News and Views » Commentary

Commentary

Gwynne Dyer: Ending the debate on an Armenian genocide

The first great massacre of the 20th century happened in eastern Anatolia 94 years ago. Armenians all over the world insist that their ancestors who died in those events were the victims of a deliberate genocide, and that there can be no reconciliation with the Turks until they admit their guilt. But now the Armenians back home have made a deal.

On October 10, the Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers signed an accord in Zurich that reopens the border between the two countries–closed since 1993–and created a joint historical commission to determine what actually happened in 1915. It is a triumph for reason and moderation, so the nationalists in both countries attacked it at once.

The most anguished protests came from the Armenian diaspora –eight million people living mainly in the United States, France, Russia, Iran and Lebanon. There are only three million people living in Armenia itself, and remittances from the diaspora are twice as large as the country’s entire budget, so the views of overseas Armenians matter.

Unfortunately, their views are quite different from those of the people who actually live in Armenia. For Armenians abroad, making the Turks admit that they planned and carried out a genocide is supremely important. Indeed, it has become a core part of their identity.

For most of those who are still in Armenia, getting the Turkish border re-opened is a higher priority. Their poverty and isolation are so great that a quarter of the population has emigrated since the border was closed 16 years ago, and trade with their relatively rich neighbour to the west would help to staunch the flow.

Moreover, the agreement does not require Armenia to give back the Armenian-populated parts of Azerbaijan, its neighbour to the east. Armenia’s conquest of those lands in 1992-94 was why Turkey closed the border in the first place (many Turks see the Turkic-speaking Azeris as their “little brothers”), so in practical terms, Armenian president Serge Sarkisian has got a very good deal.

The communities of the diaspora, however, believe the Armenian government has sold them out on the genocide issue. Their remittances are crucial to Armenia, so President Serge Sarkisian has spent the past weeks travelling the world, trying to calm their fury. In the end, he will probably succeed, if only because they have nowhere else to go.

But can any practical consideration justify abandoning the traditional Armenian demand that Turkey admit to a policy of genocide? Yes it can, because it is probably the wrong demand to be making.

Long ago, when I was a budding historian, I was sidetracked for a while by the controversy over the massacres of 1915. I read the archival reports on British and Russian negotiations with Armenian revolutionaries after the Ottoman Empire entered the First World War on the other side in early 1915. I even read the documents in the Turkish General Staff archives ordering the deportation of the Armenian population from eastern Anatolia later that year. What happened is quite clear.

The British and the Russians planned to knock the Ottoman Empire out of the war quickly with simultaneous invasions of eastern Anatolia, with Russia entering from the north and Britain landings on Turkey’s south coast. So they welcomed the approaches of Armenian nationalist groups and asked them to launch uprisings behind the Turkish lines to synchronise with the invasions. The usual half-promises about independence were made, and the Armenian groups fell for it.

The British later switched their attack to the Dardanelles in an attempt to grab Istanbul, but they never warned their Armenian allies that the south coast invasion was off. The Russians did invade, but the Turks managed to stop them. The Armenian revolutionaries launched their uprisings as promised, and the Turks took a terrible vengeance on the whole community.

Istanbul ordered the Armenian minority be removed from eastern Anatolia on the grounds that their presence behind the lines posed a danger to Turkish defences. Wealthy Armenians were allowed to travel south to Syria by train or ship, but for the impoverished masses, it was columns marching over the mountains in the dead of winter. They faced rape and murder at the hands of their guards, there was little or no food, and many hundreds of thousands died.

If genocide just means killing a lot of people, then this certainly was one. If genocide means a policy that aims to exterminate a particular ethnic or religious group, then it wasn’t. Armenians who made it alive to Syria, then also part of the Ottoman empire, were not sent to death camps. Indeed, they became the ancestors of today’s huge Armenian diaspora. Armenians living elsewhere in the empire, notably in Istanbul, faced abuse but no mass killings.

It was a dreadful crime, and only recently has the public debate in Turkey even begun to acknowledge it. It was not a genocide if your standard of comparison is what happened to the European Jews, but diaspora Armenians will find it very hard to give up their claim that it was. Nevertheless, the grown-ups are now in charge both in Armenia and in Turkey, and amazing progress is being made.

Gwynne Dyer’s latest book, Climate Wars, was published recently in Canada by Random House.

Post a Comment

Comments

Vince Greg
Rating: Loading...
"...and the Turks took a terrible vengeance on the whole community [...] and many hundreds of thousands died."

Miss Dyer, did you even read what you wrote before you concluded "ingeniously" that it is not a genocide?
 
Vigen Badalyan
Rating: Loading...
Miss Dyer, how much do you get paid by Turkish government to write these lies? You sure are piece of work.
 
Turkish fan
Rating: Loading...
What a retard - Gwynne Dyer - Trash writing not worthy of any comments.
 
Rich
Rating: Loading...
This article is completely WRONG!

Gwynne Dyer don't speak for Armenians in Armenia you have no freakin clue whats going on with this issue.

The President of Armenia had secretive talks not allowing any public discussion on the protocols nor did he discuss this with the Armenian Parliment. He is seen as a traitor by Armenians BOTH inside and outside Armenia.

Also you stated the economic problems are a "priority" over the Armenian genocide. This is a false claim, the Genocide stands alone for what it is. You don't know what priorities Armenia deals with and you especially have no idea if they are "prioritized".

I can write further but don't give this web site enough credibility to so.
 
Sergio Galiano
Rating: Loading...
"then it wasn’t. Armenians who made it alive to Syria, then also part of the Ottoman empire, were not sent to death camps. Indeed"

Miss Dyer, some Jews made it to the US or England, even to Russia does this mean the Nazis didn't commit genocide.?
 
Zorab
Rating: Loading...
Mr. Dyer, I checked and found many websites defining "Gwynne" as a female name, if I follow your analysis of the facts of the Armenian Genocide, perhaps after all you should be called Miss....
The Armenian Genocide of 1915 is a FACT. There were precursors to it in 1896 by sultan Hamid, and 1909 (in Adana, by young Turks government)...there were systematicly planed and executed. Please go and inform yourself maybe at http://www.zoryaninstitute.org/
Also to quote President Sarkissian himself : "No relations with Turkey can question the reality of the patricide and the genocide perpetrated against the Armenian nation. It is a known fact and it should be recognized and condemned by the whole progressive humanity. The relevant sub-commission to be established under the intergovernmental commission, is not a commission of historians."
 
Victor
Rating: Loading...
Dear Ms Dyer,

You were 'a budding historian' - what is that supposed to mean - are you saying you are more qualified than Rafael Lemkin, International Genocide scholars or the International court of transitional justice. Grow up and act morally , you are repeating verbatim the official Turkish line, which brings into doubt your sources - have you even bothered reading the German sources/archives, have you read the US ambassadors as well as other independent sources- do you even know what qualifies as genocide. you have just sanctioned the mass murder and annihilation of all the Kurds in Turkey - they want independence and have a minority who have taken up arms. How do people like you look into the faces of your children, parents, partners etc - do you even have any family and pretend you have any morality?
 
Harry
Rating: Loading...
Dear Dr. Dyer,

I am truly surprised to see a "historian" like you DENY the Armenian Genocide. It is my duty to present to you some facts as part of History 101 and International Relations 101, which you seem to not know.

First you accuse the Armenian Diaspora by arguing that "there can be no reconciliation with the Turks until they admit their guilt." This is a false assumption because the opposition of the Armenian Diaspora is on the content of the protocols and not on the idea of reconciliation. Armenians are in favour of reconciliation but not at the expense of giving up the rights of Armenians. As a Graduate student in Political Science I do know that negotiations are not carried out this way. The content of the Protocols protect the interests of Turkey and once again destroy the rights of Armenians.

Turkey wants to hinder the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide of 1915, by creating historical sub-commissions to examine the events of 1915. This can be seen in the protocols and also in the recent speech of Turkish President Abdullah Gul who urged foreign historians to join a sub-commission to study the Armenian Genocide. (see http://www.asbarez.com/2009/10/06/gul-invites-historians-to-study-genoci...). Numerous countries and organizations including the Canadian Parliament in April 2004 and the Canadian Government in 2006, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) in June 1997, June 2006 and October 2006, have recognized the Armenian Genocide. The International Centre of Transitional Justice (ICTJ) that studied the Armenian case requested by a similar historical sub-commission, Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC), has already concluded that the events of 1915 constituted a Genocide.

Second, the views of the Armenian Diaspora are not fully different than those who live in Armenia. There was a Massive protest the day of the signing in Armenia and President Serge Sarkissian has lost his legitimacy, as the majority of Armenians in Armenia and around the world call him as a protector of Turkish interests. You generalize the view of a minority in Armenia who want to open the border to protect their own personal interests. It is true that poverty exists in Armenia but all the below mentioned points suggest that Turkey will not help to improve the Armenian economy but it will abuse Armenia.

In September 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has announced that "Turkey’s goal is to live in peace with all countries and restore the might of the Ottoman Empire". (see http://www.armtown.com/news/en/pan/20090921/36653/), isn't this an imperialist ambition? A few weeks ago, President Gul announced that ``We’ve agreed to establish the Turkic Speaking Countries Cooperation Council in result of consultations over the last one to two years...The council will be institutionalized with a permanent secretariat,” (see http://www.asbarez.com/2009/10/02/turkic-speaking-countries-to-form-coop...).

Moreover President Abdullah Gul urged Sarkissian to ignore the Armenian Diaspora and considered the Diaspora as a separate entity. He said that "The Armenian diaspora should stop being a challenge to the solution of the problems in the region as they sit a long distance away. I believe they follow this deadlock policy as it serves their interests in some countries. This is not right, if they care about the future of Armenia, they should support the cooperation process." (see http://www.armtown.com/news/en/anw/20091009/4116). All these clearly indicate the imperial ambitions of Turkey and the desire to weaken Armenia and you seem to ignore them. Armenia's official motto reads: "One nation, one culture" and Armenia has a Ministry of Diaspora. Despite the fact that Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandyan signed the protocols, President Sarkissian announced on October

(continued on next comment)
 
Harry
Rating: Loading...
(continuation)

October 10 2009 that "Let no one ignore the fact that, contrary to any slogans, the Armenian nation is united in its goals and is strong with its sons and daughters. And let no one try to split Armenia and our brothers and sisters in the Diaspora in presenting their concern over the future of Armenia as an attempt to impose something on the Republic Armenia." (see http://www.a1plus.am/en/politics/2009/10/10/sargsyan).

Third, you argue that Armenia has conquered Nagorno-Karabagh. This is also wrong. The war in Karabagh started when the AZERI ARMY attacked Karabagh to get rid of the Armenian population, pogroms had already started in Baku and Sumgait against Armenian citizens. The Nagorno-Karabagh territory was not CONQUERED by Armenians because it was never under Azeri sovereignty. Karabagh was forcibly attached by Joseph Stalin in the 1920s to Azerbaijan and was governed as an autonomous oblast for decades.

Fourth, you DENY THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE by arguing that "If genocide just means killing a lot of people, then this certainly was one. If genocide means a policy that aims to exterminate a particular ethnic or religious group, then it wasn’t. Armenians who made it alive to Syria, then also part of the Ottoman empire, were not sent to death camps." Well it seems you have not read the U.N Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948. It says "the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. " (see http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html).

It clearly states that if there is an INTENT then it is a Genocide and even though some Armenians survived, there was an intent to exterminate them. It seems you do not know that the person who coined the word Genocide, Raphael Lemkin became interested in the concept of the crime not after the Holocaust but in 1921 after the Armenian Genocide, according to one of his interviews on CBS (see http://www.vimeo.com/6976835). You can also see the story of how Lemkin became interested in the concept of the crime by reading Samantha Power`s book ``A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide.

Thank you for your consideration,

Sincerely yours,

Harry
 
Ergun Kirlikovali
Rating: Loading...
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY CANNOT BE SILENCED

Armenians seem so wrapped up and obsessed with their version of history that they cannot even see why wartime suffering cannot possibly be considered genocide, not even a long shot. The Armenians routinely misrepresent to unsuspecting public the Turkish-Armenian conflict as settled history of genocide, whereas the truth is far from being settled, let alone called genocide. When questioned, Armenians come irritated even violent with a “What is there to questions? There is nothing to debate.”

EVERYTHING IS OPEN TO DEBATE !

Only those who are not confident about their facts and figures are terrified by open debate, as they know their lies, distortions, fabrications, hearsay, and tall tales will be exposed. Only those fanatics will argue that their case has only one side, their side, and only their stories are the truth, the whole truth. We heard it all too many times in other controversies, too: abortion, gun control, immigration, gay rights, Iraq War, Guantanamo, taxes, stimulus package, and many others. It is up to decent people to stand up to the “opinion thugs” and demand the opening of the field to responsible opposing views so that both, in fact all, sides of any controversy shall be heard. After that, let the public come to its own decision. Propaganda and political pressure are not meant to replace scholarship, as Armenian falsifiers and their fellow Turk haters attempt to do so frequently.

 
Ergun Kirlikovali
Rating: Loading...
BIAS & BIGOTRY IN THE TERM “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE”

If one cherishes values like fairness, objectivity, truth, and honesty, then one should really use the term “Turkish-Armenian conflict”. Asking one “Do you accept or deny Armenian Genocide” shows anti-Turkish bias. The question should be re-phrased “What is your stand on the Turkish-Armenian conflict?”

Turks believe it was an inter communal warfare mostly fought by Turkish and Armenian irregulars, a civil war which is engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenian revolutionaries, with active support from Russia, England, France, and others, all eyeing the vast territories of the collapsing Ottoman Empire, against a backdrop of a raging world war.

Armenians, on the other hand, totally ignoring Armenian agitation, raids, rebellions, treason, territorial demands, and Turkish victims killed by Armenians, unfairly claim that it was a one way genocide.

GENOCIDE ALLEGATIONS IGNORE “THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT”

While some in unsuspecting public may be forgiven for taking the blatant and ceaseless Armenian propaganda at face value and believing Armenian falsifications merely because they are repeated so often, it is difficult and painful for someone like me, the son of Turkish survivors on both maternal and paternal sides.

Those seemingly endless “War years” of 1912-1922 brought wide-spread death and destruction on to all Ottoman citizens. No Turkish family was left touched, mine included. Those nameless, faceless Turkish victims are killed for a second time today with politically motivated and baseless charges of Armenian genocide.

ALLEGATIONS OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ARE RACIST AND DISHONEST HISTORY

They are racist because they ignore the Turkish dead: about 3 million during WWI; more than half a million of them at the hands of Armenian nationalists.

And the allegations of Armenian genocide are dishonest because they simply dismiss

THE SIX T’S OF THE TURKISH-ARMENIAN CONFLICT:

1) TUMULT (as in numerous Armenian armed uprisings between 1882 and 1920)

2) TERRORISM (by well-armed Armenian nationalists and militias victimizing Ottoman-Muslims between 1882-1920)

3) TREASON (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies as early as 1914 and lasting until 1921)

4) TERRITORIAL DEMANDS (where Armenians were a minority, not a majority, attempting to establish Greater Armenia, the would-be first apartheid of the 20th Century with a Christian minority ruling over a Muslim majority )

5) TURKISH SUFFERING AND LOSSES (i.e. those caused by the Armenian nationalists: 524,000 Muslims, mostly Turks, met their tragic end at the hands of Armenian revolutionaries during WWI, per Turkish Historical Society. This figure is not to be confused with about 2.5 million Muslim dead who lost their lives due to non-Armenian causes during WWI. Grand total: more than 3 million, according to Prof. Justin McCarthy.)

6) TERESET (temporary resettlement) triggered by the first five T’s above and amply documented as such; not to be equated to the Armenian misrepresentations as genocide.)
 
Ergun Kirlikovali
Rating: Loading...
VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

Those who take the Armenian “allegations” of genocide at face value seem to also ignore the following:

1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the U.N. 1948 convention (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive to 1915.)

2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a "competent court" after "due process" where both sides are properly represented and evidence mutually cross examined.

3- For a genocide verdict, the accusers must prove “intent” at a competent court and after due process. This could never be done by the Armenians whose evidence mostly fall into five major categories: hearsay, mis-representations, exaggerations, forgeries, and “other”.

4- Such a "competent court" was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist (save a Kangaroo court in occupied Istanbul in 1920 where partisanship, vendettas, and revenge motives left no room for due process.)

5- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It reflects bias against Turks. Therefore, the term genocide must be used with the qualifier "alleged", for scholarly objectivity and truth.

HISTORY IS A MATTER OF SCHOLARSHIP, NOT CONVICTION, CONSENSUS, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

History is not a matter of "conviction, consensus, political resolutions, political correctness, or propaganda." History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful debate, and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved for a "competent court" with its legal expertise and due process.

POLITICAL LYNCHING OF THE TURKS BY ARMENIANS TODAY

What we witness today amounts to lynching of the Turks by Armenians to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry. Values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet. Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation of Turkey, one of America's closest allies in the troubled Middle East, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists runs counter to American interests.

Those who claim genocide verdict today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in "conviction and execution without due process". Last time I looked in the dictionary, that was the definition of “lynching”.

Isn’t it time to stop fighting the First World War and give peace a chance?

ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI

Son of Turkish Survivors from Both Maternal & Paternal Sides

www.turkla.com
www.ethocide.com
 
Mayret Sikim
Rating: Loading...
Dear Gwynne Dyer, where did you get your degree? don't tell me you are another paid "historian" paid by the Turkish government...

April 24, 1998


To Honor the 50th Anniversary of the U.N. Genocide Convention

We Commemorate the
Armenian Genocide of 1915

and Condemn the Turkish Government's
Denial of this Crime Against Humanity

On April 24, 1915, the Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire began a systematic, premeditated genocide of the Armenian people — an unarmed Christian minority living under Turkish rule.More than a million Armenians were exterminatedthrough direct killing, starvation, torture, and forced death marches. Another million fled into permanent exile. Thus an ancient civilization was expunged from its homeland of 2,500 years.

The Armenian Genocide was the most dramatic human rights issue of the time and was reported regularly in newspapers across the U.S.The Armenian Genocide is abundantly documentedby Ottoman court-martial records, by hundreds of thousands of documents in the archives of the United States and nations around the world, by eyewitness reports of missionaries and diplomats, by the testimony of survivors, and by eight decades of historical scholarship.

After 83 yearsthe Turkish government continues to deny the genocideof the Armenians by blaming the victims and undermining historical fact with false rhetoric. Books about the genocide are banned in Turkey. The words "Armenian" and "Greek" are nonexistent in Turkish descriptions of ancient or Christian artifacts and monuments in Turkey. Turkey's efforts to sanitize its history now include the funding of chairs in Turkish studies — with strings attached — at American universities.

It is essential to remember that...

When Raphael Lemkin coined the wordgenocidein 1944 he cited the 1915 annihilation of the Armenians as a seminal example of genocide.

The European Parliament, the Association of Genocide Scholars, the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide (Jerusalem), and the Institute for the Study of Genocide (NYC) havereaffirmed the extermination of the Armenians by the Turkish government asgenocideby the definition of the 1948 United Nations Genocide Convention.
Denial of genocide strives to reshape history in order to demonize the victims and rehabilitate the perpetrators.Denial of genocide is the final stage of genocide.It is what Ellie Weisel has called a "double killing."Denial murders the dignity of the survivors and seeks to destroy remembrance of the crime. In a century plagued by genocide,we affirm the moral necessity of remembering.

We denounce as morally and intellectually corruptthe Turkish government's denial of the Armenian genocide.We condemn Turkey's manipulationof the American government and American institutions for the purpose of denying the Armenian genocide.We urge our government officials, scholars, and the mediato refrain from using evasive or euphemistic terminology to appease the Turkish government; we ask them torefer to the 1915 annihilation of the Armenians as genocide.


 
jda
Rating: Loading...
Gwynne Dyer asserts the most extreme position - that there was no Genocide - on the basis of some unspecified knowledge he gleaned as a "budding historian" over 30 years ago. The assertion of such authority over the subject matter is risible, but the claims presented as facts are simply false and dishonest. No wonder that famous Turkish American race-baiter Ergun Kirlikovali quotes Mr. Dyer with approval frequently.

1. Who is Dyer? He is not an academic, but his resume says he has some experience on general miliary issues and more merely as a journalist and tv producer. As to the Genocide, he has done no original research, has published no scholarly work, has delivered no papers, has withstood no academic scrutiny, and seems to have reached his opinions 30 years ago based on sources which were silent on whether the Turkish government intended to kill its Christian subjects.

2. Apparently quite satisfied with his own pseudo-findings, Dyer does not bother to tell the reader about any of the extensive academic work and first hand accounts supporting the Genocide thesis. If he had, he might have mentioned in passing that there are more Turkish scholars today who affirm the Genocide [at their great legal and physical peril] than non Turkish scholars who deny it [Akarli, Ihnsel, Deringil, Adanir, Gocek, Akcam, Oran, Turkyilmaz, Ungor]. But that would require honesty. And Mr. Dyer is more interested in making glib pronouncements than he is in facts.

3. Dyer implies that the residents of Armenia do not care about the issue. That will come as quite a shock to them. Based on polling data, 40 per cent of the residents trace their lineage to refugees from Western Armenia, where the worst Genocidal murders occurred. Moreover, more than 90 per cent of modern residents tell pollsters that recognition of the AG is an appropriate primary goal of the Republic's foreign policy.

4. Dyer states that Armenians were transported merely from war zones, as if this is somehow proof no Genocide occurred. In reality, they were assembled, murdered, raped, and kidnapped throughout Anatolia, as conemporary Turks who resisted the Genocide testified after the war. That persecutions in Istanbul and Izmir were not as immediately brutal stems from the heavy presence of foreigners in these places, as the triumverate was well aware of the British threat to hang them for annihalation of the Armenians starting in 1915.

5. Hundreds of thousands of Armenians were murdered by the state in the Hamidiamn massacres of 1894-1896, and Adana 1909, all before 1915. As a recent article by Derengil points out about the Hamidian massacres, Armenians lived in terror decades before the mass Genocide began. It is not surprising that some armed themselves in self defense, or that some were ready to help Russians or British in the hopes of not being destroyed once more. But irrespective of whether some rebelled [for far greater reason than the Americans of 1776 had] the intentional state murder of unarmed civilians for their ethnicity is Genocide.

Rafael Lemkin, the jurist who coined the term "Genocide" made it quite clear that he invented the term, meaning murder of a race, to fit the examples of the Armenians and European Jewry.

But of course Rafael Lemkin, Niall Ferguson [Harvard], Donald Bloxham [Cambridge], Ottomanist Donald Quataert and the International Association of Genocide Scholars, plus hundreds of other real academics
quiver and reach for their Depends diapers when the gasbag Gwynne Dyer bloviates.

 
Aram
Rating: Loading...
Ms Dyer,

I think the comments here clearly reflect your incompetence in the matter. There was an organised genocide towards christian minorities living in the Ottamn Empire. The word Genocide was created by Lemkin himself taking Armenian massacres as an example. If there was no genocide, than what about the cultural genocide of armenian heritage. How many armenian monuments are still visible in Turkey (from an estimated 1700 churches and monasteries.

By all definition and as stated by international competent bodies on the matter (apparently you are not part of it!) the massacres of armenians were defined as a Genocide, period.
 
Richardson
Rating: Loading...
You need only look at the recent Soccer match in Turkey to see the display of contempt the Turkish people have for the Armenians. While the Armenian anthem was playing, the crowds jeered so loudly that you could not even hear the music. You tube has a segment on this to prove my point.

As far as the Genocide, remember that the Turkish Armenians did not have a standing army in 1915, let alone weapons to carry on a so called "civil war"
 
Harry
Rating: Loading...
Dear Mr. Kirlikovali,
I would like to ask you to stop writing these things, it is a shame, everyone knows that once again you are presenting the official version that the Turkish state has taught its people for more than 90 years. The Armenian Genocide is a fact I will have to mention it once again since you seem you did not read what I wrote above. Numerous countries and organizations including the Canadian Parliament in April 2004 and the Canadian Government in 2006, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) in June 1997, June 2006 and October 2006, have recognized the Armenian Genocide. The International Centre of Transitional Justice (ICTJ) that studied the Armenian case requested by a similar historical sub-commission, Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC), has already concluded that the events of 1915 constituted a Genocide. Are these examples of the Armenian version? NO they recognized the truth.

Second, you argue that "EVERYTHING IS OPEN TO DEBATE !" This is wrong, if everything was open then we could argue that the Holocaust has never taken place which isn't of course the case. We can not deny History and the rights of people. You argue that Russia, England, France and others supported Armenian Revolutionaries and that there was a treason, than we should refer similar uprisings in the Balkans by Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Serbs as treason too. The Armenians like all the other nations I mentioned were demanding equal rights in their OCCUPIED LANDS, the Ottoman Empire conquered ARMENIA, GREECE, BULGARIA and many other countries. Armenians were not living in a sovereign country but under an Empire. You refer the Armenian Genocide as RACIST ALLEGATIONS. That is incorrect, getting International recognition of the Armenian Genocide is not an Anti-Turkish activity, like the Turkish government thinks and punishes any usage of the word Armenian Genocide in Turkey. You argue that "only those who are not confident about their facts and figures are terrified by open debate, as they know their lies, destortions fabrications, hearsay, and tall tales will be exposed" you are ABSOLUTELY right. That is what the Turkish government is doing by introducing Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, making it illegal to insult Turkey, the Turkish ethnicity, or Turkish government institutions, which took effect on June 1, 2005. They know that the Armenian Genocide happened and they introduced this to keep the subject a taboo.

Armenian victims were not soldiers but innocent women, chilren and men who were not armed. The Te?kilat-? Mahsûsa (Special Organization) was an Ottoman imperial government special forces unit under the War Department, faithful to the Three Pashas was used to annihilate non-Muslim peoples (Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks).

Third, Armenian uprisings were a result of placing Armenians as second class citizens, the fact that Armenians could not testify in courts, and were regarded as GIAVOUR (Infidels). This is the reason that Armenians revolted. Go and read the History of Armenia, Armenia has never waged a war against a nation, in fact the History is a History of numerous attacks by foreign powers to conquer Armenia due to its strategic position.

(continued on next comment)
 
Harry
Rating: Loading...
(Continuation from previous comment)
Fourth, you refer the Treaty of Sevres as a territorial demand and creation of Greater Armenia. Armenia has never had a desire to create an empire with Christian majority, it wanted the lands forcibly awarded according to the treaty of Sevres, Turkey had and still has imperial ambitions and I talk about it below. Turkey wants to force Armenia to accept
the current de-facto borders between the two countries. In the Treaty of Sevres, which was the peace treaty signed between the Ottoman Empire and Allies at the end of World War I, there is Article 89 which is an ARBITRAL AWARD regarding the borders of Armenia imposed by U.S. President, Woodrow Wilson, and in that award Armenia's border encompassed several provinces of present day Turkey. This was a Binding Decision which was final, without appeal. No single treaty can override this decision and the subsequent Treaty of Lausanne has no reference to Armenia, and the Treaty of Kars signed between Soviet Union and Turkey could not override the binding decision of Wilson. The U.S knows this and that's why they want to force mutual acceptance of the de-facto borders between the countries because they know Wilson's binding decision is still valid and they do not want to harm their ally, Turkey.

Fourth, Professor Justin McCarthy is known to be an employee of the Turkish government, he IS THE ONE WHO PROMOTES ONE-SIDED HISTORY, no other Historic Association confirms this. What you are saying is WRONG, and what you are doing is a clear example of what you hate, which is presenting a fabricated story.

Fifth, once again you seem you didn't read my comments above, the U.N convention of 1948 is APPLICABLE to the Armenian Genocide. Raphael Lemkin became interested in the concept of the crime not after the Holocaust but in 1921 after the Armenian Genocide, according to one of his interviews on CBS (see http://www.vimeo.com/6976835). You can also see the story of how Lemkin became interested in the concept of the crime by reading Samantha Power`s (once again not an Armenian, in fact a member of President Obama's administration) book ``A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. As for the intent, there was a clear one. TO EXTERMINATE THE ARMENIANS TO CREATE A PAN-TURKIC state, uniting all Turkic-speaking people and Armenians were not Turkic so they had to be exterminated, similar to the Holocaust, where the Jews did not fit into the Aryan world the Nazis wanted to create. As for the court, only the Turkish Martial-Court took a verdict, that is because the Western powers were busy with the aftermath of the war and after the Bolshevik revolution they realized that Turkey should be an ally of the West. (continued on next comment)

 
Harry
Rating: Loading...
(Continuation)

Sixth, Genocide claim DOES NOT REFLECT A BIAS AGAINST TURKS, it reflects PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS and that is why numerous Turks within Turkey and outside have recognized the Armenian Genocide. Genocide recognition is for Turkey's benefit as much as for Armenia's and for the whole world. By respecting its history, Turkey will be a better candidate for EU membership. Armenians want to establish friendly relations and we want to be eternal BROTHERS with TURKS but not by allowing Genocide denial. RECOGNITION IS THE ONLY WAY FOR OUR EVERLASTING FRIENDSHIP. ARMENIANS DO NOT HATE TURKS, IT IS THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT THAT PROMOTED HATRED IN 1915 AND TODAY THE SAME IS INDIRECTLY CARRIED OUT BY THE OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN OF DENIAL. You are absolutely right my friend, WE WILL GIVE PEACE A CHANCE but not by prosecuting Hrant Dink (RIP), Orhan Pamuk and Rag?p Zarakolu who want to show the right path for PEACE, not by allocating millions of dollars in the Legislature of numerous countries, including Canada, to deny the Armenian Genocide but as the President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, Dr. William Schabas (A person who is independent of state pressure and a true Historian unlike Justin McCarthy) argued on his open letter to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, "Acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide must be the starting point of any ‘impartial historical commission,’ not one of its possible conclusions.”.

YES DEAR ERGUN WE WILL GIVE PEACE A CHANCE BY PREVENTING GENOCIDE DENIAL. PLEASE DO NOT SPREAD HATRED BY WRITING SIMILAR THINGS, AS I SAID GENOCIDE RECOGNITION IS NOT ANTI-TURKISHNESS IT IS THE CREATION OF THE RIGHT PATH FOR BECOMING BROTHERS AND PREVENTING SIMILAR ACTS, OF INDIVIDUALS THAT DO NOT REFLECT THE VIEW OF THE POPULATION, IN THE FUTURE.

LONG LIVE TURKISH-ARMENIAN BROTHERHOOD

Sincerely Yours,

Harry
 
Ergun Kirlikovali
Rating: Loading...
Ah my favorite Turkish denier Ergun Kirlikovali commented here too! Ergun just focus on your plastics business in Orange County and stop distorting history.
 
kyle
Rating: Loading...
i'm guessing that was about 3 commenters tops there. hint to sock-puppet trolls, when assuming multiple identities, don't begin every comment by misidentifying the author's gender
 
Silva
Rating: Loading...
Dear Gwynne Dyer. It is very obvious, your knowledge about Armenian Genocide is very limited. Armenians were massacred everywhere, not only in Armenia or turkey. My ancestors are from Syria, only 2% of Armenian population from my town survived the genocide, because they accepted to be sheltered by Arabs.
My grandfather was in USA military at that time, he went back to find that only 4 children of his family members survived, all under age 13. I heard many bone chilling horror stories from many survivors. Your hollow philosophy about Armenian genocide has no historical truth nor value...
And one more thing, if you are getting paid from Turkish lobbyist to write what you had wrote, remember, that is blood money.
 
Mark Boy
Rating: Loading...
Armenians all over Anatolia, not just on the eastern war front, were wiped out. The cities of Yozgad, Sivas, Caeserea, Hadjin, Marash, Adana, and Ankara -- just to name a few -- are hardly in the east. One needs but to look at a map of Turkey to see this. Turkish apologists depend on American ignorance of geography to make such foolish claims

If it was a feud between Turks and Armenians, what explains the genocide carried out by Turkey against the Christian Assyrians at the same time?

Furthermore, Turkish armies invaded the fledging Armenian Republic in the Caucasus inhabited by indigenous Armenians in order to wipe out not only Armenians in the Ottoman Empire but also Armenians who lived elsewhere.
 
Teskilat-i Mahsusa
Rating: Loading...
I think that the Turkish Goverment made a create mistake not to support Dr. Dyer 30 years ago. The Turks left him alone in a hard debate and he had to fight back some strange,even fanatic, attacks by so called armenian scholars (like Mrs. Housepian etc.). It is a shame that turkish historians don´t write their own history and only help fanatic historians (pro- armenian) to establish a genocide thesis with which is based on absolute nonsense. People like Dr. Dyer know quite well that the genocide thesis can only survive because of the quality of turkish historians. Their stupid hardcore denial even helped Armenians. On the other side their were and there are a lot of people who know what has happened in 1915. But they decided to be quiet until a real debatte seems possible. I only want to thank Dr. Dyer for his critical comment and hope that he will be a part of historical commission.

Yours sincerly

Teskilat-i Mahsusa
 
Ergun Kirlikovali
Rating: Loading...
How fitting Ergun works in the business of plastics, which is inherently cheap and fake.
 
Mourj
Rating: Loading...
Ah, Mr. Dyer goes at it again.

This "more Catholic than the Pope" attitude in denying the Armenian Genocide is well known. A true historian looks at the facts, balances the issue, removes possible propaganda material and comes to a reasonable conclusion. At that Mr. Dyer has fail in the past and continues to fail miserably today. Because what he does is pure propaganda that can best qualify him as a charlatan and not a historian.
 
wunderkind
Rating: Loading...
wow, i'm a little shocked by the ignorance of this so-called scholar. you need to put a little more effort in your research! i don't see how denying the armenian genocide is any more acceptable than denying the jewish holocaust. indeed, it was the 20th century's first holocaust. not sure if this guy is just trying to be contraversial or if he's truly that lazy...either way, the Straight deserves better!!!
 
Ergun the GOON
Rating: Loading...
Shame on www.straight.com for giving a forum to a Genocide denier, who's next the president of Iran?
 
Alert_American
Rating: Loading...
All over the internet it's easy to find examples of Armenian Propagandists making vicious, libelous attacks against reputable, qualified, reliable historians. Their ideological opponents are immediately attacked as "Genocide Deniers". These people are little more than attack dogs. They know their position is untenable so they personally attack all their ideological opponents as "genocide deniers" often accompanied by allusions to "Ahmadinijad", "Nazis" ...etc...etc. These people have developed a full vocabulary of invective to hurl at their opponents - especially historians. Then they claim that the "genocide" is "Settled History" and that it is "uniformly accepted by historians". These people are pathological liars. The statements in Gwynne Dyer's Article are fully backed-up by the most incontrovertible Primary Historical Sources; the proof is overwhelming! But the attacks of the people attacking the article in this forum are empty attacks based on fanaticism, hatred and brainwashing.
 
Zav
Rating: Loading...
gweneth who?
 
Mourj
Rating: Loading...
In the name of free speech Mr. Dyer permits himself to show, again, his extreme anti-Armenian bias. But that is what the does, the blame however goes to editorial staff of Straight.com to allow such trash to be publish.

There is nothing "Straight" in such intolerant views.
 
Esat Uras
Rating: Loading...
I would like to thank Dr. Dyer and the editors for their courage. Not because they had allegedly taken the side of Turkey and its people. Dyer only illustrated the dilemma of these painful issues. The numerous offensive comments against Dr. Dyer have only one goal: some people only want to silence him. If we look to the reactions 30 years ago than we will see that little have changed in the Armenian Diaspora. In their oppinion every critical voice is paid by Turkey. But the opposite is true- Turkey is not really interessed in this issue and we all know that they had und have no interest that a scholary work appears. If the eyes of some people were not bigger than their stomach Turkey would have acknowledged an Armenian genocide. Even today Turkey supports people like Taner Akcam or Hilmar Kaiser who claim that a genocide occured in 1915! But these people drew red lines for Turkey: 1.) Armenia has to accept the Turkish borders, 2.) Atatürk had nothing to do with the genocide, 3.) Reparations can only have a symbolic character.
It´s shame but if Turkey would have supported real and critical historians like Dr. Dyer we would be in a complete different situation today. The Armenian readers should know that Dyer not only criticized Armenian scholars (Hovannisian, Housepian) etc. but also Turkish historians (Salahi Sonyel). His article (Turkish 'Falsifiers' and Armenian 'Deceivers': Historiography and the Armenian Massacres - Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan., 1976), pp. 99-107) was even reprinted in the Armenian Review!.

Recommended literature:

1. Dyer, Gwynne, Turkish 'Falsifiers' and Armenian 'Deceivers': Historiography and the Armenian Massacres. Turkish 'Falsifiers' and Armenian 'Deceivers': Historiography and the Armenian Massacres, in: Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan., 1976), pp. 99-107.

2. Dyer, Gwynne, The Origins of the 'Nationalist' Group of Officers in Turkey 1908-18, in: Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 8, No. 4 (Oct., 1973), pp. 121-164.

3. Dyer, Gwynne, The Turkish Armistice of 1918: 2: A Lost Opportunity: The Armistice Negotiations of Moudros, in: Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 8, No. 2 (May, 1972), pp. 143-178.

4. Marjorie Housepian, Dyer, Gwynne, Correspondence, in: Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Oct., 1978), pp. 397-402.

5. C. J. Walker, Dyer,Gwynne, Correspondence, in: Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Oct., 1973), pp. 376-385.

6. Dyer, Gwynne, Reviewed work(s): The Republic of Armenia. Volume I (1918-1919) by Richard G. Hovannisian, in: Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 10, No. 2 (May, 1974), pp. 242-247.
 
Diran Akir
Rating: Loading...
It is a real shame that fake historians like Mr. Gwynne are given the opportunity to waste the marvelous resources of the WWW by spewing their ignorance and prejudice all over the world under the cloak of scholarly expertise and supposed inside knowledge. A complete and total sham from head to foot. Don't ask him to check his facts. He won't, and probably hasn't for years. He talks about Syria and all the Armenians who were saved by being lucky enough to get there. Heavens, where does he think Der Zor is, the inferno where the greater part of the innocent Armenians of Turkey perished beneath the thrashing of Ottoman swords and clubs? It's precisely in SYRIA! It's long past time for Mr. Dyer to pipe down and stay that way. . . .
 
Subhadeep
Rating: Loading...
As someone who is neither a Turk nor an Armenian, the constant harping over the events of (nearly) a century back seem quite childish to me. I would like to congratulate the governments of Both Armenia and Turkey on showing maturity and reason over hysteria in making a deal.

Besides, tehre are two very good reasons why the events the Armenian Genocide should be avoided in state to state talks between Armenia and turkey:
Firstly, almost no one who was an adult in 1915 is alive today. As there are few if any victims and practically no perpetrators left now, the present generation should not be made to atone for the sins of their forefathers.

Secondly, the massacres in 1915-17 were carried out by the Ottoman empire, a multi-ethnic Islamic Caliphate that happened to rule most of modern-day turkey (as well as Syria, Lebanon, albania etc etc). In no way the modern secular democratic nation-state of turkey can be held responsible for the actions of a long deceased empire. It is the moral equivalent of blaming the Canadian Govt for the crimes of the Hudson Bay Company or punishing communist china for the sins of the Manchu Emperor !!
...... and since, this is Canada, please debate the issues in a civilized manner, withpur resortng to name-calling and such !
 
sleepswithangels
Rating: Loading...
I'm reading a lot of vitriolic and faulty critiques of the subject article. When you are emotionally invested in such a topic it is hard to focus your powers of observation in an objective manner. I find that Dyer delivers a dispassionate and accurate report on the both the current situation, as it relates to diplomatic efforts, and on the original cause of all the heart ache.....until he concludes his essay without mentioning that Turkish soldiers rode into numerous Armenian villages and towns and slaughtered everybody in sight...men, women and children. This action constitutes a genocide and Dyer is guilty of making pronouncements based on an incomplete assessment of the historical record.
SMBs
 
cameronjamesmcarthur@live.co.uk
Rating: Loading...
finally,someone to open the debate of the genocide fraud.i am surprised that rappers don't use the term,as in you genocided me,or i capped him cause he genocided my bitch.the term is a fantastical perpetration of war evil in the hope of gaining influence.hopefully it will cease to be as successful a fund raising technique as it has been in the recent past. thank you gwynne. regards cam p.s. what is this gender dispute?it is not as if he is competing in the world athletic championships.
 
jda
Rating: Loading...
CJM;

Perhaps you are who you claim to be, but one doubts it, especially because Turkish lobby posters always seem so intent to establish that they are not Turks by picking "real American" or in your case a really British tryptych of a name. Could it be any more Anglo Saxonish? Maybe you could add a Queen's Honor after the fake surname for some extra oomph.

As for your post, it fails on two levels, quite apart grom the incoherent reference to rap music, or your insulting tone.

First, it is simply shambolic. I suppose you are trying to say that Armenian deaths were merely incurred in a time of war, a sort of collateral damage kind of thing, and that they are therefore not the product of Genocide. The problem with your cavalier position, so loved by Turkish Embassy spokeman, Justin McCarthy and ultranationalists alike, is that the Armenian and Assyrian unarmed civilians were killed while under guard, by state actors.

Even pro-Turkish Guenter Lewy, an AG Agnostic, maintains that whether the murder of 1.5M unarmed civilians was Genocide is an open question. He rejects what he claims are the three main arguments in favor of the AG as merely unpersuasive, but does not reject that it may have occurred. He utterly rejects your "civil war" thesis with the words of fellow Turkish historian Selim Deringil, who called the thesis a "travesty of history which no historian with a conscience" could advance. Lewy reasoned that the triumverate was too disorganized to plan a Genocide. But somehow you, an unknown non-academic, "know" it was not Genocide.

The second problem with your post, parroting Turkish ultranationalists' agitprop, is the idea that Armenians (and Assyrians and Pontians and Greeks and Maronites etc.) advance the Genocide recognition to make money. I urge you to go to an Armenan Church, and politely make friends randomly with the people there, whether they be from the old USSR, Fresno or Beirut. The Diaspora is not monolithic, but the historical experience of merciless slaughter of unarmed and helpless civilians at the hands of state actors is part of each survivor's story. By the way, the first mass march for recognition occurred not in Glendale, Paris or Beirut, but in Yerevan in 1965, a place where the Dashnags were outlawed.

 
cameronjamesmcarthur@live.co.uk
Rating: Loading...
evidently, there is a concerted effort to bandwagon legitimate opinion on this issue.all the more reason to put the soundbites and the trivial pursuers to bed.special interest groups are always the loudest and invariably the least deserving. regards sir/lord cam p.s. thanks for reminding me
 
jda
Rating: Loading...
Lord;

Please explain what the descendents of the victims should do, in your opinion. Please also explain why interest groups, be they Assyrian, Greek, Maronite, Armenian or Kurdish are so especially undeserving, even if the claims they make are true. I wait to be educated.
 
cameronjamesmcarthur@live.co.uk
Rating: Loading...
war is crime,perpetrated by criminals for gain.to choose the status of the dead is an insult and a smokescreen.a dead frontline conscript is no less and certainly no more guilty than women and children atomic bomb victims.there are no flags,religions or ethnic sides,only competing evil interests employing the age old method of divide and conquer.mass emigration(if not mass education) should illuminate this as it becomes impossible to form armies of similar race creed or color. regards, baron von cam
 
Reader
Rating: Loading...
CJM,

Your post isn't even a non sequitor. Try reading some of the literature on the issue of the Armenian Genocide, pro- con- or agnostic.
 
rail buff
Rating: Loading...
Mr. Dyer seems to know very little about Anatolian transportation, or geography on the eve of World War I. He writes :

"Istanbul ordered the Armenian minority be removed from eastern Anatolia on the grounds that their presence behind the lines posed a danger to Turkish defences. Wealthy Armenians were allowed to travel south to Syria by train or ship, but for the impoverished masses, it was columns marching over the mountains in the dead of winter. They faced rape and murder at the hands of their guards, there was little or no food, and many hundreds of thousands died."

As of 1915 there were no rail lines in Armenia - eastern Anatolia - where most Armenians lived. So, they did not take any trains anyplace south. And, of course, there were no ships in this highland plateau as there were no bodies of water other than lakes Van and Urmia.

The east-west Baghdad Railway was being built by the Germans in southern Anatolia, and it is documented that Armenians were forced onto it in conditions similar to those suffered by Jews in World War II.

Dyer is not an honest broker, his piece implies that Armenians suffered only because they were poor, unable to afford tickets on non existent railway cars.

In fact, the whole piece is slanted, despite Dyer's labored effort to seem impartial by admitting some of the horrors and deaths. For example he says that Armenains "insist" that there was a Genocide, as well they should, because there was one. But the hidden idea in his syntax is a favorite among the racist fenialists like Kirlikovali - that only Armenians insist this was a Genocide, or that this issue was important only to Armenians.

As Dyer well knows, the issue of the Genocide was of vital concern to and commonly known to the generral population of both Europe and the Middle East, and the rest of the civilized world. In fact, there is no Arab country that was once ruled by the Ottomans in which the Genocide of the Armenians is not common knowledge today. For that matter, Gwynne, ask any Kurd on he street in Diyarbekir, a City founded in the Time of Christ by an Armenian King, who named it Dickranagerd. The Genocide was successful: today there are no Armenians left in King Dickran's City.

People like Gwynne Dyer, help the murderers and those who profit today from the murder of a race and culture to consolidate their gains.
 
Vahan
Rating: Loading...
I have read the majority of the posts made in this forum, and am truly surprised how certain fact deniers aim to twist history to achieve certain goals. One should keep in mind that the overwhelming evidence does conclude that a genocide took place and the perpetrators were Ottoman Turks, the victims innocent Armenians living in there historic homeland. Deniers will attempt to distort truth using various techniques found in some of the posts above. These examples are not new but have been used since the denial began. You cannot silence truth by wasting time. Distracting truth by making false accusations; eg: "They killed us" or "it happened so long ago" will not change what ultimately happened. The truth will not be swept under the rug, and debating the issue today is yet another Turkish attempt at wasting time with the hope that the issue will one day be forgotten. All those who assist the denial have a collective responsibility which will soon come to light. The question is not what happened in 1915 but rather why it has been denied all these years? There is a growing recognition amongst nations worldwide. Recognition isn't going to disappear but rather spread, and all that will be left is the question: "Why all these years of lying/denial? Accountability/responsibility will then fall on to not only the Turkish government for the crimes perpetrated against the Armenians, but also to those who spread the lies like Gwynne Dyer. The denying of truth throughout the years will cost much more today than had the truth been accepted by the perpetrators nearly a hundred years ago. Kinda like how interest grows on a bank account, the entire framework of distortions will be overhauled leaving an empty shell of historic pride. You cannot move forward by continuing a lie. You cannot blackmail a nation by closing borders either. The truth will soon be accepted by Turkey, and all that will remain is the shameful lies and the wasted years where a nation could have moved forward, but chose to remain.
 
Hellektor
Rating: Loading...
The only way to deny the Armenian Genocide is to deny the existence of Armenia. Had not a single one of thousand upon thousand documents survived that confirm it was genocide, the very fact that an entire nation who lived in their homeland for thousands of years was wiped throughout the whole Turk occupied Armenia and most of Asia Minor, is proof of it being genocide.

The fact that the author obstinately calls Armenia “eastern Anatolia”, a genocidal term to deny the existence of Armenia, is evidence that

I. either the author is ignorant of history despite his boastful claims: maps produced even in the Ottoman Tyranny and that even up to the 19th century mentioned Armenia (Ermenistan) as the name of the same place this author calls “eastern Anatolia” = eastern East = nonsense;

II. he deliberately avoids the term Armenia because he parrots the distorted, genocidal Turkish view.
 
1.5 Million
Rating: Loading...
Others who have already posted illustrate some of the many ways G Dyer paints a distorted and highly inaccurate picture of events surrounding the Young Turk Genocide of Ottoman Armenians during World War I. Dyer claims to be an impartial researcher who has examined the facts and has come to a legitimate conclusion, however it is quite clear that he has selectively examined things and his convenient errors of omission result in conclusions that only an unknowledgeable person could possibly accept as factual and only a deliberately biased and intentionally misleading advocate of an a prior position could ever make. Please don’t be fooled by this unbalanced, incomplete and inaccurate presentation. It does not reflect true research into the facts and its conclusions are in stark contrast to widely reported observations of the day as well as the vast and overwhelming majority of scholarly research and conclusions that have occurred since. It is a fact that Dyer cannot deny that there are essentially no Armenians left in Anatolia proper and the Young Turks were entirely successful at eliminating Armenians and the Armenian nation from their homeland. To deny that this was genocide is to fail to appreciate the meaning of the word. The mentality of the perpetrators, the process of eliminating undesirables and the results are little different for the Armenians as for what occurred to Jews in World War II. Any attempt to present it otherwise is quibbling with details and misses the entire point of what occurred and why and that what we are speaking of here concerns a grave crime against humanity that cannot be whitewashed just because due to the passage of time most every survivor has now perished. Dyer is known to be disdainful of Armenians and of the claims and observations of Armenian survivors and researchers so in following posts I will briefly present some counters to his claims by other then Armenians.
 
1.5 Million
Rating: Loading...
I was told, to cover the extermination of the Armenian nation with a political cloak, military reasons were being put forward... After I had informed myself about the facts and had made enquiries on all sides, I came to the conclusion that all these accusations against the Armenians were, in fact, based on trifling provocations, which were taken as an excuse for slaughtering 10,000 innocents for one guilty person, for the most savage outrages against women and children, and for a campaign of starvation against the exiles which was intended to exterminate the whole nation. Source: Dr. Martin Niepage, in The Horrors of Aleppo; Dr Niepage was a German Schoolteacher in Aleppo who directly witnessed and wrote about the horrors of the Armenian Genocide;

The Turks have embarked upon the total extermination of the Armenians in Transcaucasia. Source: Otto von Lossow, Major General, German Military Plenipotentiary in Turkey;

Deportation of and excesses against peaceful Armenians…appears…a campaign of race extermination is in progress under a pretext of reprisal against rebellion. Henry Morganthau, U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire in a confidential dispatch to the U.S. Secretary of State (16 July 1915);

In a realisation of their plan to resolve the Armenian Question by destroying the Armenian race, the Turkish Government is not stopped neither by our representatives, nor by the public opinion of the west. Source: Comte Paul Wolff Metternich in a dispatch to the Chancellor Von Bethmann-Holweg (10 July 1919);

Ittihadists intended to destroy the Armenians, and thereby to do away with the Question of the Eastern Provinces.... Ahmet Refik, Turkish Military Intelligence Officer in WWI

It is without doubt a carefully planned scheme to thoroughly extinguish the Armenian race. Source: J. B. Jackson, American Consul General at Aleppo, June 5, 1915;

I have the honor to report to the Embassy about one of the most severest measures ever taken by any government and one of the greatest tragedies in all history…. I think there is very little doubt that one is planned… to destroy the Armenian race. This is no less than the deportation of the entire Armenian population, not only from this Vilayet, but, I understand, from all six Vilayets comprising Armenia. …The full meaning of such an order can scarcely be imagined by those who are not familiar with the peculiar conditions of this isolated region. A massacre, however horrible the word may sound, would be humane in comparison with it. In a massacre many escape but a wholesale deportation of this kind in this country means a lingering and perhaps even more dreadful death for nearly every one. I do not believe it possible for one in a hundred to survive, perhaps not one in a thousand…. In any case, it is quite certain that almost all will die in one way or another before they ever reach their destination. … Source: Leslie A. Davis, American Vice Consul in Harput Turkey (30 June 1915)
 
1.5 Million
Rating: Loading...
The provinces of Van, Bitlis, Djarbekir... were the only ones which suffered massacres in the true sense of the word. In the remaining vilayets of the Empire persecution took the form of deportations, which effected almost the same results as the massacres. …there can be no doubt that the massacres and deportations took place in accordance with a laid-out plan for which the responsibility lay with the retrograde party, headed by the Grand Vizier Talat Pasha and the civil authorities under his orders. Source: Rafael de Nogales, a Venezuelan soldier who served as an officer in the Ottoman Army during WWI in Eastern Anatolia where much of the Genocide occurred. His book Four Years Beneath the Crescent (1926) includes many of his observations from this time;

Surely a few Armenians aided and abetted our enemy, and a few Armenian Deputies committed crimes against the Turkish nation... it is incumbent upon a government to pursue the guilty ones. Unfortunately, our wartime leaders, imbued with a spirit of brigandage, carried out the law of deportation in a manner that could surpass the proclivities of the most bloodthirsty bandits. They decided to exterminate the Armenians, and they did exterminate them. Source: Mustafa Arif, Ottoman Minister of Interior after Mehmed Talat Pasha (13 December 1918);

They have inflated the importance of isolated incidents and acts of self-defense by the Armenians and used it as an excuse to deport the bordering population. On the way. the Armenians have been murdered, on orders of the Committee, by gangs of Kurds and Turks and at times, even by gendarmes. Source: Dr. Ludwig Maximilian Erwin von Scheubner-Richter, German Vice Consul, Erzerum - in a secret dispatch to German Authorities, December 1916

[What actually happened in 1915-16] was no accident, this was not a marginal or small thing, it was not a geographically or demographically limited thing, virtually the entirety of Ottoman Armenians has been ordered to be rounded up, socially deracinated, uprooted, dispossesses, and deported for no reason other than that they were Armenians and, secondly, that there was very strong evidence that the accompanied violence and massacres had not started spontaneously or despite the best intentions of the state to protect the convoys of the deportees. Rather, there was strong evidence to the effect that there were orders issued, disseminated, and executed through the Te?kilât-? Mahsusa and that this in turn triggered secondary and tertiary rounds of violence and massacres once it became clear that the Armenians were fair game and that the shooting season was open on them. It fits the clauses of the 1948 UN convention [on genocide] comprehensively, and in that light, if we are permitted to take those categorizations and apply them to an event that occurred 33 years earlier, then we have to say, "Yes, it was genocide" Source: Halil Berktay - specialist in Turkish history of the 19th and 20th centuries, has taught at Harvard University, the Middle East Technical University in Ankara, and Bogazici (Bosporus) University in Istanbul;
 
1.5 Million
Rating: Loading...
Turkism...was manifest in...the displacement and elimination of Armenian citizens of the Ottoman Empire. The institutionalisation of Turkism meant the homogenisation of the citizenship in the empire…. That is why other races had to be eliminated. Turkism constructed an imminent threat posed by the Armenians and took action to exterminate that threat. Turkism operated as state racism. Source: Bora Isyar, Department of Sociology, York University

The evidence...from German, Austrian and Turkish sources in my view leads inescapably to the conclusion that the extermination of the Armenians was actually planned by a clique within the Young Turk leadership and executed by the sinister Special Organization [Teshkilati Mahsusa] of the army. Source: Dominic Lieven - Pofessor of History, London School of Economics and former Kennedy Scholar at Harvard University

…the reality that what happened in 1915 was a mass murder was accepted by everybody having lived in that period, and was never the object of an argument. Of course the word soykirim [genocide] (being a term belonging to the post World War II period) was not used in those days. To describe what had happened in 1915, words such as "katliam" [massacre], "taktil" [killings], "teb'id" [taking away, expulsion, expelling], "kital" [massacre] were used. Source: Taner Akçam, historian and sociologist

In Turkey, more than 1,200,000 Armenians were put to death for no other reason than they were Christians ...Source: Raphael Lemkin, Holocaust refugee and lawyer who created the word "genocide" in part to describe the horrors of the official Ottoman government policy and actions to exterminate the Armenian people of Anatolia;

The Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust were the quintessential instances of genocide in the modern era…. It should be obvious from the overwhelming evidence that exists in the state archives of major powers (the above being but a small representative sample) that the 1915 genocide of the Armenians was premeditated and the isolated cases of armed resistance by the Armenians were deliberately provoked by the Turkish govenrment so as to exploit it as justification for a general campaign of race extermination. That being so, bringing up the much discredited myth of Armenian disloyalty in the context of the 1915 Armenian Genocide is as offensive to the victims as well as to well-informed non-Armenians as bringing up the Nazi rationalization of an alleged "international Jewish conspiracy" would be in the context of the Nazi Holocaust. Because both the Armenians under Ottoman rule and the Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe perished not for something they did or failed to do, but for who they were. Source: Professor Robert Melson, Holocaust survivor and genocide scholar.
 
1.5 Million
Rating: Loading...
The Armenian Genocide is proven in all its components — among them intent. The converging evidence is well in excess of that generally judged abundant in establishing other historical truths. Source: Yves Ternon, historian;
For the record, in 2000, at a Conference on the Holocaust in Philadelphia, a large number of researchers of the Holocaust, including Israeli historians, signed a public declaration that the Armenian Genocide was factual. Also for the record, in 1997, at the meeting of the Association of Genocide Scholars, the Association as a whole officially voted a resolution that the Armenians had been subject to full-scale genocide. Source: Prof. Israel W. Charny Executive Director, Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide, Jerusalem, Israel – in a letter to Shimon Peres
What took place was genocide, not massacres. I use the word `genocide' because it adequately describes the phenomenon. It's the only term we have that describes it. If one day we have a better word, fine. The English, German, and Turkish languages have only one word to describe. That this has a negative consequence on the Turkish government is something I can't change; I can't change history. I'm not prepared to haggle over it. If a Turkish scholar says it too politicized and he or she doesn't want to use the word, then let him/her take a different subject. If you want to be part of this debate, apply proper terminology and if you don't want to do it, you aren't a scholar. Source: Dr. Hilmar Kaiser, historian of Ottoman social and economic history
 
Emir Soler
Rating: Loading...
Not just Mr Dyer is telling the truth.
1988, there are eyewitness accounts of Russian soldiers, demographic evidence, reports from Allied soldiers, photographic evidence, as well as testimonies from the Turkish refugees. Seventy American scholars -- including Prof. McCarthy of the University of Louisville, Prof. Bernard Lewis of Princeton, and Prof. Sandford Shaw of the University of California at Los Angeles -- testified in 1988 in front of the House International Committee that there was no genocide of Armenians. The Clinton Administration continues to back the Turkish people on this issue, because it knows the truth: there was no Armenian genocide
 
[Comments Disclaimer]

Post a comment

URLs and email addresses will be automatically turned into links.