Since it appeared,has this republic tortured to its Armenian citizens for their race, like Germans had done to Jews? Has this public tried to destroy Armenians, with a hate, just like Germans and generally Christians did to Jews with a hate of an event of 2000 years ago?
Until late 19th century’s nationalist rebel moves motivated Armenians for independance, had any conflict,fight, opposing massacres happened between Armenians and other Anatolians?
Wasn’t it peaceful as not seen between any other nations, that was between Turks and Armenians, until that years?
Wasn’t 1915 forced move a prevention to a nation of a region, done by Ottoman Government, inside war, because of their behaviour in that war, and a prevention tried to be applied inside worst conditions? Are the deaths and massacres happened between Turks and Armenians in late 19th century and during forced move, cause of an eternal hate and will to annihilate the race, carried by Turks against Armenians ?
So why do we have this defense panic, after almost 100 years ?
Isn’t the crime of genocide, a crime that was defined as ‘ crime against humanity’ in UN General Council,9 December 1948, with an agreement signed by also Turkey? Since it is needed to search for the ‘intention’ ,which is one of the basic notions in law of punishment,
does the intention that the agreement searches exist in 1915 events, the ‘’ intention to destroy a national,ethnic,racial or religius group totally or partially’’ ? For genocide crime, there is no prescription/ time limit, but ,isn’t the principle of ‘not effecting past’ , one of the universal principles of law of punishment, valid for this case too?
Besides, not as a state, but as individual officials, weren’t accused people judged and hung, when all evidance,document and inquiry possibilities were in invaders’ control,right after WW1,in Ottoman times?
So, why is this injection of guilt feeling to all public, done by great states from outside, and some poets and historians from inside?
Subject has already passed the level of history and law , and has become a tedious tool of struggle, inside international politics.
From now on, for such a politicized subject, further from historical arguments, there is a politcal struggle that must be carried continously. Even by hitting disgusting genocides they made to their faces ; what Frenchs did against Huguenots and Algerians, what Americans did to natives and what all colonialists did to Africans.
Mümtaz Soysal
Until late 19th century’s nationalist rebel moves motivated Armenians for independance, had any conflict,fight, opposing massacres happened between Armenians and other Anatolians?
Wasn’t it peaceful as not seen between any other nations, that was between Turks and Armenians, until that years?
Wasn’t 1915 forced move a prevention to a nation of a region, done by Ottoman Government, inside war, because of their behaviour in that war, and a prevention tried to be applied inside worst conditions? Are the deaths and massacres happened between Turks and Armenians in late 19th century and during forced move, cause of an eternal hate and will to annihilate the race, carried by Turks against Armenians ?
So why do we have this defense panic, after almost 100 years ?
Isn’t the crime of genocide, a crime that was defined as ‘ crime against humanity’ in UN General Council,9 December 1948, with an agreement signed by also Turkey? Since it is needed to search for the ‘intention’ ,which is one of the basic notions in law of punishment,
does the intention that the agreement searches exist in 1915 events, the ‘’ intention to destroy a national,ethnic,racial or religius group totally or partially’’ ? For genocide crime, there is no prescription/ time limit, but ,isn’t the principle of ‘not effecting past’ , one of the universal principles of law of punishment, valid for this case too?
Besides, not as a state, but as individual officials, weren’t accused people judged and hung, when all evidance,document and inquiry possibilities were in invaders’ control,right after WW1,in Ottoman times?
So, why is this injection of guilt feeling to all public, done by great states from outside, and some poets and historians from inside?
Subject has already passed the level of history and law , and has become a tedious tool of struggle, inside international politics.
From now on, for such a politicized subject, further from historical arguments, there is a politcal struggle that must be carried continously. Even by hitting disgusting genocides they made to their faces ; what Frenchs did against Huguenots and Algerians, what Americans did to natives and what all colonialists did to Africans.
Mümtaz Soysal
Comment