Turkish Historian Halil Berktay - recent Interview (excerpts) - Armenian Genocide

[TurQ]

No thats irrelevant to what I say.

I had never heard of 10,000 before. If it was true it wouldnt make any change at all. As I said before perceptions played a role in this event. It was a pre-emptive measure according to army and CUP.Either us or them perception.

And the perception was the Armenian revolutionaries were to destabilize Eastern Anatolia to make Russian job easy(Antranik Pasha is just one example), depopulate eastern Anatolia and populate only with Armenians. Examples of Bitlis Mus and Van is obvious, the Russians cleared those areas from Turks/Kurds.

I dont know about 10,000 number. As I understand Berktay says that only Armenians(of Anatolian origin) killed 10,000 Turks/Kurds. Turks say every civilian or soldier killed by French, British and Russian forces is shared by Armenians(The ppolitical parties and revolutionaries). You cant say a match is not capable of burning a house or a forest. You cant just say 10,000 at least thats what the official Turkish stand point is. I just wanted to clarify this. And by this I am not argueing anything, just wanted to clarify the official Turkish stand point.

OK let us accept Berktays figures for a moment - (at least) 600,000 Armenians killed versus 10,000 Turks - and Berktay also makes it clear that he believes the majority of the Turks killed were killed after the genocide period in Armenian reprisals...so with these figures accepted are you still trying to tell Armenains that they should be sympathetic in regards to Turksih losses/suffering - that you see as comensurate...and that this "so-called" Armenian rebellion or Armenians killings of Turks or what have you sufficiently justifies - in any manner - the actions taken against them led by the CUP?

[1.5 million]

OK TurQ - I understand your argument here concerning attitudes (still I think you are also attempting to play the "numbers game" which is a straw man denialist tactic BTW) - but OK - let us accept that in some way the presence/existance or suspected/imagined existance of Armenian revolutionaries or Armenian bandits/gangs what have you facotred into the CUP attitudes (along with the experience that such nationalist faction among other ethnicities played roles in their ability to break away from ottomans_ etc - OK. So let us say we accept this contention. That because (at least in part) that CUP members feared that Armenians in the east may have been acting or might potentially act to destabzlize the front to the benefit of the Russians..then OK - you will fill in the blank now - the ______________ actions taken by the CUP can be justified AND I challenge you to then prove that in no way can the actions that were taken not be considered as Genocide in light of the fact that they acted on their suspicions and/or paranoia - etc - Now is this really the point you are trying to make? Even though you deny such - this comes accross as the point you are making. So you say you are familiar with Berktay's position - well you have not really commented on it. If he accepts that it is Genocide -and he is a Turkish historian who is clearly familiar with all elements of the Turkish side of the argument (you would agree no?) - and he clearly has studied this issue - and he fully accepts that it is a Genocide (even being sensitive to the word and to Turkish reaction to use of this word ) - but he says - without hesitation: "It fits the clauses of the 1948 UN convention comprehensively, and in that light, if we are permitted to take those categorizations and apply them to an event that occured 33 years earlier, then we have to say, “Yes, it was genocide”. - then why I ask do you still continue to avoid this acknowledgement - just whjat can be your rational? Unless it is adherence to the Turkish line - and that you somehow either really do blame the victims (in the case the Armenians and provably only the Armenians) or that you accept these Turkish justifications (could you ever agree that killing or attempting to kill all memebers of a particualr race/ethnicity can be justified for any reason?) - If not what is it - are you denying that these killings etc of Armenains ever took place? I can't understand your reluctance...because Armenians wont make protest to the Russians for their deporting Circassians? Just what is your issue?

[1.5 million]

Examples of Bitlis Mus and Van is obvious, the Russians cleared those areas from Turks/Kurds.

I won't argue that the Russians/Cossaks didn't do some terrible things to Muslims in areas that (briefly or otherwise) came under their control - however it is entirely incorrect to contend that these areas were "cleared" of Turks/Kurds...evidence points to large numbers of Turks/Kurds living in these regions throughout this period and for the most part they were unmolested (and were in control of these areas) - in fact eyewitnesses report that Turks/Kurds were slughtering literally tens to hunreds of thousands of Armenains in these very areas - with Harput Province aquiring the name "Slaughterhouse Province). Were Turks/Kurds killed here to? Do I say you are lying - no I do not - some tradgedies did happen for Turks it is true - but regardless of individual tradgedy - such as with yoru family - the overwhelming evidence clearly shows that the area was completley cleansed of Armenians and we have a gret deal of evidence of massive crimes against them - while after those times the arewa was well populated by Turks and Kurds and continues to be...

[TurQ]

During Russian occupation those areas were cleared off from Turks/Muslims, the ones who couldnt escape they were butchered by Russians, the rest escaped and returned back after the Russian retreat. If Russians had stayed in those regions today there wont be any Turk/Kurd there.

Harput, or other inner Anatolian events are due to preemptive measures as I said before. IF the Russian would have reach Elazig or Malatya same things would happen in those areas. Russians were using Armenian existence for their strategy. Depopulate those areas from muslims that they occupy let Armenians rule there. This was their policy, CUP policy was to reverse this.
This is not to justify any event or anything

I won't argue that the Russians/Cossaks didn't do some terrible things to Muslims in areas that (briefly or otherwise) came under their control - however it is entirely incorrect to contend that these areas were "cleared" of Turks/Kurds...evidence points to large numbers of Turks/Kurds living in these regions throughout this period and for the most part they were unmolested (and were in control of these areas) - in fact eyewitnesses report that Turks/Kurds were slughtering literally tens to hunreds of thousands of Armenains in these very areas - with Harput Province aquiring the name "Slaughterhouse Province). Were Turks/Kurds killed here to? Do I say you are lying - no I do not - some tradgedies did happen for Turks it is true - but regardless of individual tradgedy - such as with yoru family - the overwhelming evidence clearly shows that the area was completley cleansed of Armenians and we have a gret deal of evidence of massive crimes against them - while after those times the arewa was well populated by Turks and Kurds and continues to be...

[1.5 million]

This is not to justify any event or anything

OK you say that - and I'm sorry to be harsh - but I am going to keep pushing you - you have to understand that...

Premptive measures...yes - CUP feared that Constantinople would fall and that Anatolia might soon be occupied...so all Armenians must be killed ro driven away - yes? Not just in the east and don't fool yourself to believe this - because iot was not - there was no military rational or necessity -truly - and even the CUP did not believe this - regardless of what you might think - this was a political decision - the decison to depopulate Anatolia of Armenains (and later all Christians) - so there would be no question in the future of anyone but Turks owning the place or having rights or grievances etc - you are agreeing with this yes? BTW - so what was done is the very definition of Genocide - I hope you realize this.

[1.5 million]

Part of why Turks left these areas in advance of the Russians was the rumours spread by Turks themselves (perhaps not without merit due to expericnes in Balkans, N Caucuses and elsewhere and the presence of refugees from these places) - however to accuse Russians of cleansing theseplaces - when in fact it was a refugge tide that left then sweapt back in after Turks reclaimed the area - is not the same thing as if the Russians actually killed everyone there (even if we might suppose that they would - and perhaps this is debatable at least in part) - but no matter - the key thing though is that Armenains were not killing anyone in these places really (OK a few here and there - but really now - do you have any comprehension of what Armenains had been goping thorugh in that regions for the preceeding generations?)

[TurQ]

Rumours? Those people knew pretty well what Russians want to do.
What they had done to Circisians were obvious. Even by fall of 1914 they started clearing off border villiages and towns in Kars etc. Depopulate those villages and towns give them to Armenian control. They consistently pursued this ethnic cleansing in the areas they have reached.

Russian aim was to reach medeterrenian coasts, so this policy of demographically cleansing Turks and Muslims on this path(from KArs to Adana) was obvious. Thats why most of the massacres of Armenians occured east of the line connecting Kars/Trabzon to Adana.

Hopefully Russian and French/British interests collided in caucusia(with british) and south/southeast with French. This relieved Ottoman forces. After some point both sides had some skepticism towards Armenians(that worked against Armenians), even revlutionaries were expelled by Russians later(Erzurum born Antranik was kicked from Russian Army).

Part of why Turks left these areas in advance of the Russians was the rumours spread by Turks themselves (perhaps not without merit due to expericnes in Balkans, N Caucuses and elsewhere and the presence of refugees from these places) - however to accuse Russians of cleansing theseplaces - when in fact it was a refugge tide that left then sweapt back in after Turks reclaimed the area - is not the same thing as if the Russians actually killed everyone there (even if we might suppose that they would - and perhaps this is debatable at least in part) - but no matter - the key thing though is that Armenains were not killing anyone in these places really (OK a few here and there - but really now - do you have any comprehension of what Armenains had been goping thorugh in that regions for the preceeding generations?)

[1.5 million]

Thats why most of the massacres of Armenians occured east of the line connecting Kars/Trabzon to Adana

This is just untrue - did you read my post concerning the Yozgat trials for instance? Was there ever any danger of the Russians reaching this far? etc

You still are justifying. This is dispointing.

And while I will not apologize for the Russians actions/behaviors - you are exaggerating - unlike Anatolia - where there are no Armenians left - none - there are plenty of Turks and Muslims - from Caucuses eastward - and Russians did not clear them out. Russians acted against what they percieved as Muslims who would not submit to their rule. If these Muslim groups accepted Russian domination there was no problem. Again though I will not defend against what atrocities Russians did commit. However you cannot compare or use as justification Russian actiosn for those commited against Armenains by the CUP/Ottomans?Turks - and Armenians from throughout Anatolia were targeted and destroyed and the military escuse/justification had absolutly zero basis.

[Tongue]

Why are you guys arguing about numbers? It's not the number that makes it genocide it's the outcome. Almost all of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire was wiped out, which under the definition, is called genocide. 600 thousand, 1 million, or 5 million, doesn't make much difference, the outcome was genocide.

[1.5 million]

OK here is an exerpt from a yr 2000 interview with Berktay

`Armenians were killed by a special organization'
An interview with Turkish historian Halil Berktay
regarding the Armenian Genocide;
Translated from Turkish exclusively for ANN/Groong
Originally published in "Radikal" newspaper on October 9, 2000

Turkish original available on internet at http://www.radikal.com/tr/2000/10/09/insan/erm.shtml

At that time there were 1 million and 750 thousand Armenians living in
Eastern Anatolia. (my note - this figure is for Eastern Anatolia only - not Anatolia/Ottoman Empire at large) The deportation order issued by the ruling military triumvirate was drawn up so as to include all the Armenians in the region, without exception. These things are documented in writing. There was no mention of massacres or slaughter. The provincial governors and garrison commanders were directed to deport the Armenians to the region south of Turkey's current borders. However, it's clear that, in addition to these official orders, separate, non-written orders were given to the most
rapacious members of the `Teskilat-i Mahsusa' (`Special Organization'), who worshipped violence and were not bound by adherence to any normal moral code.

For the Armenians to be killed?

Yes. Historian Taner Akcam has demonstrated this in a very sound way.
There was on the one hand a legal decision and implementation, and on the
other another mechanism entirely that proceeded in an illegal manner.
How many Armenians died during the deportations?
At least 600 thousand.

How did they die? Who killed them?

Those who issued these orders had them carried out via a special
organization, the Teskilat-i Mahsusa.. Think of it as a combination of the
forces involved in the recent Susurluk scandal and the Turkish Hizballah
organization. It is clear that Bahaettin Sakir, who operated as the
Teskilat-i Mahsusa's man for Enver, Cemal, and Talat, set up death squads in
the region. Some of these people were convicted criminals who were saved from the gallows and released from prison just to carry out such
activities.. Do you know what types of people carried out these crimes? It
was the equivalent of today's `Yesil', Abdullah Catli, and the Turkish
Hizballah organization. The whole affair is that simple and clear.
Bahaittin was just like today's `Yesil' or Catli. In addition to them,
Turkish and Kurdish tribes also attacked the convoys of Armenians being
deported. In addition to these actual massacres, there were the terrible
losses caused by the deportations carred out in appalling conditions of
deprivation. Everywhere in the Western world, there are photographs of these incidents which we can't bear to look at. The first time I encountered
these visual records, I cried and could hardly breathe for several minutes.
They are no different from the images of the concentration camps, or the
massacres in Africa. For there are huge numbers of people in these
pictures
.
Well, didn't the Ottoman state try and punish those officials found guilty
of the deaths of Armenians?

Of course. These massacres were not the work of the regular Ottoman army and bureaucracy. Historically, in such situations, the regular army and
bureaucracy hate and despise those `special teams' and gangs that carry out
such deeds. We can see that the Ottoman army and bureaucracy understood just how terrible a thing this was , that they were repelled at the `special
teams' set up independently of the governors and garrison commanders, and
that there were even governors and commanders who issued an arrest order for Enver and Talat's man Bahaettin Sakir in 1915-16 and tried to capture him.

Did the Ottoman leaders make any statements to defend themselves?

The Ottoman regular army and state bureaucracy, both as a result of the
repugnance it felt toward these events and in order to clear themselves
before the rest of the world, tried as best it could to capture, try, and
punish those responsible for this disaster. And there were definitely those
who were punished. After the end of the war in 1918 and the Ottoman defeat
and subsequent flight of Enver, Cemal, and Talat, who were the primary ones
responsible, the parliament (Meclis-i Mebusan) established an investigatory
commission just for this purpose. There was later a military trial in
Istanbul. This was a famous trial. Books on it have been published in
English and Turkish.

What were the losses of the Muslim population in that area during this same
period?

They may be 10,000 or 20,000. (ny note: elsewhere i have seen him say "no more then 10,000) But it's not a question of `They only killed a
few, and the Ottomans killed a lot'. The issue is as follows: The
activities of the Armenian guerrilla bands were generally localized,
small-scale, and isolated. But for hundreds of thousands to die, there would have to be a population of this size, which couldn't be attained merely by wandering around the villages and hamlets. In addition, it's deceptive to
turn the matter into a question as to whether or not Enver and Talat Pasha
gave a written order to the `Yesil' or Catli of the day. They never did so,
and no such document will ever be found. In this regard, the witnesses of
the day are extremely important. There is a huge body of eyewitness
accounts and visual material concerning the Armenian incidents that never
reaches the Turkish public. Turkish public opinion is essentially ignorant
of what the people of Germany, England, France, and America see and read.