Berlin Permitting Ultranationalist Turkish Protest denying the Armenian Genocide

[TurQ]

The thing is by giving lots of attention you guys honor them(and him).
AS Teherlian honored him by killing him. He was already an unwanted man by Turkish autorities.

Maybe Armenians gave attention to those people more than Turks, because it was a very shameful thing to do ... I mean for God's sake, honoring Mehmet Talaat !!! The only thing that would be equally shameful is to honor Adolph Hitler ! Don't you think ?

It's interesting though you call them

[TurQ]

Being sensibile is better than being angry. I believe when your anger is gone you wouldnt say these. Turkey is Turkey, it is not so called. It is a powerful and important country. If Turkey goes away some how, whole region will plunge into chaos and darkness. Nobody will ever benefit from it, including Armenia and Armenains. You see when Ottomans were gone, the resulting political and strategic vacuum actually triggered and paved the way for an other world war. Who did benefit from it?

The point is Armenians do not need to shout at all, they should be curious of having relations with Turkey, in the end you will see that this whole mess is meaningles. Shout as much as you want you'll attract more attention from the ill-intentioned outside powers that want to use Armenians for their own purposes, nothing more nothing less. People in Turkey really dont care much about what diaspora is doing.

After all you know very well that our ancestors says "Keskin Sirke kupune Zarar" I am sure your ancestors wouldnt say it differently, "bitter vinegar is harmful to its pot".

What do you expect Turks set the precedent for denial.

You can deny all you want our voices we'll get louder and louder until Turkey becomes deaf from our voice and that will be the begginning of the end for so called Turkey.

[Joseph]

Being sensibile is better than being angry. I believe when your anger is gone you wouldnt say these. Turkey is Turkey, it is not so called. It is a powerful and important country. If Turkey goes away some how, whole region will plunge into chaos and darkness. Nobody will ever benefit from it, including Armenia and Armenains. You see when Ottomans were gone, the resulting political and strategic vacuum actually triggered and paved the way for an other world war. Who did benefit from it?

The point is Armenians do not need to shout at all, they should be curious of having relations with Turkey, in the end you will see that this whole mess is meaningles. Shout as much as you want you'll attract more attention from the ill-intentioned outside powers that want to use Armenians for their own purposes, nothing more nothing less. People in Turkey really dont care much about what diaspora is doing.

After all you know very well that our ancestors says "Keskin Sirke kupune Zarar" I am sure your ancestors wouldnt say it differently, "bitter vinegar is harmful to its pot".

TurQ,

Turkey is a powerful and important country but looking at it from a political standpoint and depending upon the cause and outcome, I don't see how Armenians would not benefit from Turkey's disintegration. If Turkey were to disintegrate, Armenia would certainly feel less threatened and whoever or whatever group took power in Turkey couldn't have worse relations with Armenia than the current political structure that runs Turkey. That being said, it's very far-fetched that Turkey will collapse unless of course the Kurdish revolt gets out of hand coupled will an Islamic revolution. Probably not going to happen though.



I guess my point is that it seems like many Turks view prsent day Turkey much like they Ottoman Empire. They have an idealized vision of Turkey as the peace-maker and benevolent and kind overlord of the region.

1. The Ottoman Empire was at peace for various periods, as long as Christians and Jews were meek and submissive. As long as they gave up their first born sons for the jannisary, paid triple taxes and protection money to state-sanctioned Kurdish fiefdoms, and had to put up with frequent insults- "Dhimminitude". Relgious minorities were merely tolerated. They were the economic lifeblood of the empire so if they were thrown a bone every now and then, so be it.
2. They were periods of prosperity but it depended on which Sultan was in power and how enlightend the political structure was at that particualr time. Some were better than others but all were very corrupt. This is not unusal and if you look at the time period in question, this is typical of all empires an there were many massacres of different minorties at various times.
3. Regardless of what you have learned, they Ottoman Empire was very backward and in sciences, medicine, economics and was eventually overtaken by Russia whcih was previously even more backward. This started from the rule of Peter the Great. When Armenian/Greek/Jewish merchants traveled abroad coupled with the eventual arrival of European consulates and missionaries to the Anatolian interior, the minorities learned of better things in the outiside world (democracy, education, science,) and this made the Ottoman authorities very nervous.
4. While Turks always complain of Armenians being used as pawns by outside powers, do they ever ask themselves if they were used as pawns by the Germans prior and during WWI? Had Turkey not joined the war, which they most certainly did not have to, there would have been no bloodshed with Russia, perhaps no Genocide, etc. Turkey would have probably been unscathed.
5. Turks seems to forget that starting from the time of the Crimean War, the European states of England, France and Germany helped prop up the empire with money, military education, technical expertise, etc as a counter-weight to Russian ambition. The price was of course high to the Sultans but it kept the empire going for several more decades.
6. Ask the Serbians, Macedonians, Greeks, Arabs, Armenians, Bulgarians, Bosnians, Albanians, Croations, Slovenians, Romanians, Georgians, etc. if they would rather be part of an Ottoman Empire or have their independence.
As imperfect and as all these states are, at least they can determine their own future. Others peoples have the same right to be as nationalistic as the Turks.



"Peace at home, Peace in the World" sounds wonderful but if Turkey was so benevolent why are there such problems with their Kurdish citizens? Why are they at such odds over history? Why do they feel the need to bully a country of 3 million people? Why are they so paranoid of outside intervention?

TurQ,

Much as there will never be any perfection on this earth, there will never be a perfect state, Armenia and Turkey included. All empires are bad and end in horror. In the U.S., people are learning the hard way. I guess what I'm trying to say is that while Turks are proud of their current state and past empire, it should not be idealized and can never be benevolent (then again, no state can with realpolitik, etc).

[Gavur]

France says Turkish protest not well received

TDN
Saturday, March 25, 2006

FATMA DEMÄ°RELLÄ°

ANKARA - Turkish Daily News

French Ambassador Paul Poudade met with Turkish diplomats earlier this
week to discuss a recent demonstration by Turks in protest of a French
monument erected in commemoration of an alleged genocide of Armenians
at the hands of the late Ottoman Empire.

Poudade told the diplomats at the meeting at the Turkish Foreign
Ministry on Wednesday that the demonstration in Lyon was not well
received and that it did not send positive messages to the French
public.

Several thousand people joined a boisterous rally in the southeastern
French city of Lyon on March 18 organized by Franco-Turkish
associations opposed to the erection of the monument. But the
situation turned rowdy when a separate group of students staging their
own protest against a controversial new employment regulation for
youths clashed with the monument protesters and began throwing
bottles. Police stepped in with tear gas to separate the two groups.

The ultranationalist Grey Wolves dominated the demonstration, sources
said, shouting strongly worded slogans to condemn the monument. The
French press generally expressed disapproval of the Turkish
demonstration.

An estimated 3,200 protestors took part in the event, carrying Turkish
flags and banners reading `There was never an Armenian genocide.'They
reacted after youths denounced them as `fascists' and yelled `Go
home!' Both sides pelted each other with projectiles and engaged in
fistfights, French police said, adding that some youths protesting the
employment law were apparently of Armenian origin.

Jean-Michel Dubernard, a deputy from Lyon for the ruling UMP party,
had earlier said in a formal question to French Foreign Minister
Philippe Douste Blazy that the protestors had `denied genocide.' He
also criticized the Turkish consul general in Lyon for calling the
monument `provocative.'

Lyon is home to some 150,000 Armenians.

Turkey categorically rejects charges that an Armenian genocide took
place and has criticized countries recognizing the Armenian
allegations.

The French reaction to the demonstration follows Germany's decision
not to issue visas to a group of Turks who wanted to go to Berlin to
take part ina March 18 rally to denounce the Armenian claims and to
commemorate Ottoman statesman Talat Pasha on the anniversary of his
murder by an Armenian assailant in Berlin in the early 20th century.

[TurQ]

Joseph I wanted to give a reply for this but I really have short time try to give my opions for this later ons.

TurQ,

Turkey is a powerful and important country but looking at it from a political standpoint and depending upon the cause and outcome, I don't see how Armenians would not benefit from Turkey's disintegration. If Turkey were to disintegrate, Armenia would certainly feel less threatened and whoever or whatever group took power in Turkey couldn't have worse relations with Armenia than the current political structure that runs Turkey. That being said, it's very far-fetched that Turkey will collapse unless of course the Kurdish revolt gets out of hand coupled will an Islamic revolution. Probably not going to happen though.



I guess my point is that it seems like many Turks view prsent day Turkey much like they Ottoman Empire. They have an idealized vision of Turkey as the peace-maker and benevolent and kind overlord of the region.

1. The Ottoman Empire was at peace for various periods, as long as Christians and Jews were meek and submissive. As long as they gave up their first born sons for the jannisary, paid triple taxes and protection money to state-sanctioned Kurdish fiefdoms, and had to put up with frequent insults- "Dhimminitude". Relgious minorities were merely tolerated. They were the economic lifeblood of the empire so if they were thrown a bone every now and then, so be it.
2. They were periods of prosperity but it depended on which Sultan was in power and how enlightend the political structure was at that particualr time. Some were better than others but all were very corrupt. This is not unusal and if you look at the time period in question, this is typical of all empires an there were many massacres of different minorties at various times.
3. Regardless of what you have learned, they Ottoman Empire was very backward and in sciences, medicine, economics and was eventually overtaken by Russia whcih was previously even more backward. This started from the rule of Peter the Great. When Armenian/Greek/Jewish merchants traveled abroad coupled with the eventual arrival of European consulates and missionaries to the Anatolian interior, the minorities learned of better things in the outiside world (democracy, education, science,) and this made the Ottoman authorities very nervous.
4. While Turks always complain of Armenians being used as pawns by outside powers, do they ever ask themselves if they were used as pawns by the Germans prior and during WWI? Had Turkey not joined the war, which they most certainly did not have to, there would have been no bloodshed with Russia, perhaps no Genocide, etc. Turkey would have probably been unscathed.
5. Turks seems to forget that starting from the time of the Crimean War, the European states of England, France and Germany helped prop up the empire with money, military education, technical expertise, etc as a counter-weight to Russian ambition. The price was of course high to the Sultans but it kept the empire going for several more decades.
6. Ask the Serbians, Macedonians, Greeks, Arabs, Armenians, Bulgarians, Bosnians, Albanians, Croations, Slovenians, Romanians, Georgians, etc. if they would rather be part of an Ottoman Empire or have their independence.
As imperfect and as all these states are, at least they can determine their own future. Others peoples have the same right to be as nationalistic as the Turks.



"Peace at home, Peace in the World" sounds wonderful but if Turkey was so benevolent why are there such problems with their Kurdish citizens? Why are they at such odds over history? Why do they feel the need to bully a country of 3 million people? Why are they so paranoid of outside intervention?

TurQ,

Much as there will never be any perfection on this earth, there will never be a perfect state, Armenia and Turkey included. All empires are bad and end in horror. In the U.S., people are learning the hard way. I guess what I'm trying to say is that while Turks are proud of their current state and past empire, it should not be idealized and can never be benevolent (then again, no state can with realpolitik, etc).

[TurQ]

Hrant Dink on those left in Anatolia after 1915 events

Maral

I promised to post the interview with Hrant on those Armenians who were left in Anatolia. I think that particular thread was closed down or locked. So I post it in here, it is in Turkish I'll just translate the relevant part and the rest will be available in Turkish in the link.

http://www.milliyet.com/2005/10/17/siyaset/asiy.html

'How can we accept the remaining (Armenians) dont exist?'
.......

I dont think it is a problem to talk about those who left (in Anatolia after 1915 events).
I once talked with an Armenian Historian and asked "Other than those died and exiled how many actually remained in Anatolia?"
He said 'around 500,000' and added 'We dont do much research on this, it is not necessary', since, he said 'it'll(might)damage 1.5 million thesis, we accept all of them as died. How could this be(acceptable)? How can you accept those who are alive as died?

(Note: in my prev posting Dink used 300,000 number based on Leusanne treaty numbers, here he conveys the number by the Armenian historian)

Also in the interview Dink openly uses the word genocide, but he also thinks it is irrelevant (not useful/productive) to insist on the wording. This is for some forum members insisting that the word genocide is prohibited in Turkey

Size göre nedir?
Soykırımdır
Q:What is it according to you?(the description of 1915 events)
A: It is Genocide

---
He also points out the role of west(Europeans) in Turkish Armenian conflict in 1915 and this issue is being used as political tool by them now.
He also says that it is possible to find another way without labeling 1915 events as genocide(he talks about the diaspora).

'İlişkiyi xxxan yine Batılılar'

Birinci Dünya Savaşı'nda Osmanlı'ya karşı Doğu cephesinde Ruslarla birlikte hareket eden Ermenilerin Türklere karşı kışkırtılmasında Avrupa'nın hiç mi rolü yok? Günah çıkarmak için, 'soykırım'ı gündeme getiriyor olmasınlar. Bir ülke yurttaşlarını durup duruken niye sürsün?
Tarihe bakarsanız, iki halkın asırlardan gelen ilişkisini xxxan yine Batılılar oldu. Ermeni kaynaklarında da böyle yazar.
1915'te yaşananlara 'soykırım' demeden felsefi bir tanım getirmek de mümkün. Yaşam dediğiniz şey canlı ile canlı varlığın alanı arasındaki ilişkidir. Eğer o canlıyı kendi alanından kopartıp, altın uçaklarla bir yere götürseniz bile onun yaşamına son verirsiniz. Çünkü kökü orada, asırlardır bir uygarlık üretmiş yerden göğe kendi varlığını, rengini, kokusunu hissettirmiş. Onun için diaspora da yaşamıyor, gözü sürekli Türkiye'de, çünkü kökü burada.
Ermeniler ve Türkler şu anda ikiz ruh gibi. Türkler demokrasi operasyonunda yatmışlar ameliyat görüyorlar, biz de elini tutmuş onun çektiği acıyı çekiyoruz. İyi olmasını istiyoruz çünkü o demokratikleştikçe biz iyileşeceğiz. Mezar kazarak, 'Ermeniler bizi kesti' diyerek bir yere varılmaz. Birbirimizi mat etmeye değil, anlamaya dönük bir konuşma uslubu geliştirebilmeliyiz.

He also makes a very important comment on solving Turkish-Armenian problems. "The key solution is to have relations/interactions"

'Sorunların anahtarı ilişki'

Bugünkü Ermenistan yönetiminin bakış açısı nasıl? Sınırın açılması beklentisi sürüyor olmalı. Son gelişmeler ve AKP'nin tutumu nasıl görülüyor. Bir 'Ermeni Konferansı' toplanmış olması Türkiye'deki tabuların yıkılması kadar Ermenistan açısından da atmosferi yumuşatmış olmalı.
Ümit verici bir atmosfer doğdu. Başbakan'ın bu yıl geliştirdiği bir açılım var, o da Ermeni dünyasını olumlu etkiledi. 'Gelin tarihle hesaplaşalım, karşılıklı acılar yaşanmıştır, gerekirse özür dilemesini de biliriz' gibi bir mesaj ortaya çıktı. Türkiye bu çağrıyı yaptı ama üslubunu yaratamadı. Hem böyle bir çağrı yapacaksınız, öte yandan Türk Tarih Kurumu Başkanı gidecek Anadolu'da mezarlar kazacak. 'İşte Ermenilerin soykırıma uğrattığı Türkler' diye dünyaya lanse etmeye çalışacak. Bunlar, Ermenistan'da ürküntü yaratıyor.

'Kalanları nasıl yok sayarız?'

Tehcir sırasında Anadolu'da komşularına emanet bırakılan çocuklar var...
Emanet eden de var, kaçırıp alıp götürenler de. Ben bir Sabiha Gökçen haberi yaptım, ondan sonra Türkiye üzerime yürüdü ve ben şu anda başıma gelenin de onun bir devamı olduğunu düşünüyorum.

Atatürk'ün manevi kızı hakkındaki yayın.
Sabiha Gökçen'in bir Ermeni yetim kız olduğunu iddia eden akrabaları ortaya çıktı, Halep'ten gelmişler, başka belgelerde vardı, gazetemde bunu yayımladım. Hürriyet'te aldı manşet yaptı, Türkiye'de kıyamet koptu. Benim derdim, şu tarihi hep ölenler üzerinden konuşuyoruz, biraz da kalanlar üzerinden konuşabililir miyiz acaba? Bekir Coşkun'un 'Ermeni meselem' diye yazıdığı çocukluk anılarını okurken düşündüm ki biz aslında bu öykülere hasretiz. Bunları ortaya çıkarmakta mahsur yok. Ben bir Ermeni tarihçiyle konuştum. Peki ölenler ve sürülenler dışında kaç kişi kaldı Anadolu'da diye sordum. '500 bin dolayındaydı' dedi sonra da 'biz bunun araştırmasını çok yapmayız, gerek yok ' diye ekledi. Çünkü 1,5 milyon tezine zarar getirebilir biz onları 'öldü' kabul ediyoruz, dedi. Böyle şey olur mu? Kalan insanları nasıl yok sayarız?

Maybe Armenians gave attention to those people more than Turks, because it was a very shameful thing to do ... I mean for God's sake, honoring Mehmet Talaat !!! The only thing that would be equally shameful is to honor Adolph Hitler ! Don't you think ?

It's interesting though you call them

[1.5 million]

No matter what certain (anonymous or otherwise) folks may claim there is plenty of support/evidence to suggest that somewhere near 1.5 million Armenians were killed in the period of 1915-1918 and that few survivors remained in Anatolia proper. The 1.5 million figure was widely known and accepted during the time - it is not new - and it is not an Armenian estimate. For instance - German intelligence reported the following in 1916 - "by February 1916, 1.5 million Armenians were destroyed ... the first step toward the recovery of the economic predominance in Turkey ... there was joy in the government circles that the long-desired opportunity finally presented itself...” A.A. Türkei, 134/35, A18613, pp. 1,2,3,4 "Volkswirtschaftliche Studien in der Türkey" Additionally this figure of 1.5 million apears in American correspondence and was picked up in the press (such as NY Times) of the day. In the late 1940s a Holocaust survivor named Ralph Lemkin was searching for a term to describe what was perpetrated against the Armenians of Anatolia in 1915/16 and he coined the term genocide. Here is something that he said at the time - "(In 1915)...In Turkey, more than 1,200,000 Armenians were put to death for no other reason than they were Christians."

And here are some figures reported by the findings of the UN Permenent Peoples Tribunal in 1984 - Population of "Armenian people (in) the Ottoman Empire (2,000,000 Armenians)" and "...following a precise timetable, the government issued orders to deport the Armenians from the eastern vilayets. Since Van was occupied by the Russian army, the measures applied only to the six vilayets of Trebizond (Trabzon), Erzerum, Bitlis, Diarbekir, Kharput, and Sivas. The execution of the plan was entrusted to a 'special organization' (SO), made up of common criminals and convicts trained and equipped by the Union and Progress Committee. This semi-official organization, led by Behaeddin Shakir, was under the sole authority of the Ittihad Central Committee. Constantinople issued directives to the valis, kaymakans, as well as local SO men, who had discretionary powers to have moved or dismissed any uncooperative gendarme or official. The methods used, the order in which towns were evacuated, and the routes chosen for the columns of deportees all confirm the existence of a centralized point of command controlling the unfolding of the program. Deportation orders were announced publicly or posted in each city and township. Families were allowed two days to collect a few personal belongings; their property was confiscated or quickly sold off. The first move was generally the arrest of notables, members of Armenian political parties, priests, and young men, who were forced to sign fabricated confessions then discreetly eliminated in small groups. The convoys of deportees were made up of old people, women, and children. In the more remote villages, families were slaughtered and their homes burned or occupied. On the Black Sea coast and along the Tigris near Diarbekir boats were heaped with victims and sunk. From May to July 1915, the eastern provinces were sacked and looted by Turkish soldiers and gendarmes, SO gangs ('chetes'), etc. This robbery, looting, torture, and murder were tolerated or encouraged while any offer of protection to the Armenians was severely punished by the Turkish authorities." and "Deportation was in fact only a disguised form of extermination. The strongest were eliminated before departure. Hunger, thirst, and slaughter decimated the convoys' numbers. Thousands of bodies piled up along the roads. Corpses hung from trees and telegraph poles; mutilated bodies floated down rivers or were washed up on the banks. Of the seven eastern vilayets' original population of 1,200,00 Armenians, approximately 300,000 were able to take advantage of the Russian occupation to reach the Caucasus; the remainder were murdered where they were or deported, the women and children (about 200,000 in number) kidnapped. Not more than 50,000 survivors reached the point of convergence of the convoys of deportees in Aleppo.

At the end of July 1915, the government began to deport the Armenians of Anatolia and Cilicia, transferring the population from regions which were far distant from the front and where the presence of Armenians could not be regarded as a threat to the Turkish army. The deportees were driven south in columns which were decimated en route. From Aleppo, survivors were sent on toward the deserts of Syria in the south and of Mesopotamia in the southeast. In Syria, reassembly camps were set up at Hama, Homs, and near Damascus. These camps accommodated about 120,000 refugees, the majority of whom survived the war and were repatriated to Cilicia in 1919. Along the Euphrates, on the other hand, the Armenians were driven ever onward toward Deir-el-Zor; approximately 200,000 reached their destination.

Between March and August 1916, orders came from Constantinople to liquidate the last survivors remaining in the camps along the railway and the banks of the Euphrates. ...In all, including those who took refuge in Russia, the number of survivors at the end of 1916 can be estimated at 600,000" thus - with an Empire-wide Armenian population of 2 million and and estmate of 600,000 survivors - the number who were killed or otherwise perished during this period is in the neighborhood of 1.5 million - quite an unusually high mortality rate - even for wartime.

[Gondorian]

1.5 million that was a great post, however I would like to add something.

Lets make this hypothetical situation.

Ok it was 1 million instead of 1.5 million killed.

So what?

That makes absoloutly no difference, it was still genocide, and it was still among the worst crimes humanity has ever seen.

Genocide is not a numbers game, and even if it was there is no doubt that about 1.5 million Armenians got slaughtered by the Turks in the Armenian Genocide.

[1.5 million]

I agree with your point Gondorian and have often made this point to Turks before. The important facts are that the genocide is well documented and that Armenians are no longer living in Anatolia (and this is not a result of a gradual exodus BTW - no matter what TurQ attempts to claim)

[TurQ]

Thats what Dink critisizes, the number game for genocide which is highly politsized.

He also clearly finds it disturbing that the remaining 500,000 Armenians in Anatolia actually assumed to be death for number games.

1.5 million that was a great post, however I would like to add something.

Lets make this hypothetical situation.

Ok it was 1 million instead of 1.5 million killed.

So what?

That makes absoloutly no difference, it was still genocide, and it was still among the worst crimes humanity has ever seen.

Genocide is not a numbers game, and even if it was there is no doubt that about 1.5 million Armenians got slaughtered by the Turks in the Armenian Genocide.