Tweet
Comments to Fred Reed (Author of "Anatolia Junction"
in ChaptersGlobe forum
Much of the following (5 year old?) exchange discusses some relevant facts of the Genocide issue and the patterns of Turkish denial:
Me:
Fred - I am very disappointed with your answer to Armen's post. That you could attempt to whitewash the Genocide of the Armenian nation and the over 1 million Armenians killed by the Turks (in 1915) based on this unsubstantiated claim by the Turks (which did not stand up during or after World War I) of any significant Anatolian Armenian cooperation with the Russians is most sad. Additionally, are you an expert concerning the events that occurred in Van during and prior to May 1915? Somehow I think not. If so you would be aware that the Armenians of Van were defending themselves and their families from massacre by the Turkish government and they managed to hold off superior Turkish forces who relentlessly bombarded the city until they were relieved by Russians/Russian Armenians who rushed in to save them. Certainly some Russian Armenian forces (there were many Armenians who were Russian citizens as well) committed wartime atrocities. However, in no way are these isolated acts comparable to the government sponsored and organized slaughter of the innocent Armenian nation - comparable in a great many respects to the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews and other non-Germans of WWII (as the Turks killed innocent Greeks and Assyrians whose members were not involved in any conflict with Turkey during WWI). I see your comments as a shameful attempt to deny the Genocide of Armenians and others during this period by a Turkish regime that was just as racist and evil of that of Hitler and the Nazis. These are fully accepted facts. Please consider more carefully what you say in this regard. I too have been to Turkey and experienced the hospitality of the Turks and the beauty and cultures of Anatolia - yet I cannot deny the history. The fact that the Turks refuse to admit these past crimes is a continuing issue. Would Germany have been allowed into NATO or the EU etc. if its current government denied the holocaust and attempted to justify their criminal actions against the Jews based on the fact that some Jews resisted their earlier oppression or that American, British and Russian Jews fought with their own nations against Nazi Germany in WWII? I am all in favor of Turkish membership into the EU - very much so. However, the past must not be forgotten and whitewashed for current political and economic expediency - as the West has allowed Turkey to do since the end of WWI. How can any human beings allow the continuation of this denial and the villains of history to escape justice and recognition of their crimes? Turkey must come to terms with its past (and modify its current political repression of Kurds and internal free speech and allow greater political diversity) and stop this reprehensible campaign to falsely and unjustifiably blame Armenians for their own destruction. That you would contribute to this is most sad.
Fred - the more I re-read your reply to Armen the more it Irks me. You state that "several respectable historians refrain from using the term "genocide" to describe the cataclysmic events that took place in eastern Anatolia during WWI." Yes perhaps, but several hundred respectable academics recently called upon Turkey to recognize the Genocide of Armenians - etc. David Irving is considered respectable by some as well - the fact that he isn't considered such by most now is the same standard that needs to be applied to those who attempt to whitewash the facts concerning the deliberate and successful genocide of the Armenians by the Turks in WWI.
You state: "The misfortune of the Armenians was to ally with the invading Russians, notably in the attack on Van. Their behavior at that time was little better than that of the Ottoman forces, by then led by men committed to an exclusivist Turkish national ideology" Well the Armenians of Anatolia in no significant way allied with the Russians - in fact they declared that they would support their own nation (Ottoman Turkey) and it was the Turks who drafted then slaughtered and or forced into slavery the Armenian men who were in the Ottoman army. There were few men of fighting age available in Anatolia to resist the Turks - thus the ease they were able to lead the remaining families off to the slaughter. And while some Russian Armenians may have been involved in massacres of Muslim civilians (known occurrences 1917 and after) (as other military forces composed of young and angry men have done in nearly all wars) there was no organized campaign of slaughter as was undertaken by the admittedly (on your part) (and certainly well known) racist/nationalist ideologues - the Young Turks - who led Turkey into the war and pursued their policy of Turkification during it. In no way can some isolated instances of misbehavior among certain Russian Armenian forces (which occurred well after 1915 and the annihilation of the Armenian population in Anatolia) be in any way equated to the Genocidal campaign by the Young Turks. Certainly Turkish civilians also suffered during the terrible war - but not due to Armenians (be real) - it was the terrible policies of the Young Turks themselves - stripping the lands bare to furnish their armies and slaughtering the most productive agricultural producers - the Armenians - which can account for the greatest number of Muslim civilian casualties. Raiding Kurds and Chettes (primarily Circassains) also affected some Muslims as well as Armenians during this period. You vastly overestimate any Armenian resistance or complicity with the Russians during this period - as it is clear you accept the current Turkish propaganda - most sad and dishonest on your part. This calls into question your overall credibility (a shame since your book sounds interesting, insightful and relevant). I would like to see you clarify your position on this issue and apologize to the Armenians whom you have offended. Few other peoples in the modern era have suffered as they - without cause - and fewer still have had the perpetrators of the crimes against them defended, glorified and apologized for as the Turkish criminals who perpetrated the Genocide against the Armenians have been.
Fred Reed:
Dear Winston,
I was working on a reply when your second posting came up. Yes, please read Anatolia Junction for a full understanding of my position.
Briefly, I must decline the accusation of whitewashing genocide, and will certainly offer no apologies to anyone for what I write. I stand by every word of my book, the principal target of which is the perverted Turkish national militarism that has deprived a country of much of its past, concealed its crimes toward others, first and foremost the Armenians, and continues to benefit from a truly extraordinary tolerance, notably from the US.
That the policy of the CUP was to dispossess and assimilate the Armenians of the empire is clear. That a war context prevailed throughout Anatolia is equally clear. That after conquering Van, Russian and Armenian troops engaged in a campaign of massacre (or counter-massacre, if you will) in Anatolia is beyond dispute.
That the Armenians were the losers--tragically—-is incontrovertible: one need only visit Erzerum, Bitlis, Diyarbakir and Urfa to atttest to that. That there is still controversy on how these events are to be interpreted is equally clear. To say so is to describe a state of fact.
But it seems that for the sake of historical accuracy, we must admit that there was an Armenian national project, and that this project had the support of the Entente Powers which were all too keen to dismember the Empire. To say so is to justify nothing, simply to underline the immense complexity of events.
At the end of the day, I was drawn to the honorable behavior of Said Nursi, who, having fought the Armenian irregulars at the head of a "fundamentalist" militia, advocated that captives, women and children be given safe conduct out of the military zone. Of course, the virulent Turkish nationalists of the CUP took no such action. As I document, they did quite the opposite.
In any case, thanks for spending time on this debate. I hope you finally read the book.
Me:
Fred, while your claims concerning Van may be true (as also I stated) – they are perhaps an exception versus the norm, only part of the story, and should also be viewed in context with what was occurring to the Armenians in the region at that time (which you fail to do). Also, I acknowledge the interest among the Entente regarding Ottoman territory and a certain degree of interest (related and for other reasons) of supporting the concept of an Armenian homeland. However, like Van these are secondary points to the great crime of Genocide committed by the Young Turks against the Armenians. For this there is incontrovertible proof. In your response to Armen you immediately sidestep this very serious and relevant issue and instead play the denialist game as practiced by the Turks to divert attention away from the very real crimes of the Turks (the relevant issue here) and tragedy of the Armenians by focusing on what really amounts to a side story – perhaps true but certainly out of context and of overblown importance. Does the fact that some Armenians pursued nationalistic agendas or that these and other Armenians fought to defend themselves justify the type of Genocide/Massacre/Deportation and slaughter of innocents on a nationwide scale just because of their ethnicity? If you answer yes then you are saying you would support the Nazi slaughter of the Jews for exactly the same reasons and circumstance. Do you wish me to elaborate on these parallels or can you just except them at face value at this time? To do as you have done – and fail to acknowledge the very real act(s) of Genocide against the Armenians and the fact that these unrepentant crimes are and should be significant factors for consideration of Turkey’s EU membership does both the (EU membership) issue and the memory of the slain innocent Armenians, the descendents of the lucky survivors, and all decent justice seeking humans a great disservice. I may read your book – as the issues are relevant – and in it you may discuss the Genocide and continuing cover-up in context (we shall see) – but unless you acknowledge that you have diverted discussion in a somewhat dishonest way here – I shall certainly not respect you as a person.
Fred Reed:
This reply is both to my indefatigable correspondent Winston, and to Richard whose friends sought to recover their properties and were told to leave. (I assume they did so.)
At last, we are on firmer ground. Let me make it quite clear that I consider the CUP leaders to be a gang of thugs and murderers. Though they saw themselves as defenders of the empire, they were in essence enlightened bandits. In comparison with them, the worst of the Armenians were choirboys. There can be no doubt that the complex and tragic events of 1915 must be laid primarily at the feet of the criminal triumvirate that ruled from Istanbul, and to a lesser extent at those of its German advisors, notably general Liman Von Sanders.
Who would disagree that unless official Turkey (not the hidden Turkey I discovered, where awareness of these events is nuanced and full of compassion) answers fully for its exterminationist policies it is not fit to join the EU. What I have always found curious is that the real deniers are to be be located in Washington, where the Turkey-Israel strategic alliance was hatched. Try asking them about the fate of the Armenians and enjoy the shuffling of shoes and the clearing of throats.
In substituting a unitary national-military state for a multinational empire, the CUP and its Kemalists successors did violence not only to the previous "subject peoples." They did extreme violence to the Turks themselves, burdening them with a poisoned heritage that cannot be explained away except through lies and half-truths. Said Nursi, for whom I gained great admiration, was saying this at the time: one of the few who dared to do so.
Winston, you persist, unfairly, in confusing my insistence on seeing a true tragedy in its full horror, with the systematic concealment of the past--or should I say, the attempt to eradicate the past--by the Turkish state. For a person of your obvious historical knowledge and sensitivity, this is surprising. I still caution you to judge the book by its full text. Given your openess to argument, I suspect you will and I look forward to more comment and criticism.
Fred Reed
in ChaptersGlobe forumMuch of the following (5 year old?) exchange discusses some relevant facts of the Genocide issue and the patterns of Turkish denial:
Me:
Fred - I am very disappointed with your answer to Armen's post. That you could attempt to whitewash the Genocide of the Armenian nation and the over 1 million Armenians killed by the Turks (in 1915) based on this unsubstantiated claim by the Turks (which did not stand up during or after World War I) of any significant Anatolian Armenian cooperation with the Russians is most sad. Additionally, are you an expert concerning the events that occurred in Van during and prior to May 1915? Somehow I think not. If so you would be aware that the Armenians of Van were defending themselves and their families from massacre by the Turkish government and they managed to hold off superior Turkish forces who relentlessly bombarded the city until they were relieved by Russians/Russian Armenians who rushed in to save them. Certainly some Russian Armenian forces (there were many Armenians who were Russian citizens as well) committed wartime atrocities. However, in no way are these isolated acts comparable to the government sponsored and organized slaughter of the innocent Armenian nation - comparable in a great many respects to the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews and other non-Germans of WWII (as the Turks killed innocent Greeks and Assyrians whose members were not involved in any conflict with Turkey during WWI). I see your comments as a shameful attempt to deny the Genocide of Armenians and others during this period by a Turkish regime that was just as racist and evil of that of Hitler and the Nazis. These are fully accepted facts. Please consider more carefully what you say in this regard. I too have been to Turkey and experienced the hospitality of the Turks and the beauty and cultures of Anatolia - yet I cannot deny the history. The fact that the Turks refuse to admit these past crimes is a continuing issue. Would Germany have been allowed into NATO or the EU etc. if its current government denied the holocaust and attempted to justify their criminal actions against the Jews based on the fact that some Jews resisted their earlier oppression or that American, British and Russian Jews fought with their own nations against Nazi Germany in WWII? I am all in favor of Turkish membership into the EU - very much so. However, the past must not be forgotten and whitewashed for current political and economic expediency - as the West has allowed Turkey to do since the end of WWI. How can any human beings allow the continuation of this denial and the villains of history to escape justice and recognition of their crimes? Turkey must come to terms with its past (and modify its current political repression of Kurds and internal free speech and allow greater political diversity) and stop this reprehensible campaign to falsely and unjustifiably blame Armenians for their own destruction. That you would contribute to this is most sad.
Fred - the more I re-read your reply to Armen the more it Irks me. You state that "several respectable historians refrain from using the term "genocide" to describe the cataclysmic events that took place in eastern Anatolia during WWI." Yes perhaps, but several hundred respectable academics recently called upon Turkey to recognize the Genocide of Armenians - etc. David Irving is considered respectable by some as well - the fact that he isn't considered such by most now is the same standard that needs to be applied to those who attempt to whitewash the facts concerning the deliberate and successful genocide of the Armenians by the Turks in WWI.
You state: "The misfortune of the Armenians was to ally with the invading Russians, notably in the attack on Van. Their behavior at that time was little better than that of the Ottoman forces, by then led by men committed to an exclusivist Turkish national ideology" Well the Armenians of Anatolia in no significant way allied with the Russians - in fact they declared that they would support their own nation (Ottoman Turkey) and it was the Turks who drafted then slaughtered and or forced into slavery the Armenian men who were in the Ottoman army. There were few men of fighting age available in Anatolia to resist the Turks - thus the ease they were able to lead the remaining families off to the slaughter. And while some Russian Armenians may have been involved in massacres of Muslim civilians (known occurrences 1917 and after) (as other military forces composed of young and angry men have done in nearly all wars) there was no organized campaign of slaughter as was undertaken by the admittedly (on your part) (and certainly well known) racist/nationalist ideologues - the Young Turks - who led Turkey into the war and pursued their policy of Turkification during it. In no way can some isolated instances of misbehavior among certain Russian Armenian forces (which occurred well after 1915 and the annihilation of the Armenian population in Anatolia) be in any way equated to the Genocidal campaign by the Young Turks. Certainly Turkish civilians also suffered during the terrible war - but not due to Armenians (be real) - it was the terrible policies of the Young Turks themselves - stripping the lands bare to furnish their armies and slaughtering the most productive agricultural producers - the Armenians - which can account for the greatest number of Muslim civilian casualties. Raiding Kurds and Chettes (primarily Circassains) also affected some Muslims as well as Armenians during this period. You vastly overestimate any Armenian resistance or complicity with the Russians during this period - as it is clear you accept the current Turkish propaganda - most sad and dishonest on your part. This calls into question your overall credibility (a shame since your book sounds interesting, insightful and relevant). I would like to see you clarify your position on this issue and apologize to the Armenians whom you have offended. Few other peoples in the modern era have suffered as they - without cause - and fewer still have had the perpetrators of the crimes against them defended, glorified and apologized for as the Turkish criminals who perpetrated the Genocide against the Armenians have been.
Fred Reed:
Dear Winston,
I was working on a reply when your second posting came up. Yes, please read Anatolia Junction for a full understanding of my position.
Briefly, I must decline the accusation of whitewashing genocide, and will certainly offer no apologies to anyone for what I write. I stand by every word of my book, the principal target of which is the perverted Turkish national militarism that has deprived a country of much of its past, concealed its crimes toward others, first and foremost the Armenians, and continues to benefit from a truly extraordinary tolerance, notably from the US.
That the policy of the CUP was to dispossess and assimilate the Armenians of the empire is clear. That a war context prevailed throughout Anatolia is equally clear. That after conquering Van, Russian and Armenian troops engaged in a campaign of massacre (or counter-massacre, if you will) in Anatolia is beyond dispute.
That the Armenians were the losers--tragically—-is incontrovertible: one need only visit Erzerum, Bitlis, Diyarbakir and Urfa to atttest to that. That there is still controversy on how these events are to be interpreted is equally clear. To say so is to describe a state of fact.
But it seems that for the sake of historical accuracy, we must admit that there was an Armenian national project, and that this project had the support of the Entente Powers which were all too keen to dismember the Empire. To say so is to justify nothing, simply to underline the immense complexity of events.
At the end of the day, I was drawn to the honorable behavior of Said Nursi, who, having fought the Armenian irregulars at the head of a "fundamentalist" militia, advocated that captives, women and children be given safe conduct out of the military zone. Of course, the virulent Turkish nationalists of the CUP took no such action. As I document, they did quite the opposite.
In any case, thanks for spending time on this debate. I hope you finally read the book.
Me:
Fred, while your claims concerning Van may be true (as also I stated) – they are perhaps an exception versus the norm, only part of the story, and should also be viewed in context with what was occurring to the Armenians in the region at that time (which you fail to do). Also, I acknowledge the interest among the Entente regarding Ottoman territory and a certain degree of interest (related and for other reasons) of supporting the concept of an Armenian homeland. However, like Van these are secondary points to the great crime of Genocide committed by the Young Turks against the Armenians. For this there is incontrovertible proof. In your response to Armen you immediately sidestep this very serious and relevant issue and instead play the denialist game as practiced by the Turks to divert attention away from the very real crimes of the Turks (the relevant issue here) and tragedy of the Armenians by focusing on what really amounts to a side story – perhaps true but certainly out of context and of overblown importance. Does the fact that some Armenians pursued nationalistic agendas or that these and other Armenians fought to defend themselves justify the type of Genocide/Massacre/Deportation and slaughter of innocents on a nationwide scale just because of their ethnicity? If you answer yes then you are saying you would support the Nazi slaughter of the Jews for exactly the same reasons and circumstance. Do you wish me to elaborate on these parallels or can you just except them at face value at this time? To do as you have done – and fail to acknowledge the very real act(s) of Genocide against the Armenians and the fact that these unrepentant crimes are and should be significant factors for consideration of Turkey’s EU membership does both the (EU membership) issue and the memory of the slain innocent Armenians, the descendents of the lucky survivors, and all decent justice seeking humans a great disservice. I may read your book – as the issues are relevant – and in it you may discuss the Genocide and continuing cover-up in context (we shall see) – but unless you acknowledge that you have diverted discussion in a somewhat dishonest way here – I shall certainly not respect you as a person.
Fred Reed:
This reply is both to my indefatigable correspondent Winston, and to Richard whose friends sought to recover their properties and were told to leave. (I assume they did so.)
At last, we are on firmer ground. Let me make it quite clear that I consider the CUP leaders to be a gang of thugs and murderers. Though they saw themselves as defenders of the empire, they were in essence enlightened bandits. In comparison with them, the worst of the Armenians were choirboys. There can be no doubt that the complex and tragic events of 1915 must be laid primarily at the feet of the criminal triumvirate that ruled from Istanbul, and to a lesser extent at those of its German advisors, notably general Liman Von Sanders.
Who would disagree that unless official Turkey (not the hidden Turkey I discovered, where awareness of these events is nuanced and full of compassion) answers fully for its exterminationist policies it is not fit to join the EU. What I have always found curious is that the real deniers are to be be located in Washington, where the Turkey-Israel strategic alliance was hatched. Try asking them about the fate of the Armenians and enjoy the shuffling of shoes and the clearing of throats.
In substituting a unitary national-military state for a multinational empire, the CUP and its Kemalists successors did violence not only to the previous "subject peoples." They did extreme violence to the Turks themselves, burdening them with a poisoned heritage that cannot be explained away except through lies and half-truths. Said Nursi, for whom I gained great admiration, was saying this at the time: one of the few who dared to do so.
Winston, you persist, unfairly, in confusing my insistence on seeing a true tragedy in its full horror, with the systematic concealment of the past--or should I say, the attempt to eradicate the past--by the Turkish state. For a person of your obvious historical knowledge and sensitivity, this is surprising. I still caution you to judge the book by its full text. Given your openess to argument, I suspect you will and I look forward to more comment and criticism.
Fred Reed
Comment