DecisionRespecting

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg
Showing posts with label Videos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Videos. Show all posts

Sunday, March 31, 2013

3395) The (Former) US Ambassador Has Falsified The History

Posted on 11:14 AM by Unknown


Dr Pat Walsh: Morgenthau’s Book Is A Propagandist Construct Around Actual Events, For A Political Purpose 
 
Dr. Pat Walsh’ Speech, Istanbul, March 30, 2013, “Rahmi M. Koc. Museum”

It gives me great pleasure to launch ‘Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau’ by Şükrü Server Aya on behalf of Athol Books. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of you for coming to this significant event and hope you will take something away from it.

Athol Books sees this event as part of a project to re-establish Ireland’s and Turkey’s common links in History going back to the time when the Ottoman Sultan Abdulmajid I provided much needed relief to the Irish people during the Great Famine of 1847. It encompasses the links between the countries’ independence struggles at the close of World War I. The founding document of Irish independence, ‘The 1916 Proclamation’ addresses “our gallant allies in Europe” and Dáil’s Éireann’s first venture into foreign affairs, ‘Message to the Free Nations of the World’ was delivered to the Grand National Assembly at Ankara, in late 1921.

Both Turkey and Ireland had treaties imposed upon them in 1920/1 by the same Great Power. Ataturk was written about in Ireland as a great inspiration to those struggling against Imperialism, showing how foreign imposed treaties could be broken and an independent nation emerge.

This will be the fourth book by Şükrü Aya published in English on the tragic events of 1915 in Eastern Anatolia. Aya’s method is straightforward and involves finding the “documented facts” and laying them down to the “judgment of the reader”. His work is an important addition to the effort to find the truth behind events that are being increasingly rendered historically false and presented in the realm of political propaganda.
. .


I would like to start with a story that will show you the importance of the issue that Şükrü Aya writes about in his new book.

About a year ago I attended a residential course for History teachers. This course was in Northern Ireland, where I come from, and which, you will all be aware, has experienced many years of conflict.

In recent years many organizations have had an interest in promoting ‘conflict resolution’ and the one that held this conference is from Massachusetts in the United States and is called ‘Facing History and Ourselves.’



The conference was mainly about teaching children the lessons of the Jewish Holocaust - presumably so that things like this would not be repeated. A 600 page book was given to the teachers in attendance with readings to use in the classroom. It is called ‘Facing History and Ourselves – Holocaust and Human Behavior’

Although this book has over 500 pages of readings and commentaries on the Jewish Holocaust it also has a section on the Armenians and the events of 1915.

It says “In 1915, soon after the war began, Turkey, which then ruled the Ottoman Empire, turned against the Armenians, a Christian minority that had lived for generations within the Muslim Ottoman Empire. The Armenians were accused of divided loyalties, because there were Armenians in Russia as well as in the Ottoman Empire and Russia was now the enemy.” (p.103)

There was no background about how the Armenians had lived as the ‘loyal community’ for centuries in the great collaboration of the Ottoman Empire, no mention of the 1907 agreement between Britain and Russia that effectively promised Constantinople to the Czar in return for his help in destroying Germany in a coming war; no explanation about how the Great War had come to the Ottoman Empire, no hint of why Russia had suddenly become ‘the enemy,’ and nothing at all about the activities of Armenian nationalists that might have encouraged the belief that they then had ‘divided loyalties.’

The next section of the book contains a long reading from ‘Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’ which is presented as entirely factual and is used as evidence of what is termed “the greatest crime of the ages.”

At the end of this reading the book says; “The word genocide was coined during World War II to describe the murder of an entire people. Although the word did not yet exist in 1915, the crime took place nonetheless.” (p.106)

This is completely inaccurate. The word ‘genocide’ existed in 1915. However, the word ‘extirpate’ was used much more widely in the English-speaking world at that time. Charles Dilke used it to say in his best-selling book ‘Greater Britain’ that the Anglo-Saxons were the greatest genocidal force in history. He said this in praise of genocide as a law of nature and being part of ‘progress’.

Nothing like the ‘extirpation’ practiced by European colonialism is applicable to the Ottoman State in relation to the Armenians or any other minority within the territory of the Empire. In fact, the Ottomans were criticized by British writers for their easy-going tolerance of races which, it was suggested, was leading to the demise of their empire. The British Social Darwinists were, in particular, appalled at the way the Ottomans had inter-married and incorporated other races into the governing of their empire and had blended aspects of their cultures into the Ottoman mix.

The book I was given connects its main subject of the Jewish Holocaust with the events of 1915 with the following sentence: “In 1939, as Hitler planned the murder of the Jews, he asked, “Who after all speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”

This is despite the fact that the document that contains the notorious Hitler quote was rejected by the Nuremburg Court as an obvious forgery.

There is another reading in the book called ‘Truth: The Last Victim of Genocide’ and one called ‘The Politics of Denial.’ It contains the text from a debate held in the U.S. Senate in February 1990 and offers “copies of articles and documents to refute Senator Byrd and his supporters.” i.e. those who questioned the allegation of denial (p.505).

The message is clear: to deny the allegations of an Armenian ‘genocide’ is to be a ‘Holocaust denier’ – so beware!

Not surprisingly, none of the young teachers questioned anything said at this conference. It is easy to be overawed by the material on the Nazis and the Holocaust and the tendency is to keep quiet, even when it is being linked to events in Ottoman Turkey or Ireland. I think everyone present doubted the relevance of it to Ireland but no one knew much about the Armenians or the Ottomans so there would have been a general unquestioning acceptance of this material. And if anyone had any thoughts they were surely deterred by the warning that they would be lining up with the ‘Holocaust deniers.’

I questioned what I was hearing at this conference and was immediately treated as if I had offended some scripture in a sacred religious book. I tried to explain that I knew something of these events and their context, having researched and written a book about Britain’s Great War on Turkey and that the depiction of the Ottoman Empire was a travesty of the truth and its explanation of the why the Ottomans relocated the Armenians was a simplistic distortion.

I could also not see why teachers needed ‘free resources’ to refute the case against an Armenian ‘genocide.’ What had that to do with the teaching of history? It was sheer political propaganda and brainwashing!

I think it must have been the first time someone had argued against what these people were saying and requiring us to believe and teach. They seemed to be shocked that anyone would even question them. But they chose not to argue. Debate was closed!

This reminded me of Geoffrey Robertson QC.

I presume that you will be aware of Geoffrey Robertson QC as being one of the prime movers in wishing to charge Turkey with genocide over the events that happened in Anatolia in 1915.

Mr. Robertson has put it on record that he wishes for historians to stop discussing the events of 1915 altogether. He declared in Yerevan last year that: “The historians have completed their mission, now it is the time for judges, who will demand proper punishment for guilt and compensation for the Genocide victims. It is no longer a subject of historians but judges.”

Whatever about the historians, Şükrü Aya has not completed his mission…

In the ‘New Statesman’ of 10th December 2009 Robertson made it clear that the case, for him, is already closed. He stated: “… genocide is a matter for legal judgment, not a matter for historians, and there is no dispute about the Armenian genocide among legal scholars.”

It is clear from this statement that Robertson does not want books like Şükrü Server Aya’s to be written and he wants historians to be silenced about history. He wishes International Law to be the supreme arbiter on history and its decision to be final and binding.

By reducing the event of ‘genocide’ to a legal decision one is making it into a subjective judgment and a weapon of foreign policy for the purposes of gaining leverage on other states.

I do not share Robertson’s faith in International Law. It seems to me to be applied only when it suits the great powers in the world and forgotten about when it does not. It is overwhelmingly applied to the ‘lesser states’ by the ‘superior’ states who appear to be above it themselves. In many ways it is the old ‘civilizing’ mission of Imperialism in a new guise of ‘ethical foreign policy’.

So I prefer to trust in the historians who look for the truth, like Şükrü Aya.

When you know that historically inaccurate propaganda material is being presented across the English-speaking world to teachers in order to inform impressionable children and jurists like Geoffrey Robertson are urging an ‘end of history’ and ‘case closed’ you can see the importance of Sükrü Aya’s book.

The important point in my story is how central the book of Ambassador Morgenthau remains. It is the corner-stone of the case against the Ottomans about the events of 1915.

As Professor Justin McCarthy says:
“Morgenthau has long held a prominent place in what has become the popularly accepted history of the events of World War I. His descriptions of Armenian suffering feature prominently in accusations that the Ottomans committed genocide. The difficulty, as demonstrated by Aya, is that Morgenthau readily accepted fabricated evidence and himself falsified the record.”

Morgenthau spent 26 months as U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire from November 1913 to February 1916. During this time he composed a lengthy diary and many letters which formed the basis of his book, ‘Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story.’ The book contains narrations of long conversations with, and statements of, various German and Ottoman officials which are placed in quotation marks. This device adds credibility to the account - as if the statements are taken down verbatim. And yet they cannot be found in the diary or letters, the original sources of the book.

The book seems to have been the concoction of a team of propagandists. The journalist, Burton J. Hendrick was the sensationalist ghost-writer. Morgenthau’s Armenian Secretary, Hagop S. Andonian, on whom the Ambassador relied for translations, was heavily involved after being allowed to ‘elaborate’ himself in writing up the original diary. The Ambassador’s interpreter, Arshag K. Schmavonian was another key constructor. And Morgenthau had no direct experience of the events he was writing about in Eastern Anatolia, having never left Istanbul in his tenure as Ambassador.

It is perhaps not fully understood that Morgenthau’s work had serious implications for the future peace of the world. Its intention was to foster an American intervention in what was fundamentally an Imperialist war on Germany and the Ottoman Empire. The U.S., acting on the principles of George Washington, was disinclined to join this foreign war of conquest but it did so with the help of Morgenthau’s propaganda and the British Wellington House publications it fed into.

Only with U.S. assistance were Britain and France able to crush Germany and seize the territories of the Ottoman Empire they desired to control. The result was a punitive peace treaty and economic ruin in Europe that produced Hitler and the Nazis and another World War two decades later. And the results of the Imperialist conquests of Britain and France that Morgenthau’s propaganda facilitated and the states they constructed are still to be seen in the Middle East today.

Professor McCarthy explains how Şükrü Aya demolishes Morgenthau’s published account:
“Aya’s method is simple. He takes Morgenthau’s statements and identifies the false, the prejudiced, and the impossible. He compares Morgenthau’s written accounts with his diaries, showing that much of what Morgenthau allegedly heard from Ottoman officials on plans to exterminate Armenians was complete invention. He analyzes the prejudices and political calculations that led to Morgenthau’s deception.”

Sükrü Aya was no scholar but he became a historian because of the sloppy work produced by those who are paid and honoured with titles to do better. Perhaps his experiences of commercial life has made him prepared to do the hard work of research that the academics avoided. Many professional historians seem to have contented themselves with relying on material like Morgenthau’s book as if it were the ‘truth’ rather than what it actually is – a propagandist construct around actual events, for a political purpose.

They really should have done the job Sükrü has done. But perhaps it would not have advanced their careers! Şükrü Aya has no concern for such things - his only interests are the facts and the truth!




Video distributed to guests as souvenir during the book presentation:





Direct Link To The Video





Ṣükrü Server Aya refutes the Armenian genocide allegations in his book authored in English.

The letter of the AP correspondent exposed




The following is a translation of a news piece that appeared at the AYDINLIK Daily Newspaper, Istanbul, on April 1, 2013, written by Irmak Mete.

Ṣükrü Server Aya who in the past has unearthed and exposed all the false claims and fabrications about the alleged Armenian Genocide has introduced his new book, titled “The Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau “. The book refutes, without any doubt, all the genocide claims made in the book “ The Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story”, written by the then U.S. Ambassador to Istanbul, Henry Morgenthau. Mr. Aya’s book explains and discloses the letter written to Ambassador Morgenthau by the AP (Associated Press) correspondent George A. Schreiner who was actually in Anatolia in 1915 who witnessed all the events of that time, objecting and disproving Morgenthau’s genocide claims contained in his book. Schreiner’s book also describes how the Armenians have been duped and promised by the Imperial Powers for granting them their independence and their own land if they fought against Turks with the Allies.

The introduction to the scholars, historians and general public of the book written by Mr. Aya in English under the name “ The Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau” was made two days ago at the Rahmi Koc Museum, Istanbul. The introduction was attended by the author, publisher Dr. Pat Walsh of Athol Books, Ireland, a writer in our editorial board Mr. Turker Erturk as well as numerous other writers, editors and historians.

During his talk to the audience, Mr. Aya explained the documents contained in his book that fully refutes all the allegations made by Morgenthau, also talked about another book, “ From Berlin to Bagdad “ written by George Abel Schreiner. The book contains a letter sternly written by Schreiner to Morgenthau on December 19, 1918, in which he said “Made some inquiries relative to massacres alleged to have happened in Pera. Everybody smiled. Then, they told me the name of the American correspondent who had disseminated these rumors from Salonica and Athens in the form of honest-to-goodness news dispatches. Also, the fact was mentioned that since then the Ottoman Government had been rather severe toward all foreign newspapermen. As to massacres – there have been no such things – of course.”

Aya also explained an important and a critical speech made by Fridthjof Nansen, the Secretary-General of The League of nations, the predecessor of today’s United Nations, on September 21, 1929, to the General Assembly, which is still kept in the UN Archives. The speech includes a statement where Nansen admits that the Armenians were promised their own land if they fought with the allies, but after the war has ended this promise was not kept eventhough the Armenians have suffered 200,000 deaths.

Aya said that he worked and researched all alone and tirelessly for years to find the truth. He continued, “ My work may not be finished before my death, but, I hope, me and my efforts will be quoted in the future as being at the right side of the fence.”

The editor of the publishing house Athol Books, Dr. Pat Walsh, who spoke after Mr. Aya, stated that some scholars have attained their positions by not studying and analyzing books like the one Mr. Aya just authored. “ However “ he continued, “ Mr. Aya has no such problems. All he is interested in are the legal and reliable documents and proofs”.


ONE MAN ARMY….


By Mr. Türker Ertürk, published in İlk Kurṣun, a Turkish language news portal and AYDINLIK Newspaper, on April 5th, 2013.

The introduction of Ṣükrü Server Aya’s new book, titled “ Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau” was made last Saturday to the national and international public at large and to the foreign and local press at the Koç Museum located in the Hasköy District of Istanbul.

I personally witnessed this historical event. In fact, my dear friend Ṣükrü honored me by giving me a chance to speak at the event. I am grateful and thankful.

Aya, in his book, exposes and disproves the so called “ Armenian Genocide” claims as lies and allegetions perpetrated by the imperialistic powers. Aya’s book displays , line by line, page by page, the mistakes and lies contained in the book, titled “ Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story “ who was in İstanbul between November 1913 and February 1916 as the U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Government.

Trashes the allegations using only the foreign documents and references

Ambassador’s own book, “ Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story” was very important. Simply because it was the . .



The interview with Ṣükrü Server Aya has been conducted by Sezin Özadalı of AYDINLIK Daily Newspaper

The author and researcher Mr. Ṣükrü Server Aya will announce and prove today to the whole world, through his book he recently authored in the English language, that the ‘genocide’ claims and allegations made by the Armenians are false and fabricated.

I have sat down and chatted with Mr. Aya regarding the Armenian allegations of genocide which is subject of his book titled “ Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau “ which will be introduced to the market for sale today.
Those who accuse us are the charlatans in the U.S.

Aydınlık : Have you received any negative response in this suject from the Armenian citizens of Turkey ?

Aya : I am a friend of Armenians. Our struggle is not with Armenians or any other nation. We perceive and regard man as human being. We do not evaluate or consider at all the man’s skin color, his race or nationality. Our opponents are those charlatans who have gone to the U.S. lately and finding no suitable work to make a living and thus re-kindling or re-creating this issue. My biggest supporters are the young Armenians. But they conceal their identity due to their fear for their safety.

How have the Armenian allegations surfaced ? . . .


Aya : They have been making a living by extorting money since 1890. And most of that money has been taken from their own people, the Armenians. They have killed those who have not submitted to their demands. This scheme has come to a point during the Ottomans period that they even have killed their own mayor who had not yielded to their demands for money. The grand father of the terrorist organization PKK today in Turkey is the Armenian Dashnak terrorists. After their establishment, they started extorting money from people by saying “ We need money for this national struggle. We will make a list of names who are expected to pay and will kill those who would not come up with money “. At times, the names of those people who are expected to pay have been printed in the newspapers. And the killings have been displayed to the public at large to teach them a lesson and to create terror atmosphere. As a result, everyone has paid up. The money was the only thing that mattered. The estimated budget of this extortion business was about $ 1 Billion. The money collected using the ‘genocide’ as a tool did not at all go to the poor people but to the rich only to make them richer. It was a large commercial business. Everyone sells something, i.e., some sell ‘hope’, others sell ‘love’. They sold ‘hate’.

How is ‘hate’ sold ?

Aya: In the Armenian Youth Camps in the U.S. they inject ‘hate’ to the hearts and minds of 10-11 years old children. The same age children in Armenia in military fatigues are trained in how to use gun and kill human beings. The ‘hate’ injetion starts at the cradle.

What did U.S. Ambassador’s Diary contain ?

Aya : The Ambassador has received a warm welcome and shown a lot of respect in the Ottoman Empire although he had no diplomatic experience and credentials. He made a lot of money in his real estate investments and donated sizeable amount of this money to election campaign funds of President Wilson who in turn had appointed him to the ambassadorial position in Istanbul which was the capital city of the Ottoman Empire. In Istanbul, he was very much involved in the money transactions for the Jewish people. He remained in Istanbul for 780 days and I counted 240 days were spent in Jewish business matters and dealings. Both of his two secretaries were Armenians. He was told most of the things in his diary by these two people. All the documents he used in his book was delivered to him by them. But since he was an ambassador, everyone including even today’s politicians, have taken his book without any reservation and questioning. He wrote his book or had it written under his name by others, 3 years after his return to the U.S. The main reason for him to write this book ( or have it written for him ) was to create or demonstrate to President Wilson a credible reason for the U.S. to enter the World War I.

Does his book tell the truth ?

Aya : Not at all, it is totally false and fabricated. The origin of all these lies were the two Armenian secretaries mentioned earlier whom he brought with him to the U.S. Since the statements appeared to be told by the US Ambassador, the book has been taken as a respectable and believeable resource for the Armenian allegations of genocide. We proved in my book that even the one and only respected resource Armenians had was totally unreliable and not trustworthy.

There is a reference in your book to the works of Mr. Mehmet Perinçek who is a Research Associate in the Istanbul University and who is also a suspect these days in the Ergenokon trials.

Aya : I have included in my book a chapter written by Mr. Perinçek about Talat Pasha based on his extensive research of the Russian State archives. I appreciate him a lot as a scholar. He is an excellent academician. He studied the Russian archives as related to the Armenian issue which was something not done by anyone else. I personally studied the British and American archives. So, our studies complemented each other.

Thank you very much Mr. Aya.







AYDINLIK 30.3.2013

PREPOSTEROUS PARADOXES OF U.S. AMBASSADORS by Türker Ertürk

He was born in 1930 in the City of Galati, Romania. The name of the city which means ‘ bastion, castle, ‘ is actually derived from the Turkish Kuman dialect. His family has arrived from Trabzon, Turkey in the 19th centuery and settled in the City of Sulina which is located at the point of discharge of Danube River into the Black Sea. Sulina, at that time, was known for its relatively large settlement of people of Turkic origin.

After Soviet invasion in August 1939 of Moldovia ( then called Bassarebia ), his family picks up the roots and moves back to Istanbul, Turkey, the homeland, in a cargo ship displaying a Turkish flag.

He was accepted to Robert College – now called Bosphorous University, after finishing his elementary, middle and high school education. He interrupts his education in order to work and support his family after the death of his father in an accident at the sea in 1951. He later returns back to school and completes his college education in 1953.
He establishes his own business after the school, involved in international trade, earning a living while travelling the world during the following 50 years. As his age advances, he finally retires from the active business life. Instead of going fishing and exchanging hunting stories with his friends in the years following his retirement, he chooses the hard way.

During his childhood in Arnavutköy, İstanbul, he makes a lot of friends, Armenian children among them. However, he has been confused and worried by the allegations made later by the Armenians. He is interested in history and at the end, he decides; he would look deep into the events of 1915. Did his ancesters really committ “ genocide “ or were all those claims judgement without trial ?

The claims were all baseless.

He rolls up his sleeves to find out the truth. He screens and reviews all the books, magazines and articles claiming the ‘Armenian Genocide’. He finally reaches the truth that all these claims are false and fabricated as part of a larger project. He has authored five books until today, three in English and two in Turkish, about the so called genocide claims along with hundreds of articles and essays.

This dear person is Ṣükrü Server Aya. I have had the honor of meeting him in a TV show where we were both invited. We have been very good friends since that day. I am priviledged to call him “ Dear Brother Ṣükrü”.

Tomorrow, March 30th, 2013, at 3.30 pm, there will be the introduction, to the press and the group of national and international scholars, writers and historians, of his most recent book, titled “ Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau “ at the Rahmi Koç Museum in Hasköy, İstanbul.

Ambassador Morgenthau has served as the US Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, located in İstanbul, between November 1913 and February 1916. The Ambassador has a book he has written later, about his relationship with and the conversations and opinions of the leaders of the Committee of Union and Progress ( CUP), and about what he has heard regarding the Forced Deportation of the Armenians in 1915, titled “ The Story of Ambassador Morgenthau”.

This book is considered by the Armenians as an ‘invaluable’ source for their genocide claims. A quite a large portion of their claims are based on this book. But this book is based on lies, false accusations and fabrications. Even the real author of this book is quite suspicious and debatable.

Morgenthau has not traveled even 6 miles away from his office in İstanbul during his tenure there. The book heavily relies on the statements of his two Armenian interpreters and office workers; Arshag Schimavonian and Agop Andonian. The Ambassador, after returning to the U.S., asks and receives a permission from President Wilson to write a book accusing the Ottomans regarding the Armenians. He is not the ‘true’ writer of the book; the book actually has been written by the Pulitzer Prize winner writer Burton J. Hendrick, at a cost of 1.3 Million US Dollars ( at today’s rate).

And that is what Aya’s new book describes in detail, based on non-Turkish references and documents. The book contains irrefutable and non-negoitable documents and proof, not just a story or memoires. Please read this book and leave it to your grandchildren in your library as a valuable endowment.

They are getting ready for a final blow.

Two years later, it will be the 100th anniversary of the Armenians’ 1915 Genocide Claims. The Imperial Powers and, under their guidance, the Armenian Diaspora, are working very hard for that day. What has our own Government done regarding this issue during the recent 10 years they have been in power ? And what are they planning to do in the future ?

I am very proud of Ṣükrü Server Aya who, despite his advanced age, has been tirelessly working, using his own financial resources when required, serving his own Turkish Nation of which he has been a part. The societies feel proud by those serving them.

There is no doubt in my mind that the “ Armenian Genocide ” claims are imperialist lies and falsifications. And these lies have been created to clear the road for a much larger imperialistic plans and targets to be achieved. Just like Ergenekon and Balyoz lies….Therefore, it is quite normal to have contradictions within lies. The purpose of these two big lies are the realization of the bigger imperialistic plans directed or aimed towards our country and the region.
The lies may be contrversial within themselves but the imperial powers are right on target and quite within their plans, even 100 years after these lies have been created. The target was the Ottomans yesterday and is Turkey today.

The target is the destabilization of the region, the contraction of Turkish economical and political growth under the disguise of the false growth, being used as a subcontractor to export terror to its neighbours and finally the change of the regime in the country.

Don’t please get personally angry with the US Ambassadors, they are only civil servants receiving orders, coordinating the efforts and plans directed at our country and our region

Respectfully,

İLK KURṢUN

AYDINLIK 29.3.13 Column of Turker Erturk in English


The First Thing Our Teacher Of Philosophy Taught Us Was To Admit And Confess If You Do Not Know . .
Şükrü Server Aya – Book Launching Speech İstanbul, 30.3.2013

Esteemed Ladies and Gentlemen,

I had prepared a speech, starting with my thanks to almost a quarter of the guests and friends going back to my 60-70 years, newer friends with whom I share my life and express my appreciation o all. Then, I realized that only the “thanking part”, to include like the book printer Cengiz who sees me only now, my selected supporters, Ahmet Tekin, or several other names, Berk, Yildirim, Okur families and others, here and overseas who helped me in the preparation of this “imece” or communal work. So, please excuse my I treat time as first priority. I depend on the usual trust and tolerance of those few but selected buddies, some of which are here today to see the result of their fatigue.

My class mate world respected Mr. Rahmi Koc, is a friend to any one in need, be at time of sickness and even at funerals. He says that “anything older than half a century is considered to be antique”. Well, may be this is one good reason he extended this historical place to an event on history and he did it rather than visiting me at his hospital. I wish to express my open thanks not only to him, but the director and the young ladies who have been very great help. Now, speaking of ladies, antiquity and great help, I must say that all of us feel honored with the presence of a century old couple or Romeo and Juliet of Turkey, Muazzez abla who is 99 and his Romeo Hayrettin Karaca, world reputed for his preservation of nature, ethics, intelligence and his love the whole Turkey knows from TV screens. Seems they prefer to stay engaged rather than ending their love by the marriage event. I think we should all thank them for their being younger in action and soul compared to many others.

It is the first time that Dr. Pat Walsh and I meet, and he accepted to be the editor of my book. I hope he does not regret this togetherness, but he already read me inside out and may be this is will lead our becoming more productive before I am pulled out from the life stage in the remaining few years. I have a book titled by a person in his eighties titled “The Rest of Your Life is the Best of your Life”. True statement, but how can you be happy when you have your values as a “human” which you must share with the rest of all “other humans” but their aims and means differ. Let me clarify that I was and I am still fortunate to have many much decent and loveable Armenian friends from Turkey. We have no animosity against any race, nation, color, faith or tribe or Aborigines or Masais from Kenya. It is not the outside appearance and faith or traditions we inherit beyond our preference, but it is the values of honor, decency, equality and defending truth which we chose ourselves as we grow up. Have a look at the Note-cards distributed to you for your notes or written questions. You will see the blog of “Armenians-1915.blogspot.com” called also the “Genocide Resource Center”. Too many Turks go shortcut, and they do not click on this treasure chest with over 3400 postings (370s are mine) and over 100.000 pages of authentic articles, essays, review and news starting in 2005 and still going strong. Don’t look for my name in Turkish blogs or news, they do not care about me and I do not care about them. There are over 400 E-books over 100 Documentary videos, essays of various reputed names; It is all there in the refrigerator, all you have to is to go there, click and learn for your satisfaction. If you start today, it may take at least ten years to read or surf everything. The scholars, Dr. Walsh just mentioned, do not go there, they cherry pick and use only the few hundred pages of the books put in their front and they jump into decisions. The first thing our teacher of Philosophy taught us was to admit and confess if you do not know. Some of my friends here will remember Dr. Seelye, and his teaching us “I know that I don’t know”. Yes, some lesson that proves to be true and remembered 70 years later. Our biggest problem is that we have to deal with “scholars or writers or authorities, who do not know, but they think they know all, and hence feel happy with their level of ignorance or knowledge. This is what Walsh tried to tell you, of course much nicer than I can ever do.

Good speakers, usually start with a funny joke. Below quotes are taken verbatim from the blog of Armenians and reflect what their readers think about the essay or subject.

Date: 18/9/09: From Netherlands: - You cannot build a house without foundation. Armenian try. And will fail. Mr. Aya, again good work from you! You should get the medal of honor for your efforts defending Turks against these vilifiers -

Date: 21/8/10: Observer 2009 said: - Sukru Server Aya, one of the most prolific researchers on the issue of Turkish-Armenian conflicts, has doe it again. His analysis is balanced, sources of data respectable, message poignant, fair and clear. Those who believe the myth of “poor, starving Armenian victims” should read Aya’s review, of Sam Weem’s book. For visual aid to enhance Aya’s message, one is referred to the photos at www.ethocide.com. Congratulations, Mr. Aya, you have achieved what most scholars have not been able to: you have raised global awareness of one of the most persistent myths of the 20th Century: the bogus genocide claims of Armenian falsifiers and Turk haters.-

Date: March 2, 2013: Comment on Post 3298: …- Sukru is either working fort he Turkish government or is severely insane. He made me laugh, though. Peace to all.

Date: March 27, 2013: Observer has left a new comment on your Book Review 3379, Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau (by Prof. Ata Atun)
-I congratulate researcher and productive writer Sukru Server Aya for a careful study of the Morgenthau misrepresentations and fabrications that, unfortunately, some Armenian lobbyists are still promoting today. Morgenthau was a real estate developer who raised most funds for Wilson in 1912 presidential campaign and was rewarded with an ambassadorial post. He is neither a diplomat, nor a historian. He relied on whatever his male Armenian secretaries placed on his desk. His sources are all problematic: Armenian revolutionaries, Christian missionaries, foreign diplomats, soldiers and journalists. In spite of all this biased approach by this real estate agent Morgenthau, anti-Turkish circles continue to present him as a reliable diplomat-historian. Sukru Server Aya exposes Morgenthau for what Morgenthau is: practically an imposter… -

Dear guests, I gave you three examples of opinions on some of my over 370 articles which you can click on the menu of the blog. This is the part of what is happening on the unbiased Armenian forum. Did you note any Turks read or write there? The Armenian man who said that “I am either working for he Turkish Government or I am severely insane” has proven that he did not even click on my name on the internet and see if any one would give even a janitor’s job to a man 83 years of age. Never mind the Turkish government, is there any one to offer any job? And my unknown Armenian friend does not know that “NO ONE IS EVER PAID FOR TELLING THE TRUTH, it is the LIE that sells for good prices, continued jobs in USA or even some may get jackpots such as Nobel for books edited by an American professor of literature. In one of my interviews on a local Queens TV in New York, when asked, I had made it loud and clear that I was never approached by any one, I have received no offers, no sponsors, no backup and that these books have been financed and printed by me and the income from sales does not even cover my postage and investment costs. So, this “working matter is settled”.

As regards words of appreciation, congratulations and Medal of Honor (?), these I hear from foreigners I never see. On our side in Turkey, I do not wish to speak of the vain efforts to wake up persons or positions which produced no result other than silence and distance. In one particular case an important advisor who told me that he knew the subject quite well because of his previous posts, recommended me that when I write a book, I should follow Morgenthau and use the first hand source. My second book was on his desk and I asked him if he read the sixty pages I could spare on Morgenthau and added that I am prepared to write three hundred pages if any one places an order. Well, this is the type of ice sheets or closed mentalities I am trying to break through instead of being consulted and supported.

And now, let me add a few clarification remarks to few of the important subjects raised by Mr. Walsh. I thought that instead of speaking on another subject, it is better to show the dark half of the moon or the topic.

Walsh gave live examples of what happens in biased conferences, lectures and how the Armenian or Christian or political lobbies believe and support whatever is put in their front without questioning. In such cases, only a small portion of the argument is given in a biased way. Never mind the truth, not even the full picture and details which may create suspicion are ever shown.

For example no one says that Turks and Russians signed an agreement assuring full autonomy in the Six vilayets in the East and that even the Inspector Governors, Norwegian Colonel Hoff, and Dutch ex-governor Westenek arrived in spring 1914 to go to their capital cities, Erzurum and Van. But after the Sarajevo assassination it was sure that a war was to break for sure, so the project was suspended and governors paid and sent back. When the war was eminent the CUP government sent a delegation of 28 persons to Erzurum to the 8th Dashnak Congress in August to convince them to fight for Turks whilst the Armenians in Russia were to cause incidents that will busy Russian forces.

The reward offer “Autonomy” was guaranteed by Germany as well. But the Dashnaks consulted Russians British and French, who offered two more Vilayets to Armenians and so the Armenians turned down this golden offer of autonomy which was reoffered for their loyalty to fight.

When war started some Armenian soldiers in the Turkish army went to Russia with their arms to fight against Turks and back lines of supply were sabotaged. Armenians did the exact opposite of what they were hoped to do, in which case the whole Russian army in the Caucasus would have been taken prisoners and Turks reach the Baku oilfields.

In a counter attack by Turks at Christmas time through the high mountains, the Turkish troops lost in snow and -30*C temperature, were delayed at passes by Armenian volunteers, which enabled Russians to regroup and came back to the front. Records say that a 90.000 soldier’s army was wiped away in less than ten days, because of poor gear, lack of food, disease, frozen like statues in the open air or caves. Why don’t they mention the greatest loss in military history of Turks just because Armenians who knew the terrain well, fought and stopped the Turkish troops in ice covered mountain passes?

In February 1915 Armenians in Van revolted, in April the city fell to them. We have books and photos by Armenian heroes. It was evident that allies were to land at Gallipoli and Armenian troops engaged Turkish troops in the rear when they were needed up front. German commanders asked that all front lines be cleared of all living people and animals hindering activities. The normal reaction (see some documentary films of British and Americans) would have been firing and killing immediately on spot or push towards the front to be wiped off between two fires and war deprivations.

The relocation of Armenians in Anatolia (those in the Western cities, families of those working for the State were excluded) started in mid June 1915. In late August Catholics and Protestants as well were excluded and those who were relocated were permitted to return. Certainly there was insufficiency of everything, food, guards, medicine… But transfer camps were set up to feed and rest the columns but nevertheless some acts of banditry happened on some columns which could not be protected when crossing Kurdish villages that had a grudge of revenge for atrocities committed by Armenian bands and revolutionaries.

Well, it is this incident which is claimed to be genocide. Records show that only ten percent of the people which were relocated (estimated 600 to 700.000) died in transit, epidemics, and hardships etc. 42 Gendarmes died trying to protect their groups. To prove that there was never any genocide (no intention, or place, no time, no graves, no time, and no written evidence, not even neutral eye witnesses) let us submit our written evidence that no act which may be called massacre or genocide ever happened.

*Copy of “Note Verbal” by Secretary-General Sir Eric Drummond, dated March 1st, 1920.
League of Nations, Sunderland House, Curzon Street, London, SW.1 20/4/34 Doc. ?41/2422/607
Page 2: “Further, in Turkey, minorities were often oppressed and massacres carried out by irregular bands who were entirely outside the control of the central Turkish Government.

Now, let us see what the Associated Press correspondent George Abel Schreiner, who sent the bitter letter dated December 11, 1918 to Ambassador Morgenthau, and which was found by Professor Heath Lowry, now with us, wrote in his later book “From Berlin to Bagdad”. May I express my thanks to Prof. Lowry for being the discoverer in 1990s, of this letter which exposed Morgenthaus duplicities for the first time. Morgenthau’s Diary was known at that time, but it has only been made public by Gomidas Institute in London in the recent years which enabled me to make this “hair counting comparison”.

Mr. Lowry, is free to say a few words now for this book, which owes much to him. (*)

P. 10: -Made some inquiries relative to massacres alleged to have happened in Pera. Everybody smiled. Then they told me the name of the American correspondent who had disseminated these rumors from Salonica and Athens in the form of “honest-to-goodness news dispatches. Also the he fact was mentioned that since then the Ottoman government had been rather severe toward all foreign news-paper-men. As to the massacres – there has been no such thing, of course.-

Those who surf posting No. 3099, on the “armenians” blog site, can see with their own eyes the speech of the General Secretary Fridhjof Nansen and printed in the League of Nations Official Gazette relative to the meeting held on September 21, 1929, in which this highest authority confirms that the western powers promised to give Armenians a national home, if they were to fight for them! They fought, 200.000 of them died in several fights but that the promises were never kept. Gentlemen, what better and stronger evidence can be ever produced by anyone to refute this international declaration? Those who would refer to page 105 of my second book can see the full text of the report dated August 1919 by Captain Emory Niles and Arthur Sutherland, in which they clearly confirm that it was the Armenians who killed Moslems, raped and murdered Moslems. This one was discovered by Prof. Justin McCarthy. It is all there gentlemen in the official U.S. state records, waiting to be picked up and noticed.

Now, let me add a few remarks about, Geoffrey Robertson, Q.C. which means that he is Consul of the Queen, a great reputation. Mr. Robertson wrote a book on the Armenian affair, trying to pass a resolution through the British Parliament, which failed because the Government said that there was no “international legal verdict” on this matter. When we read the book, we learn that he was given this job by a member of the Oil billionaires the Gulbenkian family in London. He was so careless that he did not even made use of the “Gomidas Institute” material, which published the Morgenthau Diary. Ara Sarafian the director of Gomidas has been in the Ottoman archives speaks Turkish and he frequently visits Turkey on errands to publicize genocide. Q.C. Robertson made a series of mistakes, because he read what was given to him and had no idea about other sources which would scrap everything he wrote ambitiously, in seconds. He speaks that the matter now is for judges. But in doing so he is not even aware of the European Court of Justice Verdict No. T-346/03, dated 17.12.2003 and refusing a court case opened by an Armenian Family which depended on a decision of the European Parliament. He is neither aware of the 60th Genocide Convention in Rome and that a special rapporteur has been assigned to the General Secretary in 2004 (?) to deal with genocide claims which must depend on authorized international court’s decision, under several restrictions. Mr. Robertson is a much reputed lawyer, but he poke his well paid hand in a subject he never knew anything about it. It is not any matter of “legal scholars”, it is matter of International Authorized Court, where no one has the courage to apply and lose.

Let me add a few remarks on the famous Hitler quote, which is known to be fake and rejected by the Nuremberg Court. Any one that will refer to my second book Chapters 13, 14/1 and 14/2 will find comprehensive pictures and data, showing the paper supposed to be the Hitler speech. This is a book named “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” by William A. Shirer, dated 1959, about 1600 pages. Here you have details of Nuremberg court, who said what, which documents were found and used, from military to all political contacts. Sir, if you do not research even this much, please do not shade the title given to you. Again in my second book there is about 60 or more pages, some excerpted from Sam Weem’s book, “Secrets of a Christian Terrorist State Armenia”. You are given plenty photos, picture of the Dashnakist Hayastan newspaper dated February 1945, praising Hitler and victory.

Gentlemen, we have irrefutable several evidences of the Armenians in the Nazi Army under General butcher Dro, Drastamat Kanajan who did most of the killings in the Caucasus together with General Antranik. They had 22.000 soldiers, special Armenian Legion with tags, medals and everything. 4.800 were special S.S. troops. Jewish people are so naïve that they believe in a lie but cannot read their own historians, such as Stamford Shaw, may be teacher of our friend Professor Lowry here, who certainly knows everything better than me. General Dro, which was searched by Russians, was accepted in USA and so the 22.000 soldiers who suddenly became “D.P.” displaced persons, war victims, and they too were nearly all accepted to USA against a quota of only 2.000 persons. How? It is all written in this book again from Armenian writer, Arthur Derunian who went to Berlin in 1949 and saw the black market operated by the Dashnakist Armenian ex-soldiers. I have given all details, even the money each had to pay to obtain affidavits to enter USA. Dashnaks do nothing for free. Money is the blood of the whole system, including today’s claims. The “Armenian Terror and Genocide claims” were produced after 1960s, when all gang leaders were accepted into USA, but had o invent an industry to “collect money for training in the Bekaa Valley” etc..

This book has been in the internet since 2008, anyone can download and take PDF prints, I still have a few copies left of this first book. It has over 2000 verbatim excerpts, which has been picked up may be from 20.000 pages reading and surfing. You may see it in many Embassies, but who ever opens the cover and looks in the contents or sources? So, I am wrong for counting the hairs in a research and find facts, and those who do not read much and do not care to learn or defend truth, they have the position and power. So, lies win over truth. Lies are paid well; truths, never!

I urge you to watch the DVD gifted by Melih Berk as “diş kirası”. It has many videos, speeches of Tayyip Erdogan in 2005 in Munich silencing everyone, words of Artin Penik who set himself on fire protesting the Esenboga attack of Armenians, and many others. But my favorite documentary is the one about the Galipoli War, with the beautiful ballad “Waltzing Mathilda”. In this documentary you see how youngsters are deceived to become heroes, and how sad they return home crippled stage that they no long can sing Waltzing Mathilda and that the ones who bid farewell to them going to war, this time turned their heads and do not want to see…

Yes, you will see Armenian children aged 10-11 being taught in camps or schools how to kill Turks. Will you all surrender to these bandits of human ethics and killers?

So far I did not, and fought against the windmills alone. I may not win, thanks to so much indifference by people who should be the ones concerned but at least I will be remembered in which side of the fence I stood. Thank you all for coming, thank you Pat, so many of you filling this room with your feelings.



Comment by Ferruh Demirmen

Ambassador Henry Morgenthau was the U.S. envoy to Ottoman Turkey during November 1913-February 1916. His book, Ambassador Morgenthau's Story, written in 1918 and based on his personal diaries, has been used by Armenian propagandists as the main source of “Armenian genocide” allegations. Because of his diplomatic post, Morgenthau’s book had an aura of credibility with the American public and greatly shaped the public perception of the Turco-Armenian conflict. To this day this perception continues almost unabated, with Morgenthau’s book cited as a prima facie evidence for Armenian claims. The book was ghostwritten by Mr. Burton J. Hendrick, a Pulitzer Prize winner, at substantial financial gain.

But Morgenthau, a key player in President Woodrow Wilson’s 1912 election campaign and rewarded with a plum diplomatic appointment in return, was unconscionably bigoted and untruthful in his book. His book is infused with blatant racism against Turks, and his claims of premeditated massacre of Armenians by the Ottoman government were outright lies. During his 26 months of service as an ambassador to Ottoman Turkey, he barely set foot outside Istanbul, and he relied on his two Armenian secretaries (whom he had brought from the U.S.) as the source of alleged Turkish atrocities in the eastern territories. His motive for demonizing and vilifying Turks (and to some extent the Germans) was to induce the U.S. to enter the war on the side of the Allied Powers – an aim apparently supported by President Wilson.

Mr. Sukru Server Aya deserves much praise for writing the book, Preposterous Paradoxes of Ambassador Morgenthau: A Factual Story About Politics, Propaganda and Distortions. This is Mr. Aya’s third book on the Armenian question. The book follows Prof. Heath W. Lowry’s seminal work, The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, published in 1990, revealing the untrustworthiness of Morgenthau’s book. Mr. Aya’s book, comparing meticulously Morgenthau’s personal diaries with his subsequent book, further exposes the duplicity, dishonesty and unreliability of the ambassador’s book. The comparison brings new perspectives as to why Ambassador Morgenthau's Story was a wartime propaganda tool lacking objectivity. Mr. Aya also explains in his book how the Armenians were duped and promised their own land if they fought alongside the allies, but ended empty-handed afterwards.

The true, self-serving character of Morgenthau’s book should be disseminated widely, and Mr. Aya’s book is a valuable contribution toward that end.

Apart from his books, Mr. Aya has given conferences and authored some 370 articles on the Armenian question since 2005. It is remarkable that he does his research at great personal sacrifice. As he stated during the inauguration of his latest book in Istanbul on March 30, 2013, he is a friend of Armenians, and holds no personal hostility toward any ethnic or religious group. But he stands for truth and justice, and that is what motivates him to write and expose. Contrast that with the racist mindset of the likes of Peter Balakian from the “genocide” camp.

F. Demirmen
April 7, 2013






Direct Link To The Document



The following article has been written by Mr. Melih Aṣık, an opinion editor of the Turkish Daily “Milliyet” on April 14th, 2013


Direct Link


Book Review : Preposterous Paradoxes: Ambassador Morgenthau

Preposterous Paradoxes: Ambassador Morgenthau …the title of Sukru Server Aya’s latest book could not be more appropriate in lieu of the information presented in a “reader friendly” format. Thankfully not an academic treatise, Mr. Aya thoroughly documents the many discrepancies in the ongoing saga that the media labels the Armenian Genocide. Using archival documents from the era, Ambassador Morgenthau’s book as well as his diary, and previously published works of other authors, Aya’s book presents information which has been in the public domain for years but ignored by the majority of historians.

Part I, comprising the majority of the book, juxtaposes Ambassador Morgenthau’s published and public views with those in his diary and the blatant inconsistencies are shocking, challenging a belief that has permeated western thought for 100 years and counting. It is impossible to read this section and not doubt the commonly accepted mantra still touted.

Parts 2-5, presented in the same format, expose the deception and manipulation used by the media, government officials, and philanthropists of that era to achieve their various goals and support their own agendas. Part 3 raises the issue of “numbers”….how many Armenians were killed and this is where archival documents are important. There are so many different numbers given by various sources that one has to either pick a side to believe or decide to believe neither side. Since all the sources of the day had an agenda, even those who claimed to be neutral, and the number of dead varied from source to source, one wonders if the exact count, which is impossible to determine, is important. There are more significant issues presented that ought to have a greater impact: the speech that Hitler supposedly said about the Armenians was considered to be fabricated by the Nuremberg Tribunal who would not accept it as evidence; do the events fit the definition of genocide.

A familiar phrase often used in academia is: Statistics never lie but statisticians do! While challenging the credibility of Ambassador Morgenthau and debunking the myth of genocide, Mr. Aya exposes the vast differences in sources that purport to hold the truth. There are many lessons to be learned from this book, the impact of which goes beyond the topic by challenging our beliefs. If one “truth” can be doubted, so can many others. In this technological age when information comes at us fast and furiously via the internet, it behooves us to become more critical in our thinking knowing that there is more than one side to a story. Popular wisdom may not be so wise.

Ellen Reisman
Shaker Heights, Ohio, USA

7 June 2013

.
Read More
Posted in Sukru AYA, Videos | No comments

Monday, January 14, 2013

3386) Video : Turkey & The Emerging World Order by Chomsky: Bogazici University, Istanbul for Hrant Dink, 18 Jan 2013

Posted on 12:22 AM by Unknown
Bogazici University announced a special lecture on January 18, which will be held by Noam Chomsky, professor in the Department of Linguistics & Philosophy at MIT.

On January 18, linguist and political activist Noam Chomsky will hold lecture dedicated to the memorial of Hrant Dink in Bogazici University, Istanbul.

The session is scheduled at 3 pm in Albert Long Hall, co-hosted by sociology and political science departments in Bogazici University.

The title of Chomsky's lecture was announced as "Turkey and The Emerging World Order".

The lecture will be in English but also simultaneously translated into Turkish.


. . . Recorded broadcast of the Conference:



.
Read More
Posted in Hrant DINK, Noam Chomsky, Videos | No comments

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

3368) Interview With François Georgeon: Revelation A Shameless Manipulation From Hachette

Posted on 5:47 AM by Unknown


  1. Interview With François Georgeon: Revelation A Shameless Manipulation From Hachette
  2. The overlap of two realities: the martyrdom of muhacir and massacres of Armenians in Anatolia
  3. "Armenian genocide" thesis about the contradictory presence
  4. Interview with Fuat Dündar, History, No. 341, April 2009
  5. Interview with Fuat Dundar: Comments By Sukru Server Aya, 14 September 2012


These days, following private discussions about the two pages dealing with the Armenian "genocide" in the new textbooks (especially those of Hachette), this document has been sent. We discovered, read (with the greatest attention) and archived: it is indeed overwhelming for some "teachers" clearly unethical. Then, not knowing what to do in the immediate future, we said that we may publish it here. For fear of losing ourselves in developments unclear, we only bolded the passages that seem most important and serious contradiction with the contents of the screenshot below.

Collections of History, No. 45, October 2009, p. 52-61:

Chronicle of a collapse

The Treaty of Sèvres in 1920, after the First World War, leaving the Ottoman Empire in Anatolia State rump Northwest ... How did we get here?
. . .
Interview with François Georgeon

AUTHOR
François Georgeon is Emeritus Research Director at the CNRS. Specialist in the history of the Ottoman Empire and modern Turkey, he has published Abdülhamid II, Sultan Caliph (Fayard, 2003), a collection of articles: Under the sign of reform: state and society of the Ottoman Empire Kemalist Turkey, 1789-1939 (Istanbul, Isis, 2009). This interview is unpublished.

History: What does the term "decline of the Ottoman Empire"?

François Georgeon: At the end of the seventeenth century, there has been a series of setbacks territorial. Should we all talk about a "decline" or "decadence" as history textbooks continue to do so? And decline what? Absolute decline compared to the golden age of the empire? The Ottomans in the seventeenth century, felt that their situation was worse than the previous century, during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, and they needed to go back to previous political practices. Decline relative to European powers? The delay of the Ottomans was first manifested in technology. Then the institutions appeared inadequate: this is the challenge of reforms called the "Tanzimat" in the nineteenth century.

Following these reforms, the central government is increasing but the phenomenon is masked by the territorial decline. In reality, the state disappears at the end of the First World War is a state relatively effective, with a significant military force, with a capacity to mobilize the population and actual administrative efficiency. Imagine a declining empire ever since the seventeenth century is not likely. He has adapted the vicinity of a rapidly changing Europe, that of the rise of capitalism, the industrial revolution, and finally that of imperialism.

The H. : The term "sick man of Europe," where is she?

FG: The phrase was used by the Russian Tsar, Nicolas I in 1853, during a conversation with the British Ambassador on the eve of the Crimean War (1854-1855). To heal this man sick, the czar would just ... dismember. The idea of sharing goes back at least to the eighteenth century. She has never gone then. Trandafir G. Djuvara even wrote in 1914 a book entitled One Hundred sharing projects in Turkey. I do not know if there has been a hundred, but this title shows how diplomats have studied this problem ... with scissors.

The term "sick man" was then popularized. Many caricatures show great powers "doctors" the nursing "sick" with poisoned potions. It has also hurt the Ottomans in their pride and arrogance. The Sultan Abdülhamid II, in the late nineteenth century, rebelled against this approach and argues that the Ottomans will show Europeans that they are, in fact, the strong men of Eastern Europe and the Middle East and Empire is a great power.

The H. : What explains the recoil geopolitics, which seems to continue so inevitable?

FG: Two main factors explain these declines territorial: the great power politics - later called imperialism - and nationalism. The empire is a victim of appetite Russia in the Caucasus, north of the Black Sea and Crimea (the Russian push to the South Seas began in the eighteenth century) of Austria-Hungary in the Balkans; the French in Algeria and Tunisia, the British in Egypt and Eastern Mediterranean, the Italians in Tripoli.

The movement of contemporary nationalism is the onslaught of great powers and is also supported by them. After a first crisis in 1804, Serbia pulls its autonomy in 1829 and Greece, aided by the movement Philhellene and naval support of the great powers, gained independence in 1830.

What is the determining factor? It's hard to say. Certainly, the major powers are assigned to provinces margins of the empire, but, lest the breakup occurs for one of them, they are neutralized and, somehow, they helped preserve highlighting the theme of "the integrity of the Ottoman Empire." The rivalry between England established in India and Russia in the Caucasus has played in his favor. The British wanted to retain a state which controlled the straits between the Black Sea, the Mediterranean and the route to India. As for Russia, because they can not capture these strategic positions, she preferred a rotting empire rather than the dominance of one or the other of the states of Western Europe. When the Treaty of Paris in 1856, the Ottomans enter the "European concert". Three years after the word of Nicolas I, the Empire is part of Europe on the diplomatic front.

The H. : Where then lies the heart of the empire, Constantinople or Anatolia?

FG: In fact, almost to the end, the heart of the empire is in the Balkans. The Turks have gained a foothold in the middle of the fourteenth century. It was the richest region and the most modern, whence came the Janissaries and taxes. At the end of the nineteenth century, Thessaloniki is a more modern city Constantinople.

The H. : What is the political picture of the early twentieth century?

FG: In 1876 a crisis erupts, both financial and political, which is a turning point. Already overburdened, the empire must face bankruptcy. That same year, three successive sultans and the Russians intervened in favor of the Slavs and Orthodox revolted in the Balkans. Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878 left a deep impression in the minds of the Ottomans armies of Tsar reached near Istanbul, was heard in the city Russian cannon thunder.'s English Istanbul save in extremis by sending ships through the Bosporus - the price will be Cyprus. In 1878, after the Treaty of Berlin, Turkey no longer in Europe that Macedonia, Albania and Thrace.

It is also in 1878 that Sultan Abdülhamid impose authoritarian regime turning. If not undermine modernization, it is a complete break with the Tanzimat as opening to the West. It continues to strengthen the state, but by reference to Islam and based on the middle classes. Sultan emphasizes the role of caliph for welding Muslim populations of the empire. Because of the disturbing events occurring after 1878: the non-Turkish Muslims, Albanians, Kurds and Arabs are agitated, wondering if the empire is strong enough to defend them. Until then, the empire was a victim of nationalism Christians. There are Muslim separatist movements represents a new danger.

The H. : In this multi-ethnic empire, what is the situation of the different communities in the late nineteenth century?

FG: It has to nineteenth century censuses and tax estimates or military travelers or diplomats. The first modern population census date of 1880-1890, it is followed by another in 1905-1906. Before 1878, non-Muslims accounted for about one third of the population can be estimated that in 1900 the empire was three-quarters Muslim. The situation varies greatly locally. In some cities, in 1900, non-Muslims are the majority. In Salonika, almost half of the population is Jewish, the rest being shared between Greeks, Bulgarians, Turks and Jews converted to Islam. Izmir is very Greek. Half of the population of Istanbul is not Muslim. We see that the term "community" is more appropriate than "minorities".

In the Ottoman Empire, particularly in the Balkans and parts of the Middle East, a map of nationalities is almost impossible to draw as they are nested in cities, villages and even neighborhoods. In his autobiography, maverick (Ramsay, 2005), Eric Hobsbawm, who had lived in Vienna after the war, said the old Austro-Hungarian capital remained a very cosmopolitan city, combining Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Jews ... But, says he, there was a common culture and language, German, allowing access to the universal. This is not the case in the Ottoman Empire. Each community is itself divided. Among the Armenians there Protestants, Catholics, Gregorians, among Muslims, Shiites, Sunnis, Alevis ...

Regarding the situation of communities on the legal level, the Tanzimat proclaimed equality before the law, but the reality is different, especially on the issue of military service. Until 1909, the army is entirely Muslim, with the exception of a few Jewish doctors as leaders doubt the fighting spirit of non-Muslims. Communities pay a poll tax, transformed into a tax exemption military. Their place in the administration is reduced, even if we know until the end of the empire of Armenian ministers. And then, in contradiction with the principle of equality, communities enjoy real autonomy, manage their schools, courts, taxes. The Ottoman state never dared to remove what had become a series of privileges to non-Muslims.

Communities also benefit from the protection of the Great Powers, which puts them in an ambiguous situation. This is France for Catholics and Maronites and Orthodox Russians, the Anglo-Saxon missionaries for Protestants. Jews get the support of the Alliance Israelite Universelle founded in France, which multiplies the schools in the Middle East.

The H. : Is this a golden age for these communities?

FG: Demographically, yes, as have shown Courbage Youssef and Philippe Fargues. What worries leaders: the growth of the Muslim population is lower. Economic modernization of the empire is mainly the Greeks, Armenians and Jews, among whom are recruited shopkeepers and entrepreneurs more active. They develop relationships with Europe. In Salonika, most commercial and industrial activities in the hands of large Jewish families as Allatini.

Muslims have a lower economic and social position. All this creates frustration. Proclamation of Tanzimat second major text, the "Imperial Rescript" of 1856, establishing the equality of all (especially for jobs in the public sector), has been described by one of the great men policies of the time, Ahmed Pasha Djevdet, which is also Ulema "day of mourning" for Muslims!

The H. : After the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878, there were large movements of Muslim populations to Anatolia. How is cohabitation with these newcomers?

FG: The issue of migration is essential for understanding the history of the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century. Successive losses of territory cause flows to what remained of the empire and Europe to Anatolia. Some inhabitants of the empire experienced a double or triple emigration.

Historians are unsure of the numbers, but we're talking about several million Muslim immigrants in the Empire in 1914. These people, called muhadjir "immigrants" are a fundamental feature of Anatolia. Ottoman Empire welcomed them, considering they represented wealth and that it was the duty of the caliph protected as they were Muslims.

The H. : For the empire, it was religion that had?

FG: Yes. These large movements of population have contributed to the Islamization of the whole. The empire was relatively underpopulated, there were long land available for new arrivals. Some immigrants were settled in the region of Bursa and Eskisehir to. Gradually, it became more difficult. We also tried to install the Caucasians in the East, but the Russians have pushed for not being in direct contact with them on their borders.

Some Caucasians like Circassians, were problematic because of their tribal organization. Many disorders and violence (neighborhood conflicts, kidnapping, rape, etc.). Anatolia due to their presence. They came into conflict with the Armenians who had difficult relations with the Kurds. All this complicated living together of the Ottoman Empire and accentuated its multi-nationality and multi-culturalism.

Part of the violence that we are witnessing the end of the empire are related to this fear, experience dramatic muhadjir. As clearly demonstrated Erik Jan Zürcher , most of the Young Turks themselves were from Turkey to Europe and had seen their little homeland disappear. They wanted to stop these successive declines in creating a state in Anatolia solid. They no longer wanted to be muhadjir.

The H. Who are these Young Turks? They could save the empire?

FG: The Young Turks, causing the 1908 revolution, believe in the empire. They are patriots and progressive secularists. The phrase "We will be the Japan of the Middle East" suggests their ideal to modernize without losing its soul and identity. They want to reduce the role of Islam and reform institutions. Their ambitious program is marked by positivism learned during their exile, notably in Paris. They have faith in science, in technology. And they want to save the empire by a constitution - finally achieve equality between communities, the panacea that will solve the problem of non-Muslims and prevent the intervention of the Europeans protect. It is with these dreams and illusions that the Young Turks arrived in the corridors of power in 1908. The empire is found with a constitution, a parliament, elections, and for at least some time, a lot of freedom of expression and association.

But the Young Turks will suffer terrible setbacks. In October 1908, three events occur simultaneously. First, Bulgaria, yet theoretically vassal declares its independence. The next day, Austria-Hungary annexed the occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina since the Congress of Berlin. Then its application Crete with Greece. Though these areas were only nominally in the Ottoman Empire on a map as they were still parts of the territory and the caliphate exercised their spiritual power over Muslim populations. Suddenly , the Young Turks were forced to surrender to the obvious: the constitution does not protect the empire. The great powers are not more favorable to a constitutional empire and modern than an old autocratic empire. In addition, freedom, actual, acquired in 1908, has benefited the communities that have created their newspapers and associations. Settled on a misunderstanding that means equality. For the Young Turks, it is first citizen of the empire and then only Armenian, Greek, Kurdish. For communities, it is the opposite.

The Young Turks also face resistance among Muslims, who accuse them of measures secularists too. A cons-revolution in April 1909 was suppressed by the army in Macedonia. For the first time, the army appears in the foreground. Rebels and soldiers clash in the streets of Constantinople. This is the end of the Young Turk revolution. Regime hardens, internal dissent are emerging financial difficulties appear. Not forgetting, of course, in 1909, the pogrom of Armenians in Adana which thousands died. In 1911, Italy invaded Tripolitania.

The H. : Then came the Balkan wars in 1912-1913. At the same time they mark the end of Turkey in Europe they are at a turning point in the Young Turk ideology?

FG: The defeat and territorial losses in Europe are painfully felt by public opinion more attentive and responsive thanks to the development of newspapers and associations, by an intellectual elite larger. Turks were beaten by nations that they once dominated, which is more humiliating than to be defeated by the great powers, the British or the Russians.

The army becomes the solution to the problems of empire: from it come the successes (the retaking of the city of Adrianople), when it is modern and well directed as it was by Enver Pasha. turns public opinion diplomacy. Time for militarism, newspapers are entitled The Bayonet, Canon.

At that time, the Ottoman elites cease to believe in the sustainability of the empire. Turks know they can not recover the lost provinces, including recent losses in the Balkans. Press about "revenge" of "revenge", but because they can not take a foreign enemy, anger channeled through the Young Turk leaders turned against the "enemy within", that is to say, the Christian communities of the empire accused of being a fifth column, and, primarily, the Armenians. The crushing defeat of the Russians face Sarikamich in January 1915, followed closely by the first steps of deportation of Armenians.

The H. : The special role of the army in Turkey today is rooted in the context of the early twentieth century?

FG: Many Young Turks were military, as Enver Pasha and Djemal Pasha. The army was the first institution to benefit from modernization in the eighteenth century, because war is the place of confrontation with the West. Huge financial effort, because of the vastness of the borders of the empire, are devoted to him: up half the budget in the nineteenth century. The German Colmar Freiherr von der Goltz, head of the Ottoman military schools established in the late nineteenth century, has a considerable influence on the generation of Young Turks. He popularized the notion of "nation in arms" and the idea that the war of the future will be a total war against frontally peoples and cultures.

It also explains the late 1890s that the Turks in the Balkans exhausted and need to refocus on Anatolia and the Arab provinces, changing capital. Following the loss of the Balkans, Istanbul has become very difficult to defend.

The theme of Anatolia as a sort of mythical country, carrying the original purity began to emerge. This idea first becomes quite romantic politics after 1913. Preferred scenario is one in which the empire continues in Anatolia and the Arab provinces, a kind of Austro-Hungarian Turkish Arabic. But this idea collapsed in 1916 with the Arab Revolt. Then the only remaining Anatolia.

The H. Why Turkey between she war in 1914?

FG: This issue has been the subject of much debate. Why a ruined country, battered post-conflict disastrous he decides to go to war? And why side of the Central Powers? Regarding this last point, the Allies bear some responsibility because they have consistently turned back to the openings of the Ottoman government in 1914. Otherwise, we talked a lot about the influence of Enver Pasha, Minister of War, a pupil of von der Goltz, who was military attaché in Berlin - the grand vizier and others were themselves hostile to Germany. A secret treaty of military alliance was signed with Germany on 2 August 1914. The Germans maneuvered to draw the Ottomans in the war sooner than they did not wish, in November.

But what counts is nationalism. The opinion, white-hot, growing interventionism. Entered the war then appears the way to serve the interests of the empire. Remember that everyone believes that the war will be short and lead to a negotiated peace. Turks think Germany will win, but especially hope they "liberate" and the guardianship of the Great Britain and France. Because of capitulations, in fact, the Ottomans are not masters of their tariffs and large foreign companies have privileges.

Another key element to understand the entry in war of empire: the Russian threat. Following his disappointment Far East, the traditional enemy of the Ottomans was taken by his dreams of expansion to the South Seas and its willingness to exercise control over the Straits - at that time, most of Ukrainian wheat passes through them. In addition, in February 1914, the Russians have revived the issue of Armenian reforms in eastern Anatolia, to the chagrin of the Young Turk leaders. They hope the destruction of the Russian power interposed by Germans and the relief that would follow on the borders north side of the Caucasus. The first major offensive launched is also against the Russians in Eastern Anatolia during the winter of 1915.

At the same time, a coup de main against the Suez Canal fails. After forcing the Allies to re-embark the Dardanelles, Ottoman troops stop the British advance in Mesopotamia. However, the Russian offensive resumed in 1916, while the fronts crack Palestine and Iraq in 1917 at the hands of the British and the Arabs revolted under the sherif of Mecca. Certainly the Bolshevik revolution relieves the eastern front and allows Ottomans pushing until Azerbaijan, the "pan-Turkic dreams" Will it happen? But the front of the Central Powers collapsed in the summer of 1918, Bulgaria was defeated. The Ottomans signed the armistice of Mudros October 30, 1918. A few days later, the main leaders Young Turks fled Germany.

The H. : The Armenian genocide is taking place from 1915. What do we know today?

FG: The power of attitude towards Armenians is part of a broader framework of the growing distrust towards all non-Muslim communities. They are more vulnerable because they are so cut off from the great powers traditionally protected. Consuls and diplomats English and French have disappeared from the scene Anatolia. Network remains the German and U.S. one until 1917, and the few missionaries who deliver valuable evidence. War gives Young Turks opportunity to implement their plan to reduce the influence of communities.

For policy towards Armenians, historians, as Fuat Dündar , use the term "demographic engineering". It was for his master craftsman, Talat Pasha, to make a space Anatolia ethnically homogeneous, and thus expel the Armenians they were to be deported to the deserts of Mesopotamia. But deport the entire population to an inhospitable region was already organizing his disappearance. What should be added to the inhuman conditions of the transfer, local violence and massacres. Overall, it is probably between 600,000 and 800,000 Armenians who fell victims of this mass murder, qualified at the time of slaughter collective and thereafter, genocide, like the Holocaust (see p. 58).

It also existed in the Young Turk leaders fear collusion between Armenians and Russians, fueled by the defection of some Armenians moved from the Russian side after the defeat of Sarikamich in January 1915 and the Van revolt. The Young Turks want to neutralize this population and away from the theater of war. It is clear the way for more reliable components, the more secure loyalty. Violence but not limited to the east. April 24, 1915, which marks the beginning of what the Armenians call the "Great Catastrophe", hundreds of Armenian leaders and figures were arrested in Istanbul.

Other communities have been affected by these movements and these massacres. The Greeks in the Aegean region, the Chaldeans in eastern Anatolia. The Kurds have been the subject of travel because their loyalty was also questioned: they were away from the border they had long been considered the guardians against the Russians.

The H. : What is the outcome of the war for Turkey?

FG: Military losses are huge: 325,000 dead, 350,000 wounded, 250,000 prisoners. The social fabric is torn as a result of displacement, deportation and massacres. The conditions of the armistice were harsh: military occupation of the Straits, control communications (railways, telegraph), demobilization and disarmament of the Ottoman troops.

In the weeks after the armistice, the British troops occupied Mosul.'s Muslim population is exhausted by years of war and demoralized. Intercommunity conflicts multiply. In May 1919, the Greeks landed at Smyrna. In March 1920, the Allies occupied Istanbul. The Treaty of Sèvres in August 1920 left the Ottoman Empire a puppet state in Anatolia Northwest with Istanbul as its capital. The Straits are internationalized. Armenian republic was created in eastern Anatolia, while autonomy is granted to Kurds. Arab provinces are divided between France and Britain as mandates. Meanwhile, resistance was organized in Anatolia ...

(Interview by Huguette Meunier).


On pages 58-59, we find this text in addition:

Armenian tragedy

From January 1915, full military disaster, the Armenians were victims of deportations which soon turned to mass murder.

At the end of the Ottoman Empire, the Armenians are repeatedly victims of pogroms, the worst being that of Adana in April 1909. In 1914 the major powers, including Russia, have over the Sultan of pressure to sign the "reform of Armenia" document providing administrative arrangements favorable to the Armenians of eastern Anatolia. This reform must be carried out by two inspectors general, one Norwegian, one Dutch, appointed in July 1914.

For the Young Turks of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), in power since 1908, which have not hitherto expressed open hostility against Armenians, the first step toward independence of these regions appears immediately dangerous. switch But what makes the situation is the outbreak of the First World War, in which the empire between 1 November 1914 alongside Germany. Indeed, in January 1915, the military situation turns into a disaster. Enver Pasha, head of government fears an "attack back" in eastern Anatolia and it was then that Armenians become "internal enemies" .

In an interview published in History in April 2009 (the "Armenian Genocide: Scenario", No. 341, p. 8-21), the Turkish historian Fuat Dündar distinguished three stages marking the offensive. 1) The first police hunt Armenian activists under the pretext of pursuing deserters after the defeat against the Russians in January 1915 Sarikamich. 2) The second, taken by Djemal Pasha, commander defeated at Suez, targets the Armenians and Dörtyol Zeytoun: he decided - this is a first - their deportation in February 1915, causing the uprising Van 20 following April. The government then ordered the partial evacuation and full of Armenians in the provinces of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis to the desert of Deir ez-Zor, Syria, and Mosul. Desertion effective Armenians in Russia and the constitution Armenian militia, with the Russians ravaged Muslim villages and killing their inhabitants, accelerate the brutalisation of political CUP. 3) The third stage is reached when the army folds: all units, plus the Special Organization created by the secret CUP perpetrate massacres in late May to August 1915.

The horror is not over. Survivors are forced deportation marches to the Syrian desert deadly in enclosed camps in Where they die of hunger and disease. Raymond Kevorkian in The Armenian Genocide (Odile Jacob, 2006) gave a detailed description of the company and chilling genocidal intent Where is clear. Recently (2009) was published the specifications of Talat Pasha, Minister of the Interior, document gathering secret texts, maps and statistics of 1914 (consolidated in 1916 for operational purposes). All figures for Armenians therein. The "telegrams" Talat Pasha (the fund DH.SFR) set for each province maximum thresholds for the Armenian population: in the regions affected by the reform (Diyarbakir, Sivas, Trabzon, Van, Bitlis, Erzurum, Mamuretulaziz) no Armenian should be left for Aleppo expected 2%, 5% for the rest of Anatolia and 10% in the desert of Deir ez-Zor, Damascus and Mosul.

The crucial point concerns the interpretation of the deportation order of 27 May 1915. For some historians, including Fuat Dündar, "intentionality" is in this document, because the authorities had deported necessarily aware that in the desert equivalent to a death sentence.

As for the quantitative assessment, the current state of knowledge, we can not establish conclusively. Fuat Dündar from estimates of survivors of a share of the population before the massacres of the other - 1.5 million according to the specifications of Talat Pasha, from 1.9 to 2.1 according to the census of the Armenian Patriarchate - , estimates that 850,000 Armenians who survived either in Anatolia or emigrated, bringing the death toll to at least 650,000. Erik Jan Zürcher for, the figure would be 600 000 to 800 000 deaths. Estimates differ widely depending on the source, but the proportion of missing remains roughly the same: about half. Men of goodwill from all sides and try to watch the horror in the face. A historian help, away controversial and hateful caricature.

L'Histoire

Google Translated Content in French : Armenologie


Attachments:

The overlap of two realities: the martyrdom of muhacir and massacres of Armenians in Anatolia
Erik Jan Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History, London and New York, IB Tauris, 2004:


"The events of 1877-78 were a disaster for the Empire. Territorial loss, even after the Berlin Conference, was enormous, including as was the case of Romania, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Thessaly, parts of Anatolia and Cyprus, overall about one-third of the territory of the Empire and more than 20% of its population.

The disaster was not limited to military, political or financial, it was also a tragedy in human terms. The immigration of Muslims in the Empire had been a characteristic of Ottoman life since the late eighteenth century. The Russian Empire was expanding along the shores of the Black Sea since. After the Russian conquest of the Crimea (1771) and again after the Crimean War (1854-56), Muslim Tatars emigrated from the north shore of the Black Sea in large numbers. The total was probably in the region of half a million people. Further east, the Russians finally took control of the mountainous region of the Caucasus in 1864, after a long struggle with guerrilla bands Cerkez (Circassians). Again, many Muslims, including some entire tribes, preferred to migrate to the Ottoman lands to live as Christian leaders. Often they were terrorized by fleeing the advancing Russian army or irregular Cossack and Georgian. A total of approximately 1, 2 million Muslims were forced to emigrate, or fled, from the Caucasus.

Regions lost Empire in Central Europe, until now, had not generally significant Muslim populations. In 1877-78, for the first time, areas where a considerable part of the population was Muslim and Turkish fell under foreign occupation, foreign occupation, which also turned a blind eye, or even helped the mass killings of villagers Muslims. The result was that about one million people fled. Many returned home after the war, but about 500,000 of them remained refugees (muhacirs). No fewer than 260,000 people were killed or died of disease and starvation. Many survivors ended in Istanbul, but many others were resettled in Anatolia in the Ottoman Balkans, Crete and even Syria, often with great difficulty, contributing to the anti-Christian sentiment became so strong at the end of the nineteenth century . "(p. 80-81)

"However, the magnitude of losses in the Ottoman Balkan War can not be understated. It was a disaster on human, economic and cultural. L'Empire lost almost all its European territories, more than 60,000 square miles in total, with nearly four million people. Again, as in 1878, Istanbul was flooded with Muslim refugees who had lost everything. There were serious outbreaks of typhus and cholera and a high mortality rate among the refugees. resettlement caused huge problems and spent many years in the slums. meaning but went even further: the lost areas (Macedonia, Albania, Thrace) were the key areas of the Empire for over 500 years. They were the wealthiest provinces and the most developed and a disproportionate share of the Ottoman ruling elite was from there. Thessaloniki, after all, was the birthplace of the CUP. A side effect of the loss was that now, for the first time in Ottoman history, ethnic Turks became a majority of the population. " (P. 108-109)

"Clearing the way to Central Asia may have been a reason for some [in the massacres of Armenians], but Turkism movement remained fairly marginal, at least until 1917. Ottoman Muslim nationalism became, however, very stronger after 1912. The fact that at least one quarter of the Muslim population of Anatolia was composed of muhacirs, refugees (or children of refugees) areas of the Balkans, the Black Sea region and the Caucasus as Christian states had conquered the bitterness added to ethnic tensions. these people remembered how they or their parents had been forced to leave their ancestral homes, often more than once, and were determined not to let that happen again.

The killings were not motivated by any racial theory false (which is a major difference with the Nazi persecution of Jews during the Second World War). "(P. 117)

"Armenian genocide" thesis about the contradictory presence

Courbage Youssef and Philippe Fargues, Christians and Jews in the Arab and Turkish Islam, Paris, Zone Books, 1996, p. 222-227:

"Passed under the tutelage of the Russian Orthodox, Eastern Armenia (Erivan and Karabakh) was known as early as 1830, a national revival, religious and cultural, and economic expansion. Eastern Armenia became independent and Greece formed two poles assets nationalism. Armenians and Ottoman Greeks were thus torn between loyalty to the empire and new aspirations for independence. recent escalated around the First World War, which saw off ottomaniste doctrine. More than three million Christians were Ottoman pay with their lives, or exile, the clash of nationalisms and the birth of modern Turkey.

The Armenians in Turkey, the number provided by the first census of the Republic, 77,000 in 1927, is our only support. What people were they the survivors? De 1.2 million people, as evidenced by the last Ottoman counts (1914), or from 2.4 million in 1882, as claimed by the Armenian Patriarchate? Formerly Milleti Sadika, "loyal nation", "all nations subject to the Porte, which has more common interests with the Turks and the most directly interested in maintaining them," the Armenian community was brutally deported to Turkey 1915-1916 the periphery Arabic. In Exodus, it undergoes extensive massacres which continue after three quarters of a century, feeding the controversy between Armenians and Turks. Remained if the Armenians in Anatolia after the deportation and killings, the vagaries of Russian political , American and French at the turn of the war were quick to rush disappearance.

To know what was the scope of the massacre, we must know the number of Armenians in Turkey before the present war, and the exiles from Turkey after. The estimates support the contention that Armenians and Turks are contradictory. Armenians cast doubt Ottoman counts: the penalty to badal, they say, encouraged Christians to hide from state officials. Echoing those of patriarchy, their estimates usually vary between 1.8 and 2.1 million Armenians on the eve of the war. Toynbee, who was not Armenian, offers a workforce of between 1.6 and 2, 0,000,000. Regarding the Turks, they endorse today as yesterday and the enumeration of 1914 put the figure at 1.3 million. Is it possible to decide this battle of numbers? Difficult to judge whether the statements of the American Committee for Relief to the Armenians and Syrians, who reported in 1915: "The Turkish government estimates are generally considered too low and those of the Armenian Patriarchate as sometimes too high, with a trend in the first case and to reduce the latter to exaggerate the number and importance of the Armenian population. "

Reopening the file in the 80s, an American scholar [Justin McCarthy] has spent the screened data Ottoman Contemporary demographic methods. Reassess It Armenian population of 1.6 million and concluded that there was no deliberate manipulation but rather an underestimation given normal counting techniques of the time. Subtracting identified Armenians in Turkey after the war, and leads to depopulation of about a million and a half people, including the massacre itself and migrants, deported or voluntary, and converted.

The relative importance of the massacres and deportations been the most controversy. Immediately after the events, the British historian Toynbee and Pastor Lepsius comptabilisèrent German refugees in Syria, Russia and Persia, which had been counted upon arrival by charitable organizations, as well as those who remained in Turkey, because they had the opportunity to reside in a large city, Istanbul or Izmir, where "it was difficult to remove them before so many witnesses" [statement of Chaliand and Yves Ternon] or because they escaped death at the cost of conversion to Islam. Toynbee leads to 660,000 people were massacred and Lepsius 1 million.

The Turkish thesis recently presented recognizes the phenomenon of deportation, euphemistically called "relocation." She admits its size, 703,000 persons of both sexes and all ages Ottoman official sources, nearly 70% of deported Armenians from . This deportation was an act of war inevitable because of the intelligence of the Armenians with the Russian enemy. This thesis also recognizes more than 300,000 Armenians died, but denies that they have perished under the Turkish sword. Far from a massacre orchestrated from above, the war dead would be collateral damage victims of epidemics or weakening during the exodus, or fallen in battle which pitted rival armies and militias. The responsibility of the Turkish regular army would not be so concerned that uncontrolled bands, Kurds or highwaymen.

Western scholars are now in a same scale suffering of the Turks and the Armenians: "Mention the suffering of a group and avoid those of the other gives a false picture of what was a human disaster, not only ethnicity. "[Justin McCarthy] One of them has taken the calculations to reach 584,000 victims [always McCarthy] (Table VI.8). Its estimate should be slightly revised upwards. Indeed, in his reconstruction of the Armenian population living in Turkey on the eve of the war, he failed the Armenians of Istanbul and Turkey to Europe. They should be back, leading to 688 000 deaths, a figure likely. Moreover, it is the magnitude that Toynbee had advanced hot.

The last vestiges of the Armenian population continued to languish after the deportations and massacres. Those who left were not allowed to return [of measures similar to those of the first Austrian Republic from the Austro-Hungarian citizenship obsolete as regards the nationality laws]. In 1965, the last census mentioning religion counted 64,000 Armenians, 32,000 of which arménophones only. Disappeared from the Great and Lesser Armenia, their community now living in the former Ottoman capital, Istanbul [note the recent immigration of tens of thousands of ex-Soviet Armenians]. "


Interview with Fuat Dündar
History, No. 341, April 2009, p. 8-21:
Armenian Genocide: Scenario


Turkish historian working today in the United States, Fuat Dündar helps us to understand how it was decided and executed the deportation of the Armenians in 1915. Leading to the massacre.

AUTHOR
After supporting a thesis in 2006 at the EHESS, "Engineering ethnic Committee of Union and Progress and turkicization of Anatolia (1913-1918)," Fuat Dündar teaches at the University of Michigan. He has published in Turkish "policy installation of Muslims led by the Committee of Union and Progress" (Istanbul, Iletisim Yayinlari, 2000) and "The Figure of modern Turkey. Ethnic engineering of the Committee of Union and Progress "(Iletisim Yayinlari, 2008). It will release in the U.S. a book entitled Crime figures. The Role of Statistics in the Armenian Question, 1878-1918.

History: To understand the tragedy that was developed in 1915, it is necessary to understand the situation of the Ottoman Empire, the "sick man of Europe", on the eve of the First World War.

Fuat Dündar: The Ottoman Empire is in full flow. The Balkan war of October-December 1912 waged against Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece and Montenegro led to the almost total loss of the European territories of the empire. It is interesting to note that the Young Turks back to power in January 1913 have never tried to recover these territories (except Adrianople, now Edirne). The Young Turks are so realistic in deciding to withdraw in Anatolia.

The H. Who are these Young Turks who came to power in 1913? What ideology the guide?

FD: The Committee of Union and Progress (CUP is the official name of the movement led by the Young Turks), was in fact came to power for the first time in July 1908 but lost in the summer of 1912. He returned to power in a coup in January 1913, then. It is composed mostly of Turks in Macedonia and the Balkans, that is to say people who have been affected personally and in their families, by the Balkan territories lost after the War of 1912.

The coup bringing the Young Turks to power in 1913 was something of a coup for refugees in the Balkans. They were first done everything not to lose their homeland, try to change up through the transfer of populations ethno-religious composition of land in Macedonia (deporting Christians in Anatolia and installing the Muslims). But it is a failure. They then turn to Anatolia, with the desire to strengthen his character and Muslim Turkish population by changing the regions mostly non-Turkish and non-Muslim.

The Young Turks, like many movements of the late nineteenth century, believe in science as a religion. They appropriate a social Darwinism teaches that to survive he must be strong, but also have a scientific approach to reality. For them it becomes a vital necessity.

The H. : Their program is to build a strong and modern Turkish nation?

FD: Yes. Turciser for Anatolia, they will use all means of modern ethnography. Maps, statistics and surveys. If we are to believe the reports of the French consulate in Istanbul, it was in the aftermath of the coup d'etat of 1913 that the Young Turks were sent scientists, sociologists in particular, for ethnographic missions in Anatolia.
What you need to understand is that the population policy of the Young Turks is a global project that affects a dozen different populations. Immediately after the coup of 1913, they first attacked the Bulgaria, of course many of the territory that is now Bulgaria in Turkey but also in Europe and eastern territories of modern Greece. To ensure the safety of the capital Istanbul, Adrianople was taken to the Bulgarian army in During the Second Balkan War in July 1913. Bulgarians, who were the majority in Thrace are then expelled. In fact the European border of Turkey today is drawn that time.

The second target was the Rum (Greek Orthodox empire, the Greeks distinguished the kingdom of Greece) outside Istanbul, they were especially numerous in the Aegean region, Cappadocia and in the region of Pontus, south east of the Black Sea. Became the border town after the occupation of the Aegean islands of Greece, Smyrna and its surroundings are subject to terror. Muslim attacks strips (consisting mostly of Macedonian refugees and Crete), who sow panic and economic boycott, which starves the people, were the two main instruments used to force Roums to emigrate. But the Young Turks continue to argue that it is a movement "voluntary". Indeed, the Young Turks do not want this to become a deportation casus belli for the kingdom of Greece.

With the decision to enter the war on the side of Germany, this policy change. The Rum who lived throughout 2000 kilometers of coastline were deported to the interior of Anatolia, predominantly Muslim region. Conversely, thousands of Balkan Muslims are encouraged by the Young Turks to emigrate to be installed in non-Muslim villages (called the muhadjir). approach to solve this problem by manipulating the ethnic composition of the population will find its conclusion with the decision of general deportation of the Armenians.

The H. : What place do they occupy the Armenians in the empire on the eve of the First World War?

FD: It is estimated that the population on the eve of the First World War to about 1.5 million. They are especially numerous in the vilayets (provinces) of Van, Bitlis, Erzurum, Sivas and Istanbul (see map, p. 10) . Until then, the Young Turks were not developed hostility towards them. In Salonika, the Young Turk nationalism was first directed, I said, against Rums and against the Bulgarians. The Young Turks admired the intellectual level of the Armenians, more likely to be educated in the Western missionary schools, and often had very close relations with the Armenian organizations: Alliance of Young Turk Committee of Union and Progress with ARF Dashnaktsutyun (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) lasted until 1914.

The H. : Everything changed with the First World War?

FD: Before the war, has been a very important event: the reform of the eastern part of Anatolia, known in the West as the "reform of Armenia", a document that was signed by the Sultan, under pressure from Western powers, in February 1914. Inspired by Russia, the plan called for the appointment of two inspectors general foreigners, with full powers, which were to administer and oversee a package of reforms for the Armenians of eastern Anatolia. This reform, which was considered by the UPC as a first step towards the independence of these regions, also meant the intrusion of the Russians to the heart of Anatolia, now regarded by the Young Turks as "Turkish home" . Its effect will be instrumental in the anti-Armenian policies conducted in 1915.

The H. Why the Ottoman Empire between he war on the side of Germany in 1914?

FD: The Young Turks admired Germany, its culture and its military power. The school German (Prussian) enjoyed great prestige among Ottoman officials. However, they waited until the end of October 1914 before embarking alongside the Germans. They feared indeed Bulgaria enemy power during the two Balkan wars and the country closer to the capital Istanbul. But at the end of 1914, they were convinced that the Germans will win the war and activism pushes them to act, and act quickly. They hope the war gains territory.

The H. : It is in this context of war that the Young Turks attack the Armenians?

FD: Among the Young Turks, a small group decided (I take their vocabulary) to "fix" the Armenian question and to "flush out" one by one all Armenians. That is why that was prepared a secret notebook of Talat Pasha, one of the Young Turk leaders, then Minister of the Interior. It is a set of texts, statistics and maps, together (most likely) in spring 1916, and whose statistical information dating from 1914, before the war. If these documents are valuable is that they have not been established for propaganda purposes or publication, but for operational purposes.

The H. : What is in the book of Talat Pasha?

FD: This book is an account of Armenians in the empire. It provides such an inventory in 1914 and another after the deportations.

This is where we get the figure of 1.5 million Armenians in the Empire in 1914 (the Young Turks had secretly establish statistics which resulted in a total of 1.2 million Armenians, but is not the number they have finally chosen, considering that all the Armenians were not made ​​identification).

In this book, everything is recorded: the number of orphaned Armenian Armenian women, Armenian property. The State of Talat Pasha is a great machine counting. It must be said that man is powerful: Minister of the Interior from 1913 and Grand Vizier, that is to say about Prime Minister, from 1917 to 1918, he was beyond his power political, technical means to observe, coordinate and control all the details of the deportation. What this book shows is that it is the Minister of the Interior who takes the lead and not, as is often argued, the Young Turk leader Enver Pasha.

The H. : This book, one does not know?

FD: Some excerpts from the book Talat Pasha had been unveiled in 2005 by the Turkish daily Hürriyet journalist Murat Bardakci. The latter, which claims to have obtained from the family of Talat Pasha, was published in full in December 2008.

In addition to this book, there are untapped sources, coded telegrams relating to power of the Young Turks who are in the Ottoman archives in Istanbul - called "Talat Pasha telegrams" - and I could view. There are three essential funds: DH.SFR (Ministry of the Interior. Bureau figure) which includes the coded telegrams; DH.EUM.2.Sube (Ministry of the Interior. 2nd section of the Branch security funds, opened in 2005) which includes responses coded telegrams to the provinces; EUM.KLU (Ministry of the Interior. Branch safety. general correspondence) where the ethnographic maps and statistics. These documents illuminate the process of administration. And the character that plays a central role here is still Talat Pasha.

The H. : These coded telegrams, you have not been the first to see them?

FD: No, of course. Coded telegrams These are at the heart of the controversy since the publication in 1920 of the work of journalist Aram Andonian, a collection of "official" documents by which it claimed that Talat Pasha ordered the extermination Armenians. I believe with many others that some of these documents are fake., But they had the merit of drawing attention of researchers DH.SFR funds from the Ministry of Interior. For the first time in 1995, two historians, Ara Sarafian and Hilmar Kaiser, tried to work. Soon, however, relations were strained between officials of the Ottoman archives and the two researchers who were eventually excluded from the archives. The event has increased the mistrust of the scientific world to these documents. It was at this time that I started working in the Ottoman archives.

The H. : What do we find in these coded telegrams?

FD: It is in these telegrams, for the first time, according to my research, Talat Pasha established for each province "thresholds" that the Armenian population must not exceed (and July 12, 1915, August 5, 27 October, etc..), but it always includes these telegrams through the decision has been taken before. In the regions covered by the "reform" of 1914 and threatened the independence project (those of Diyarbakir, Sivas, Trabzon, Van, Bitlis, Erzurum and Mamuretulaziz (see map below cons), plus a single Armenian should remain. Elsewhere, it was expected percentages of 2% for Aleppo, 5% for the other regions of Anatolia and 10% in the desert of Deir ez-Zor, Damascus and Mosul.

Specify, as I showed in my 2001 book, that at the same time the power has shifted Young Turks and other non-dispersed Turkish (Kurds, Albanians, Bosnians, Circassians, etc.). Always with the same objective: to limit the proportion varying a threshold Anatolia 5 to 10%. however, for these populations, the decision did not have the same deadly consequences for the Armenians.

Where are these percentages? I think the Young Turks believed that if a displaced population was limited to that proportion, it would be easily assimilated and absorbed by the local population.

The H. : How did we draft deportation massacre?

FD: The war has accelerated things. At the outbreak of war, the 1st-November 5, 1914, the situation is catastrophic for the Ottoman armies and going to deteriorate. The attack Sarikamich in the Caucasus in December 1914-January 1915, when nearly 100,000 Ottoman soldiers die, cold for the most part causes the failure of the offensive against Russia and opens the armies of Anatolia Tsar. With the defeat of Suez in January-February 1915 against the British, and especially the Battle of the Dardanelles, the Franco-British naval expedition in February 1915 to force the straits and occupy Istanbul, the situation is getting worse. Indeed, the Allied naval expedition then attempts landing from April 25, 1915 directly threatening the capital, under these conditions, as Enver Pasha said the American consul, "we can not afford to attack back "that is to say, in eastern Anatolia.

The H. : This is the moment that triggers the offensive against the Armenians?

FD: Three successive steps: a step after the defeat of police Sarikamich, a step deportation after the defeat of Suez, a step of massacres after the failure of the Ottoman incursion into Russia and especially after taking by Van Armenians supported by the Russians.

1) First Step police: in the Battle of Sarikamich in December 1914, the Ottoman army has identified some comitadji (nationalist agitators) Armenians from the Russian army over a small portion of the Armenians of Ottoman troops deserted. The result was the pitiless hunt activists Armenian organizations.

2) Second step, that of deportation: Djemal Pasha, commander defeated by the English at the Battle of Suez in February 1915, targets, he returned to his headquarters in Damascus, Armenians and Dörtyol Zeytoun. The first village was then the capital of a prefecture coast, considered a potential landing point for the Allies. About Zeytoun further north, in the region of Marash is a rallying point for young Armenians fleeing military service. After a few armed clashes with the Armenians, Djemal Pasha is the first deportation decision in February 1915, the families of the "rebels" of these two regions to the province of Konya.

News of the deportation panic Istanbul Armenians. Much more to the east, on April 20, the Armenians of Van begin to build barricades. On April 24, the Armenian notables were arrested in Istanbul while the idea emerges to deport Armenians to the deserts of Mesopotamia, between Aleppo and Deir ez-Zor. Throughout the history of mankind, this is the first time a population was deported to this inhospitable region.

A general panic seized the Armenians believe that the Young Turks began their systematic extermination. In this climate of terror, resistance turns into Van rebellion and the Ottoman army loses the center of the kaza (district) of the city. Istanbul then orders the evacuation, initially limited (9 May 1915) and total (23 May 1915) Armenian provinces of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis. However, these orders are not executed by the governors or are only partially executed. A large part of the Armenian population of the region fled to Russia. This desertion has accelerated the brutalisation of political CUP, where desertion was synonymous with danger, statistically and militarily. Every deserter could turn into Armenian Russian soldier - some of these deserters were already enrolled and attacked Muslim villages. In addition, the Armenian population could be reduced by the Russian army in regions that occupy it, which could pose a threat statistics in the future.

3) It is in this climate of failure of deportation and loss of Van the army fell inward. All units, regular and irregular, including tribal regiments (Kurdish) Cavalry (achiret suvari alaylari), whom James Bryce and Arnold Toynbee called in their 1916 report "battalions butchers Djevdet Bey" perpetrated mass killings. I'm not sure of the dates, but I can say that the massacres took place in late May to August 1915. That is to say, when Talat Pasha ordered by a coded telegram June 21, 1915 the evacuation of "all Armenians without exception" provinces that were included in the reform of 1914. That's when the deportation and massacre are crossed.

Much of deported Armenians who arrived in the desert regions have been held there, in a kind of concentration camps (Ermeni mintikalari) - of which there is unfortunately very little information.

The H. : What were the protagonists of these deportations and massacres?

FD: The first is the Special Organization (Teshkilat-Mahsusa, OS), a secret organization created by the paramilitary CUP probably in 1914, and is regarded by many scholars as the main actor of the mass killings. We can not measure its role before his archives, which are very likely in the military archives in Ankara are open. We know that this organization was founded during Operations Demographic anti-Rum, has been widely used on the Russian front, she took first mission is to spread terror in the Russian territories. Its ranks were swelled by the release of convicted criminals. When the offensive in the Russian Caucasus was completed, and especially after the fall of Van, May 19, 1915, the troops of the OS are folded inwards with the army, engaged in the transition to acts of mass violence.

The Ottoman Army also deported Armenians. By the law of 27 May 1915, it was indeed permitted without prior approval of the central government, to "transfer" and "to put an end immediately, with the utmost rigor, and using armed force to any aggression and resistance. "

The H. : There were people to resist or oppose this policy?

FD: When, June 21, 1915, the order of deportation "without exception all Armenians" was given and the installation in the desert region decided, Djemal Pasha, commander of the Fourth Army in Damascus and governor of the province Syria, the same one that triggered the deportation of the Armenians and Zeytoun Dörtyol in February 1915, proposed to install in Aleppo, where living conditions were not as bad. Following a lengthy discussion with Talat Pasha and Chükrü Bey (later responsible for the deportation of Kurds in the 30s), Djemal Pasha obtained permission to install a 2% (or 11,600 Armenians considering that, according to official figures, 580,000 Muslims living there) of the Armenian population in Aleppo. Djemal Pasha was well aware that giving the Armenians in the desert meant condemning them to certain death.

The other character that occurred is the vali (governor) of the province of Aydin, Rahmi Bey, who was opposed to the mass deportation of Armenians in the region.

The H. : Can we finally say that there is an order from the central government to exterminate the Armenians?

FD: This question is much more sensitive than the definition of genocide involves not only the "intent", but also an order, a written document. Personally, my goal is not to criticize the massacres. Or even to prove that the government (or not) the intent to exterminate the Armenians. I want to establish is the importance of the decision to deport the Armenians. If it was criminal, it is for three reasons: 1) the Armenians were deported en masse to the desert where there was nothing to survive, 2) in the context of the war, the deportation was accompanied attacks convoys organized by the Special Organization, by units of the army and police, but also spontaneous attacks by local populations that led to the death of thousands of people, and 3) all it was covered by a government that had been in the nineteenth century all kinds of displacements and could not ignore the consequences. Above all, the Young Turk leaders, immigrants from the Balkans, had personally measured the destructive consequences of deportation, led epidemics.

The question is not that of intentionality, but that of Talat Pasha's awareness of the lethality of deportation. Ten months before the deportation decision, Talat Pasha, to repel an application installation muhadjir beyond Aleppo (in the region of Deir ez-Zor), replied: "If we had sent and well dispersed muhadjir all died of starvation. "What difference is there between this consciousness and intentionality whose research evidence?

The H. : College or not, the responsibility of the central government is heavy?

FD: Sure. As a researcher working on the documents of the bureaucracy of the Young Turks, I never found extermination order in the Ottoman archives I consulted. However, we have not yet seen the archives of the UPC and especially those of the Special Organization. In addition, we know perfectly well that apart from formal exchanges of correspondence between the institutions and their representatives, leaders of the Young Turks communicate privately and this private communication also helps to understand the mechanisms of decision making. For example, after his wife, Talat Pasha used the telegram to him, communicated the whole night with his friends about Armenians. Statesman, he knew how to not always give an official dimension to events.

We have no information on the content of the correspondence between the center (Talat Pasha) and for example the head of the political section of the Special Organization Bahaeddin Chakir. Central figure of the CUP although never having been a member or minister, it was regarded as the main actor of Armenian massacres. But by looking paperwork found in the Ottoman archives, we understand that Talat Pasha and the government knew exactly what happened to the Armenians. Talat We know that ordered the governors of Diyarbakir (July 12), of Ankara (July 27) and finally all provinces (August 29) to stop the massacres. During this time we found for the first time (to deny the existence of) the term "policy extermination "(IMHA siyaseti).

During the mass killings of 1915 were perpetrated by the auxiliary forces and irregular (bachibozouk), the government did collect photos and documents which prove that the Armenians did have a general plan of rebellion to justify repression in the eyes of world. Somehow, during the massacres, the government sought to conceal the truth.

Finally, the government is busy distributing Armenian orphans in Muslim homes or orphanages and Armenian women married to Muslims for their "assimilation and education", in the words of the Young Turks.

The H. : What is the death toll Armenian?

FD: It is very controversial and it is a huge challenge. I think we can estimate the number of victims at around 650 000.

My starting point is the figure of the Armenian population given by Talat Pasha in 1915: 1.5 million which is a plausible figure.

The real difficulty is to determine the number of survivors at the end of 1918, when the fall of the Young Turk power. There were three categories of survivors who found refuge in the Caucasus and Europe, those who remained in Anatolia and those who survived in the desert regions. 1) Assessments of the diaspora vary between 250 000 and 350 000. The figure of 350,000 was advanced by the Government of Armenia to get, in my opinion, more humanitarian aid. 2) For the second group, those who remained in Anatolia, including Istanbul, according to the specifications of Talat Pasha, he stood at 284,000. 3) For the third group, we do not know the number of deported Armenians who survived the end of 1918 in the concentration camps in the desert. In these inhumane conditions, people were dying by the thousands from hunger, thirst, disease. We know that nearly 500,000 people have arrived in 1915, but there was no official figures on deaths in the camps concentration. I estimated about 300,000 survivors at the end of 1918.

If we total, it is estimated that about 850,000 Armenians survived, and 650,000 have died during the deportation, massacres in the camps.

The H. : What are the Armenians who escaped deportation?

FD: Some regions and families - to some extent - been spared. Even if they have experienced individual deportations, three provinces (Istanbul, Edirne and Aydin in the Aegean region) were not part of mass deportations, deportations of entire populations (without distinction). Edirne and Istanbul to the authorities fear of having to explain to the civilized world the deportation of people living in European lands.

Aydin also played a personal factor, the role of the governor (vali) Rahmi Bey, but also the fact that in this region, the main concern of the Young Turk leaders - which included Rahmi Bey - was the demographic and the economic power of Rum. The Armenians were seen as a counterweight.

Three categories of families have also escaped deportation principle: the artisan families, families of the soldiers and Armenians Protestant or Catholic.'s Notion of "family" (efradi wing), as it was defined by the Young Turks exclude boys over 15 years, and married girls over 15 years. They should be deported. Armenians who had escaped the deportations, however, be separated and distributed in Muslim villages, never exceed the threshold of 5% of the total population.

The H. : What are other people who have been affected by the ethnic policy of the Young Turks?

FD: When, from the spring of 1915, the power was estimated that the Armenian issue was "resolved" by the deportation and massacres, acts the influx of Muslims fleeing the areas occupied by Russia. These refugees were subject to reprisals Armenian organizations are separated by the Young Turks Kurds and Turks. Kurds were deported and settled in the Turkish regions with a threshold limit of 5%, and the Turks have settled in the Kurdish regions, to break the concentration of population of Kurds.

Other non-Turkish Muslims (Albanians, Bosnians, etc.). Were scattered aussi, always with the objective of Limiting the population Between 5 and 10% in the Turkish regions. During all operations thesis, Jemal Pasha was deported aussi Thousands of families of Syrian Arabs in Anatolia, a brutal policy That Will be one of the arguments of the Arab Revolt. He wanted aussi déjudaïser Palestine. At The Beginning, all the Zionist organisms Were Involved, Their leaders deported to Anatolia and Their capital confiscated Ottoman Jews Expelled Especially not. Under the pressure of international public opinion, the deportation was stopped. Talat Pasha HAD even then the idea of ​​deporting Jews kibbutz, and install the muhadjir! If this project was not executed, it is for two reasons: the reaction mentioned above and the priority given by the Young Turks in Anatolia.

The H. : You yourself are Turkish. How did you get interested in this topic?

FD: Because I am of Kurdish origin, the question of identity I worked since my childhood. Member of the Commission of minority rights in the Association of Human Rights in Istanbul (IHD), I was confronted with discrimination against non-Muslims and especially the forced evacuation of Kurdish villages and migration of Kurdish villagers. The publication of the book by Taner Akcam and especially the meeting with Armenian historian Ara Sarafian pushed me to try to make the history of forced migration in the Ottoman Empire. An article by Benedict Anderson has played a role in my direction. Maybe because I'm an engineer, my initial training in mathematics led me to determine my key issue: the role of statistics in all matters of ethnicities, religions and sects.

The H. : Have you encountered any obstacles?

FD: No, and one reason is that I do not work specifically on the Armenians, but the Young Turks. At a time when the Young Turks and positivism are openly discussed my work enlighten another aspect of their policy.

The H. : Your work they had echoes in Turkey? How have they been received by the Armenians?

FD: My editor is in its third printing in a few months, and the book has been positively received. My work has been challenged by either the Turks or the Armenians. Actually, I was surprised.

The H. : There is much talk in France Book Taner Akcam, A Shameful Act. How would you search from this book?

FD: I have some differences with Taner Akcam. I believe there has not been a decision made prior to the massacre: I think I have told you that the massacre was the product of circumstances the result of a gradual evolution of events, as has also seen Donald Bloxham. If there had been no deportation in February 1915 Zeytoun, there would been no reaction of Armenians in Van and Istanbul. If there had not been the defeat of the Ottoman army against the Russian troops during the offensive between Lake Van and Ourmiya, resistance-Van rebellion would not have occurred. If Van had not fallen into the hands of the Russians with the revolt, the mass killings would not have happened ...

Second point of disagreement with Taner Akcam: I do not think the government ordered the killings but he helped the executioners somehow, he was responsible for ensuring the logistics. However, the deportation was neither an excuse nor a secondary, but a deadly decision. For the Young Turks, the danger was not yet the Armenian demographic imbalances. This is why I advocate that policy was Turkification CUP - above all - a statistical and mathematical. The arménophobie developed not before but after the massacre. Turkish nationalism does not precede the Armenian nationalism. But it must be fair and recognize that, even if his arguments are sometimes questionable, Taner Akcam is the most energetic of "genocide scholars" (genocide scholar) in the world, and it is thanks to his energy to talk about what subject.

The H. : There was also a request for forgiveness by Turkish intellectuals launched in December 2008. This attitude is new?

FD: Yes (see interview with Ahmet Insel, p. 19). In fact, it is the result of the new world order. The Cold War now over, one of the reasons that led these two communities, Turkish and Armenian, to remain isolated from the rest of the world has disappeared. Since Turgut Ozal (Prime Minister and then President from 1983 to 1993), opens Turkey to the west, and Turkish intellectuals maintain more contact with the world and therefore also with the Armenians (a notable example is the Wats, Turkish-Armenian Workshop for Scholars).

The most important is that Turkey today faces serious about his past Young Turk and his positivist ideology. Ideology that dominates Turkey for almost a century is based on the denial of Kurdish identity, the extermination of the Armenians and the eradication of Islam. Since coming to power of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) in 2002, these three points are revalued, re-discussed.

On the other hand, among the Armenians, two major events have pushed to communicate with the Turks: the independence of Armenia (1991) and the qualification of genocide recognized the massacres of Bosnians in Srebrenica. The decision of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in 2004, confirmed in 2007, encouraged the Armenian side considers - correctly - that the massacres Meds Yeghern ("Great Catastrophe" in the terminology Armenian) deserved the qualification genocide.

Campaign asking for forgiveness is a turning point, but so far only 30,000 people have signed this text. At a time when millions of Turks can use the Internet and easily sign, I think this figure is very low. The walls are broken but the bridges are not built yet.

(Interview by François Georgeon).

Our comment: although his remarks are questionable in many respects (including acceptance of the subjective and polysemic term "genocide"), Fuat Dündar has the merit of not blindly follow the Armenian allegations outrageous and recontextualize the Young Turk revolution. His work is interesting and challenging. It may well be with her historical research on this subject crosses a new milestone.

To see a course he gave at the University of Michigan in November 2010, Please : Click Here
Please Feel Free to email Us A Better Translation



Comments by Sukru Server Aya Marked in Blue

===================================================================
TA 3368 Comments on Fuat Dundar’s interview in 2009:
http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2012/09/3368-interview-with-francois-georgeon.html
====================================================================


Thank you for your valuable addition to your E-library. Although there are several by-passes or oversights in the interview made with Mr. Fracois Georgeon, I am under the impression that he was sincere and objective within his sources of knowledge. Hence, I prefer to comment on the interview with Mr. Fuat Dundar. I have watched a portion of his lecture and must express my surprise for the deliverance of same in a university.

Interview with Fuat Dündar
History, No. 341, April 2009, p. 8-21:
Armenian Genocide: Scenario
. . .

. . It is physically impossible to study from different sources, the depth and dimensions of various Armenian publications, plus original documents. However, University of Michigan is reputed for Armenophiles . . .


.
Read More
Posted in Fuat Dundar, Sukru AYA, Videos | No comments
Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • 3155) FBI Busts Armenian Mafia For The Largest US Medicare Fraud, Identity Theft & Bank Fraud
    March 26, 2012 Update Armenian Power Organized Crime Group Convicted For One Of The Largest Identity Theft And Bank Fraud Schemes Armenian...
  • 3348) ASALA: We All Believed In One Idea: Party
    ASALA: We All Believed In One Idea: Party Interview with "The interlocutor of Armenia," Commander Group "Yeghia Keshishian...
  • 2925) Opinions: Kassesian, Sassounian, Aramyan, Novosti, Aramyan, Jabarian, Badalyan, Eckian, Bayramoglu, Toranian, Gürsel . .
    Young Turks: Who Were The Authors of Our Genocide?, Ioasif Kassesian , From His book: Nemesis Are Armenia’s Policies Making Turkey Stron...
  • 3054) Pursuing The Just Cause Of Their People A Study Of Contemporary Armenian Terrorism by Michael M.Gunter
    Pursuing The Just Cause Of Their People A Study Of Contemporary Armenian Terrorism by Michael M.Gunter West Would Not Support Armenian Po...
  • 3026) Human Rights Report: Turkey & Armenia (US Department of State March 2010 Release)
    2009 Human Rights Report: Turkey Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2009 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices Marc...
  • 3344) Armenian-Speaking Muslims Of Hamshen in Turkey: Who Are They?
    By Vahan Ishkhanyan / © 2012 Hetq online “I feel uncomfortable conversing through a translator. We can speak that language fairly well, but...
  • 3267) Ara Papian: Woodrow Wilson’s Arbitral Award Is A Valid And Legally Obligatory Document
    Indefatigable analyst of international legal and historical contexts of occupation by the Turks in Armenia, the former Armenian diplomat ...
  • 3290) After All, Who Remembers The Armenian Victims Of The Armenian Terrorism?
    Maxime Gauin 30 June 2011 One of the most clear evidence that the Armenian nationalist parties have no right to present themselves as prom...
  • 3030) SlideShow: Armenian Legion In Nazi Germany
    Related Link: Nazi-Armenians Helped Hitler Exterminate Jews . . 12 Images Kindly Provided by TruckT...
  • 3405) My Soul Dear Agop, . .
    After serving the University of Istanbul, Cerrahpasha Faculty of Medicine for 41 years, Prof. Dr. Agop Koto?yan, otherwise also known as...

Categories

  • 1 (19)
  • Adolf HITLER (2)
  • Alfred De Zayas (3)
  • Ambassador Morgenthau (3)
  • ANCA (4)
  • Andranik Pasha (1)
  • Andrew Mango (3)
  • Ara BALIOZIAN (12)
  • Ara Papian (7)
  • Ara SARAFIAN (2)
  • Aram Andonian (1)
  • ARF (21)
  • Armen GARO (6)
  • Armenian TERROR (24)
  • Arthur Sutherland (4)
  • ASALA (5)
  • Ata ATUN (1)
  • AUSTRALIA (6)
  • Berch Keresteciyan (1)
  • Boghos Nubar Pasha (1)
  • Book REVIEW (21)
  • C F Dixon-Johnson (1)
  • CANADA (1)
  • Captain Emory Niles (3)
  • Court Cases (10)
  • David Holthouse (2)
  • David Saltzman (5)
  • Dennis R PAPAZIAN (1)
  • Dogu Ergil (1)
  • Edward ERICKSON (4)
  • Erciyes University (1)
  • Ergun KIRLIKOVALI (17)
  • Erman SAHIN (1)
  • France (5)
  • Free E-Books (54)
  • Free E-Books And Docs (2)
  • Fridthjof Nansen (1)
  • Fuat Dundar (5)
  • General Harbord (1)
  • Guenter LEWY (2)
  • Gunay Evinch (4)
  • Gwynne DYER (1)
  • Hampig Sassounian (8)
  • Harut SASSOUNIAN (32)
  • Henry Morgenthau (1)
  • Hetq.am (28)
  • Holdwater (2)
  • Hrant DINK (5)
  • Innocent(?) Armenians (24)
  • James Bryce (2)
  • Jeremy Salt (6)
  • Justin McCarthy (11)
  • Kamer KASIM (1)
  • Karabakh (1)
  • Kemal Cicek (2)
  • Khatchig Mouradian (11)
  • Khojaly (1)
  • League of Nations (13)
  • Limited Book Preview (2)
  • Lobbying (1)
  • Louise NALBANDIAN (2)
  • Maxime GAUIN (31)
  • Media SCANNER (4)
  • Mehmet PERINCEK (1)
  • Michael GUNTER (5)
  • Mumtaz SOYSAL (2)
  • Murad Topalian (4)
  • Noam Chomsky (1)
  • Norman STONE (3)
  • O E LUTEM (6)
  • Pasdermadjian (1)
  • Peter Balakian (2)
  • Pierre Loti (2)
  • Rafael De Nogales (1)
  • Research PAPERS (76)
  • Robert Fisk (8)
  • Ruben Safrastyan (1)
  • S (41)
  • Sadi DINLENC (2)
  • Sedat LACINER (1)
  • SlideShows (5)
  • Southern Poverty Law Center (2)
  • Sukru AYA (150)
  • Taner AKCAM (11)
  • Turkkkaya ATAOV (4)
  • Vahakn DADRIAN (1)
  • Vahe AVETIAN (4)
  • Vercihan Zifliyan (3)
  • Videos (43)
  • William Saroyan (2)
  • Woodrow Wilson (2)
  • Yucel GUCLU (2)
  • Yuksel OKTAY (1)
  • Yusuf Halacoglu (1)
  • Zoryan Institute (4)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (29)
    • ▼  September (1)
      • Would You Like To Login To This Site & Publish Yo...
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (7)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (7)
  • ►  2012 (49)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (4)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  May (8)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (5)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2011 (139)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (5)
    • ►  October (6)
    • ►  September (11)
    • ►  August (10)
    • ►  July (8)
    • ►  June (17)
    • ►  May (16)
    • ►  April (16)
    • ►  March (11)
    • ►  February (19)
    • ►  January (17)
  • ►  2010 (208)
    • ►  December (13)
    • ►  November (20)
    • ►  October (9)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (26)
    • ►  July (14)
    • ►  June (9)
    • ►  May (32)
    • ►  April (28)
    • ►  March (21)
    • ►  February (15)
    • ►  January (16)
  • ►  2009 (75)
    • ►  December (7)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (13)
    • ►  September (23)
    • ►  August (27)
    • ►  July (3)
Powered by Blogger.