and other experts from our two countries to study the developments and events of 1915."
Had there been any indication that Mr. Erdogan's government wished to come to terms with historical truth, the move could have been interpreted as a message to hard-line nationalist historians: "Go argue your case to the best of your ability, and if you fail, we'll acknowledge the Genocide and blame you for your poor advocacy." In reality, however, Mr. Erdogan was pursuing the same tactic Mr. Özal had pursued: stack a jury, argue that the jury is still out and any recognition of the Genocide is premature.
The Armenian government responded very correctly to the Turkish proposal. This week, in an interview with Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, President Serge Sargsian rightly reiterated that response. "There is no need for it whatsoever" for a historians' commission, he said.
Turkey has long insisted that, as a precondition for the establishment of diplomatic relations and open borders, Armenia should renounce its efforts toward the universal recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
Mr. Sargsian's statement to the German newspaper implies that the Turkish side is now insisting on the historians' commission it proposed in 2005 - understanding that the establishment of such a commission could thwart efforts to see the U.S. administration stop equivocating about the Armenian Genocide.
"We do not put the recognition of the Genocide by Turkey as a precondition for the establishment of bilateral relations. We wish to establish relations, but not at any cost. In the past the European nations did not create any commissions for the establishment of normal relations either. Such a step could also mean an attempt to mislead the international community, especially when the process could last for years."
We believe that this was the correct response.
Scholars have plenty to do
As foreign minister back in 2005, Vartan Oskanian had rightly noted, "Historians have done their job. It remains for Turkey to come to terms with its past and its neighbors."
The focus, we agree, must be on the political will of Turkey and its people to come to terms with the reality of the Genocide and the reality that Armenia and Armenians are their neighbors.
That does not mean, however, that historians have nothing left to do. Indeed, scholars doing their jobs can help Turkey come to terms with its past and its neighbors, and their work can inform the process beyond recognition.
We have in the past suggested some areas of inquiry:
Historians and attorneys need to work in Turkey to track down the history of title deeds to real property throughout Turkey but especially in areas where Armenians were heavily concentrated. We know that contrived laws and rules were put into place to confiscate the property of Armenians. But there's a lot that remains to be learned from case studies of specific areas.
The genocidal policy met some resistance on various levels. Which leaders of the ruling Committee of Union and Progress opposed the policy? Which provincial and district officials refused to fully carry out their orders? Which officers? Which Kurdish tribes helped Armenians? There are numerous stories of Turks who saved Armenians. If Turkey is going to come to terms with its past, it will need new sources of national pride rooted in truth. Such research could be important.
Further documentation of cultural monuments, including ancient churches, needs to be done with an eye to preservation.
The pages of this newspaper remain open to a further discussion of research on the Armenian Genocide. Whether or not you're a historian, write in with your thoughts and ideas. The address is [email protected]
Comment