Tweet
Commentary: Armenian Patriarch of Turkey in On Turkish Propaganda Tour Once Again
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
This week Mesrob Mutafyan, the Armenian Patriarch of Turkey, is making his
second visit to the United States in the past 6 months.
During his highly controversial first visit in April, the Patriarch
participated in a conference organized by a Turkish group at the Southern Methodist
University, in Dallas, Texas. The conference was titled, "Turkish-Armenian
Question: What to do Now?"
Despite intensive efforts by various Armenian-American groups to persuade
the Patriarch not to speak at that conference, he went ahead with his speaking
engagement. All other Armenian invitees, for one reason or another, refusedto
take part. The concern was that the Turks would use the conference as a ploy
to convince the outside world that Armenians and Turks were "reconciling" with
each other, and therefore, there was no need to pressure Turkey into genocide
recognition.
Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, the Primate of the Armenian Church of America
(Eastern Diocese), was so incensed by the Patriarch's planned participation
that he wrote to University officials objecting to its sponsorship of this
politically tendentious and one-sided "Armenian-Turkish dialogue." The University
complied with the Primate's request and withdrew its support from the
conference. Archbishop Barsamian rightly pointed out that Patriarch Mutafyan "has a
very limited ability to freely express his true thoughts and concerns because of
oppressive Turkish free-speech laws." The Primate aptly described the
Patriarch as "a virtual 'prisoner of conscience' of the Turkish government."
Interestingly, the Patriarch repeated word for word in Dallas what he had
said a year earlier during a similar conference held at Erciyes University in
Kayseri, Turkey. The April 2006 conference was entitled: "The Art of Living
Together in Ottoman Society: The Example of Turkish-Armenian Relations."
Patriarch Mutafyan will most probably repeat the same remarks during his
talk on September 20, at the Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. The
sponsors of both the April and September conferences are affiliated with the
Islamic Fethullah Gulen group.
To gain an advance insight into what the Patriarch might say this week,
here are some excerpts of his previously delivered talks in Kayseri and Dallas
which consist of some straight talk mixed with words meant to appease Turkish
officials.
"It is certainly not possible to idealize every phase in the history of
Ottoman-Armenian relations and to say that Armenians never had any problems.
Being Christians, the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire were never first class
citizens. And they certainly did suffer discrimination. However, we know that the
first acquaintance between Turks and Armenians dates back to at least 1300
years agoâ=80¦. In this long history of commercial and political interactions between
neighbors, there are relatively few instances where we observe exchanges of
physical violence," the Patriarch said.
He then went on to say that "especially towards the end of the 19th century
there was an increase in tension in relations, whether responsibility for
this was due to the Ottoman government, or the German, American, French, British
and especially Russian governments, Armenian political parties, or even the
Armenian Patriarchs of Istanbul of that period, who discharged their obligations
under the surveillance of the Temporal Affairs Council that then consisted of
Armenian secularists in Turkey. Even if the various parties were not all
equally responsible, it is not a moral approach in view of the painful
after-effects for any one of them to deny any accountability in the development of these
events, or to place all the responsibility on the other parties."
After several Turkish propagandists delivered their talks at the Dallas
conference, the Armenian Patriarch responded by making the following statement
outside of his written text: "Did some Armenian political parties promote armed
rebellion in the Armenian community? They did. In some areas, did armed
Armenian gangs work together with the Russian army? They did. But the Government of
the Committee for Union and Progress, being in charge of the country, is
chiefly responsible for the painful events that occurred and the great suffering
that was endured. If you do not hold the government in charge of the behavior of
the country as responsible for that behavior, then whom will you hold
responsible? Instead of eliminating in their local areas the armed Armenianfactions
who were in rebellion, the Government of the Committee for Union and Progress
sent all Armenians in the Ottoman Empire on a sort of death march to the
Syrian Desert; it sentenced them to death. Therefore this party is chiefly culpable
for the 1915 events."
A day before his Georgetown speech this week, the Armenian Patriarch is
invited to participate at the 2nd Congressional Interfaith and Intercultural
Ramadan Iftar Dinner on Capitol Hill, where he will speak along with several other
clergymen from various faiths.
There has been some speculation as to who arranged for the Armenian
Patriarch to come to Washington, D.C., shortly before the anticipated vote in the
House of Representatives on the Armenian Genocide resolution and less than a
month before the Pontifical visit of His Holiness Karekin II to the nation's
capital? Many see the sinister hand of the Turkish government orchestratingthe
Patriarch's speaking engagements, using the connections of high-powered lobbying
firms hired by Ankara.
This writer has repeatedly urged the Armenian Patriarch to stay away from
involvement in political matters and instead tend to the spiritual needs ofhis
flock. He must at all cost resist the pressures exerted upon him by Turkish
officials, in order not to allow them to use him as a propaganda tool serving
Turkey's denialist agenda.
In the meantime, Armenian religious and secular leaders have an obligation
to point out that the Patriarch does not speak for the Armenian Church and
that his political statements are made under Turkish pressure and do not reflect
his true views on the Armenian Genocide.
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
This week Mesrob Mutafyan, the Armenian Patriarch of Turkey, is making his
second visit to the United States in the past 6 months.
During his highly controversial first visit in April, the Patriarch
participated in a conference organized by a Turkish group at the Southern Methodist
University, in Dallas, Texas. The conference was titled, "Turkish-Armenian
Question: What to do Now?"
Despite intensive efforts by various Armenian-American groups to persuade
the Patriarch not to speak at that conference, he went ahead with his speaking
engagement. All other Armenian invitees, for one reason or another, refusedto
take part. The concern was that the Turks would use the conference as a ploy
to convince the outside world that Armenians and Turks were "reconciling" with
each other, and therefore, there was no need to pressure Turkey into genocide
recognition.
Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, the Primate of the Armenian Church of America
(Eastern Diocese), was so incensed by the Patriarch's planned participation
that he wrote to University officials objecting to its sponsorship of this
politically tendentious and one-sided "Armenian-Turkish dialogue." The University
complied with the Primate's request and withdrew its support from the
conference. Archbishop Barsamian rightly pointed out that Patriarch Mutafyan "has a
very limited ability to freely express his true thoughts and concerns because of
oppressive Turkish free-speech laws." The Primate aptly described the
Patriarch as "a virtual 'prisoner of conscience' of the Turkish government."
Interestingly, the Patriarch repeated word for word in Dallas what he had
said a year earlier during a similar conference held at Erciyes University in
Kayseri, Turkey. The April 2006 conference was entitled: "The Art of Living
Together in Ottoman Society: The Example of Turkish-Armenian Relations."
Patriarch Mutafyan will most probably repeat the same remarks during his
talk on September 20, at the Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. The
sponsors of both the April and September conferences are affiliated with the
Islamic Fethullah Gulen group.
To gain an advance insight into what the Patriarch might say this week,
here are some excerpts of his previously delivered talks in Kayseri and Dallas
which consist of some straight talk mixed with words meant to appease Turkish
officials.
"It is certainly not possible to idealize every phase in the history of
Ottoman-Armenian relations and to say that Armenians never had any problems.
Being Christians, the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire were never first class
citizens. And they certainly did suffer discrimination. However, we know that the
first acquaintance between Turks and Armenians dates back to at least 1300
years agoâ=80¦. In this long history of commercial and political interactions between
neighbors, there are relatively few instances where we observe exchanges of
physical violence," the Patriarch said.
He then went on to say that "especially towards the end of the 19th century
there was an increase in tension in relations, whether responsibility for
this was due to the Ottoman government, or the German, American, French, British
and especially Russian governments, Armenian political parties, or even the
Armenian Patriarchs of Istanbul of that period, who discharged their obligations
under the surveillance of the Temporal Affairs Council that then consisted of
Armenian secularists in Turkey. Even if the various parties were not all
equally responsible, it is not a moral approach in view of the painful
after-effects for any one of them to deny any accountability in the development of these
events, or to place all the responsibility on the other parties."
After several Turkish propagandists delivered their talks at the Dallas
conference, the Armenian Patriarch responded by making the following statement
outside of his written text: "Did some Armenian political parties promote armed
rebellion in the Armenian community? They did. In some areas, did armed
Armenian gangs work together with the Russian army? They did. But the Government of
the Committee for Union and Progress, being in charge of the country, is
chiefly responsible for the painful events that occurred and the great suffering
that was endured. If you do not hold the government in charge of the behavior of
the country as responsible for that behavior, then whom will you hold
responsible? Instead of eliminating in their local areas the armed Armenianfactions
who were in rebellion, the Government of the Committee for Union and Progress
sent all Armenians in the Ottoman Empire on a sort of death march to the
Syrian Desert; it sentenced them to death. Therefore this party is chiefly culpable
for the 1915 events."
A day before his Georgetown speech this week, the Armenian Patriarch is
invited to participate at the 2nd Congressional Interfaith and Intercultural
Ramadan Iftar Dinner on Capitol Hill, where he will speak along with several other
clergymen from various faiths.
There has been some speculation as to who arranged for the Armenian
Patriarch to come to Washington, D.C., shortly before the anticipated vote in the
House of Representatives on the Armenian Genocide resolution and less than a
month before the Pontifical visit of His Holiness Karekin II to the nation's
capital? Many see the sinister hand of the Turkish government orchestratingthe
Patriarch's speaking engagements, using the connections of high-powered lobbying
firms hired by Ankara.
This writer has repeatedly urged the Armenian Patriarch to stay away from
involvement in political matters and instead tend to the spiritual needs ofhis
flock. He must at all cost resist the pressures exerted upon him by Turkish
officials, in order not to allow them to use him as a propaganda tool serving
Turkey's denialist agenda.
In the meantime, Armenian religious and secular leaders have an obligation
to point out that the Patriarch does not speak for the Armenian Church and
that his political statements are made under Turkish pressure and do not reflect
his true views on the Armenian Genocide.
Comment