2
Taner Akçam (Photo: Cihan)
19 April 2013 /SAMET ALTINTAŞ, İSTANBUL
As the anniversary of the forced migration of Armenians in 1915 from Anatolia to other parts of the Ottoman Empire approaches, historian Taner Akçam suggests Turkey open its borders with Armenia as a step to normalize relations between the two countries. Talking to Today's Zaman Akçam claims that the Armenian issue cannot be solved unless diplomatic ties are established.
Akçam, who describes the 1915 events as “genocide,” says that Turkey should stop wasting its time with the argument that 1915 was not genocide “by exploiting people's ignorance about this matter and creating an unnecessary debate.” He argues that 1.2 million Armenians were forced to relocate under the rule of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) during the Ottoman Empire.
He also argues that thirst, hunger and diseases were among the main reasons for the deaths, but the groups that were forced to migrate were intentionally led to take the longer routes and were not provided water and food during their journey.
As far as acts of revenge are concerned, Akçam acknowledges that after the Russians withdrew from Eastern Turkey during the Bolshevik revolution, some Armenian gangs committed some vengeful acts in 1918 and 1919. However, he believes that they were small in proportion to the number of Armenians killed.
How many Armenians in the Ottoman territories faced forced relocation in 1915?
The booklet, attributed to Talat Paşa and referred to as the "Black Relocation Book," gives the number of relocated Armenians as 924,158. From some Ottoman documents, we understand that Talat Paşa had completed this booklet possibly in early 1918. Therefore, this figure should be considered as the most accurate number of relocated Armenians. But the list has also some major shortcomings. The list does not include the names of about 15 settlements from which Armenians were sent to exile particularly including İstanbul, Edirne, Aydın (İzmir), Bolu, Kastamonu, Çanakkale, Kütahya and Urfa. Adding the Armenians relocated from these provinces to the list, we get an estimated 1.2 million Armenians who faced forced relocation.
How many people died during the relocation?
The new Ottoman government that came to power after the CUP in November 1918 established a commission to investigate Armenian losses. This commission made public its findings in May 1919. Thus, the number of Armenians who died in the process was 800,000. In 1928, the Turkish General Staff published a book on the casualties during World War Ir. According to the statistics provided by the General Staff, "Some 800,000 Armenians and 200,000 Greeks died due to killings or relocation or in labor battalions." These figures do not include those who died of hunger, disease or massacres in Caucasus after 1918. If all of these figures are added together, we get a total number of over 1 million.
How did these deaths occur?
One can distinguish at least four different methods. First, as we know from the cases in Trabzon, Samsun and Ordu, Armenians were forced to board small boats and eventually drowned. After the CUP lost its hold on power in October 1918, the Ottoman parliament started to discuss this issue openly. For instance, in a session held on December 11, 1918, Trabzon Deputy Mehmet Emin Bey, noting that he was a nationalist, said that he himself witnessed how Armenians were forced to board boats and how those boats capsized, killing the Armenians. "I directly saw this incident, I mean the real Armenian incident," he said, adding: "There was a district governor in Ordu. Under the pretext of sending Armenians to Samsun, he ordered that Armenians board boats, and in this way, he paved the way for the destruction of Armenians." From the eyewitness testimonies made during a trial held in 1919 in Trabzon, we know that Armenians were killed through a similar method in Trabzon as well.
Second, in some regions, Armenians were not even forced to migrate, but they were killed on the spot. Even in some places, they were gathered together in churches and these churches were burned down. In a written testimony, Vehip Paşa, who was appointed as the Third Army commander after 1916, provided examples of this method, which he witnessed in Bitlis and Muş.
Third, the Intelligence Service forces or Kurdish clans attacked the convoys and massacred people at certain locations. Norwegian Caregiver Wedel-Jarsberg, who was working in Erzincan, prepared a report of the accounts of Armenians who survived the massacre by playing dead and the soldiers who witnessed the massacre.
Massacres continued in Syria and Iraqi deserts, which were identified as the destination of relocated Armenians. Here, gendarmerie troops and Circassian gangs played a major role. The number of Armenians who died in Deir ez-Zor deserts in 1916 is estimated to be around 200,000.
Still, we can say that deaths resulted mostly from hunger, thirst, disease and climate conditions. Deportation convoys were intentionally forced to travel along longer routes, and water and food were denied to people in resting places, and no measure was taken as regards the ill people who were forced to move on. The Ottoman documents referred to the epidemics in Armenian convoys by saying: "Do not bring them closer to military troops. Do not allow them to approach cities. Make them move on." In other words, Armenians were destroyed through intentional use of hunger, thirst and disease.
Do you believe there was genocide in 1915? Why?
Few people know this, but the Armenian genocide was one of the main reasons why the word "genocide" was first coined. Raphael Lemkin is the person who coined this word and admits that the Armenian genocide was decisive in this coinage. In his memoirs, he talks about it. In 1921, he was a university student in Poland when an Armenian named Soghomon Tehlirian killed Talat Paşa. During the trial of Tehlirian, he asked his professor why a person who was responsible for the deaths of about 1 million people [Talat Paşa] was not arrested, but a person who killed one person [Tehlirian] was jailed and tried. His professor's answer was interesting. "Think about a farmer who has chickens," he said. "The farmer kills the chicken. Why not? It's none of your business. If you meddle with it, you go too far." The professor implied that the state officials cannot be tried for their actions due to the principle of national sovereignty. Lemkin's answer to this was simple: "But people are not chickens."
After recounting this story, Lemkin says as he was impressed, he decided to abandon philology and attend the law faculty. "Sovereignty does not mean the right to kill 1 million people," he said, and started to work on a bill that would allow state officials to be tried for the murders they committed. In this way, he found a definition for genocide and exerted great efforts to ensure that this was passed as law. He eventually became successful. In 1950s, he promoted his coinage in his writings and speeches.
The drafter of the 1948 Genocide Convention says, "I coined this word in order to describe what happened to Armenians," and we still claim that 1915 was not genocide. Isn't this a bit odd?
I think we should stop wasting our time and energy in arguing, "1915 was not genocide." This insistence is useless. In the end, those groups who seek to deny 1915 by exploiting people's ignorance about this matter are creating an unnecessary debate.
What do you think about Armenians' killing Turks?
Acts of revenge are known to follow every massive collective massacre. After Russians withdrew from Eastern Turkey with the Bolshevik revolution, some Armenian gangs were responsible for actions that can be described as revenge in Erzurum, Erzincan and Kars in 1918 and 11919. Murder is murder. Revengel acts cannot be justified in any manner. We feel sorry for any person who dies. But you cannot place the uncontrolled acts of some gangs against a state's massacring its 1 million citizens and argue that there was a conflict in which two sides were mutually engaged. After 1945, there were acts of revenge targeting Germans in Poland and Czechoslovakia, but no one tried to argue, "There was no Holocaust," by using these acts as justification. The acts of revenge that occurred after 1918 cannot/should not be used as an answer to the question whether the Ottoman government systematically destroyed its own citizens. Under the influence of their nationalist policies, the CUP destroyed about 1 million people of this country just because their religion and language differed. This is the main point.
How can the Armenian issue be settled?
I think we should focus on a "Turkish issue" rather than on the "Armenian issue." First of all, we, Turks, must learn to talk about what happened in the past. We must learn both what the truth was and how we can discuss it. To know the history and to talk about it are two different things. In my opinion, the first thing to do is to learn how this can be understand and share sorrows. We must be able to listen to Armenians as they talk about their heart-wrenching experiences.
On the state level, a government which really intends to solve this issue must first change its wording and style. The language of peace and fraternity is different from that of strife. First of all, a language that would facilitate the settlement must be created. To this end, the publications including official websites of certain ministries that are rife with hatred and animosity against Armenians must be shut down. The Board of Coordination for Combating Unfounded Genocide Claims, subordinated to the National Security Council (MGK), must be abolished. As long as there is such a board, it is a fancy to believe Turkey will launch an initiative about genocide.
The second step is to open up border crossings. We can solve a past issue only by normalizing ties today. As long as the border crossings are kept closed and no diplomatic ties are established with Armenia, this issue cannot be solved. If people don't know each other and if they don't talk to each other, how will they settle a problem among themselves? Dialogue is a sine qua non component of communication among people. If Turkey opens up the border crossing with Armenia and calls it "Hrant Dink Border Gate," this would be a good gesture.
The third step is to pay an apology. In our time, heads of state and government pay apologies in connection with past tragedies. When they do, this does not humiliate them. Rather this boosts their prestige. Turkey must take this step. Given the fact it expected Israel to pay an apology for an attack against a vessel, Turkey should know that Armenians nurture similar expectations about the death of about 1 million people in 1915. This problem cannot be solved if the Turkish government does not accept the fact that 1915 incidents were a crime that cannot defended ethically. For two societies and sides to make peace, Turkey must denounce the crimes against the Ottoman Armenians in 1915 and declare that those crimes were morally/ethically unacceptable.
The third step is to launch a number of moves to compensate for the past's losses. In this scope, Armenians who have roots in Anatolia may be automatically granted Turkish nationality. Another step may be to recognize and promote the Armenian cultural heritage in Turkey. In this framework, religious, cultural and historical Armenian buildings may be renovated. Reviving the destroyed or damaged Armenian cultural heritage and civilization in Anatolia will be the best response to the past's subversive mentality.
Another symbolic yet significant step might be to return the churches, buildings and fields seized in Çukurova region that belonged to Sis Katolikos Church, which is of secondary or even equal importance to Mother Cathedral of Holy Etchmiadzin.
There are also things we, as a society, can and should do. For instance, we may organize mevlit ceremonies at major mosques such as Kocatepe of Ankara or Sultanahmet of İstanbul on April 24 to commemorate the victims of 1915. It is religious duty for everyone to pay respect to the people who died tragically. Other religious ceremonies may be organized as well. Religions teach us how to pay respect to human beings. Therefore, I assume, religious ceremonies would be very meaningful for the victims of 1915.
Another thing we can do is to raise awareness of people. To ensure public access to correct information and eliminate the negative effects of 100-year old brainwashing and denial policies, programs may be organized to inform the public, through participation of Armenian scholars, and via the press. Joint committees at various levels (Parliament, universities, etc.) between two countries may be established and civilian initiatives to boost relations may be developed.
The primary purpose is to eliminate prejudices. To this end, we must learn to develop and use a language that fosters peace and solution. After these steps, the parties may start to talk about what they can do to redress the past injustice.
What do you expect to happen in 2015 as the 10th anniversary of forced relocation?
If Turkey does not seriously change its policies and if the US, the UK and Israel do not modify their stance, I don't think anything special will happen. And there is nothing to suggest that these countries will change their position. I think people will conduct demonstrations and repeat the same arguments. And then April 25 will come.
He also argues that thirst, hunger and diseases were among the main reasons for the deaths, but the groups that were forced to migrate were intentionally led to take the longer routes and were not provided water and food during their journey.
As far as acts of revenge are concerned, Akçam acknowledges that after the Russians withdrew from Eastern Turkey during the Bolshevik revolution, some Armenian gangs committed some vengeful acts in 1918 and 1919. However, he believes that they were small in proportion to the number of Armenians killed.
How many Armenians in the Ottoman territories faced forced relocation in 1915?
The booklet, attributed to Talat Paşa and referred to as the "Black Relocation Book," gives the number of relocated Armenians as 924,158. From some Ottoman documents, we understand that Talat Paşa had completed this booklet possibly in early 1918. Therefore, this figure should be considered as the most accurate number of relocated Armenians. But the list has also some major shortcomings. The list does not include the names of about 15 settlements from which Armenians were sent to exile particularly including İstanbul, Edirne, Aydın (İzmir), Bolu, Kastamonu, Çanakkale, Kütahya and Urfa. Adding the Armenians relocated from these provinces to the list, we get an estimated 1.2 million Armenians who faced forced relocation.
How many people died during the relocation?
The new Ottoman government that came to power after the CUP in November 1918 established a commission to investigate Armenian losses. This commission made public its findings in May 1919. Thus, the number of Armenians who died in the process was 800,000. In 1928, the Turkish General Staff published a book on the casualties during World War Ir. According to the statistics provided by the General Staff, "Some 800,000 Armenians and 200,000 Greeks died due to killings or relocation or in labor battalions." These figures do not include those who died of hunger, disease or massacres in Caucasus after 1918. If all of these figures are added together, we get a total number of over 1 million.
How did these deaths occur?
One can distinguish at least four different methods. First, as we know from the cases in Trabzon, Samsun and Ordu, Armenians were forced to board small boats and eventually drowned. After the CUP lost its hold on power in October 1918, the Ottoman parliament started to discuss this issue openly. For instance, in a session held on December 11, 1918, Trabzon Deputy Mehmet Emin Bey, noting that he was a nationalist, said that he himself witnessed how Armenians were forced to board boats and how those boats capsized, killing the Armenians. "I directly saw this incident, I mean the real Armenian incident," he said, adding: "There was a district governor in Ordu. Under the pretext of sending Armenians to Samsun, he ordered that Armenians board boats, and in this way, he paved the way for the destruction of Armenians." From the eyewitness testimonies made during a trial held in 1919 in Trabzon, we know that Armenians were killed through a similar method in Trabzon as well.
Second, in some regions, Armenians were not even forced to migrate, but they were killed on the spot. Even in some places, they were gathered together in churches and these churches were burned down. In a written testimony, Vehip Paşa, who was appointed as the Third Army commander after 1916, provided examples of this method, which he witnessed in Bitlis and Muş.
Third, the Intelligence Service forces or Kurdish clans attacked the convoys and massacred people at certain locations. Norwegian Caregiver Wedel-Jarsberg, who was working in Erzincan, prepared a report of the accounts of Armenians who survived the massacre by playing dead and the soldiers who witnessed the massacre.
Massacres continued in Syria and Iraqi deserts, which were identified as the destination of relocated Armenians. Here, gendarmerie troops and Circassian gangs played a major role. The number of Armenians who died in Deir ez-Zor deserts in 1916 is estimated to be around 200,000.
Still, we can say that deaths resulted mostly from hunger, thirst, disease and climate conditions. Deportation convoys were intentionally forced to travel along longer routes, and water and food were denied to people in resting places, and no measure was taken as regards the ill people who were forced to move on. The Ottoman documents referred to the epidemics in Armenian convoys by saying: "Do not bring them closer to military troops. Do not allow them to approach cities. Make them move on." In other words, Armenians were destroyed through intentional use of hunger, thirst and disease.
Do you believe there was genocide in 1915? Why?
Few people know this, but the Armenian genocide was one of the main reasons why the word "genocide" was first coined. Raphael Lemkin is the person who coined this word and admits that the Armenian genocide was decisive in this coinage. In his memoirs, he talks about it. In 1921, he was a university student in Poland when an Armenian named Soghomon Tehlirian killed Talat Paşa. During the trial of Tehlirian, he asked his professor why a person who was responsible for the deaths of about 1 million people [Talat Paşa] was not arrested, but a person who killed one person [Tehlirian] was jailed and tried. His professor's answer was interesting. "Think about a farmer who has chickens," he said. "The farmer kills the chicken. Why not? It's none of your business. If you meddle with it, you go too far." The professor implied that the state officials cannot be tried for their actions due to the principle of national sovereignty. Lemkin's answer to this was simple: "But people are not chickens."
After recounting this story, Lemkin says as he was impressed, he decided to abandon philology and attend the law faculty. "Sovereignty does not mean the right to kill 1 million people," he said, and started to work on a bill that would allow state officials to be tried for the murders they committed. In this way, he found a definition for genocide and exerted great efforts to ensure that this was passed as law. He eventually became successful. In 1950s, he promoted his coinage in his writings and speeches.
The drafter of the 1948 Genocide Convention says, "I coined this word in order to describe what happened to Armenians," and we still claim that 1915 was not genocide. Isn't this a bit odd?
I think we should stop wasting our time and energy in arguing, "1915 was not genocide." This insistence is useless. In the end, those groups who seek to deny 1915 by exploiting people's ignorance about this matter are creating an unnecessary debate.
What do you think about Armenians' killing Turks?
Acts of revenge are known to follow every massive collective massacre. After Russians withdrew from Eastern Turkey with the Bolshevik revolution, some Armenian gangs were responsible for actions that can be described as revenge in Erzurum, Erzincan and Kars in 1918 and 11919. Murder is murder. Revengel acts cannot be justified in any manner. We feel sorry for any person who dies. But you cannot place the uncontrolled acts of some gangs against a state's massacring its 1 million citizens and argue that there was a conflict in which two sides were mutually engaged. After 1945, there were acts of revenge targeting Germans in Poland and Czechoslovakia, but no one tried to argue, "There was no Holocaust," by using these acts as justification. The acts of revenge that occurred after 1918 cannot/should not be used as an answer to the question whether the Ottoman government systematically destroyed its own citizens. Under the influence of their nationalist policies, the CUP destroyed about 1 million people of this country just because their religion and language differed. This is the main point.
How can the Armenian issue be settled?
I think we should focus on a "Turkish issue" rather than on the "Armenian issue." First of all, we, Turks, must learn to talk about what happened in the past. We must learn both what the truth was and how we can discuss it. To know the history and to talk about it are two different things. In my opinion, the first thing to do is to learn how this can be understand and share sorrows. We must be able to listen to Armenians as they talk about their heart-wrenching experiences.
On the state level, a government which really intends to solve this issue must first change its wording and style. The language of peace and fraternity is different from that of strife. First of all, a language that would facilitate the settlement must be created. To this end, the publications including official websites of certain ministries that are rife with hatred and animosity against Armenians must be shut down. The Board of Coordination for Combating Unfounded Genocide Claims, subordinated to the National Security Council (MGK), must be abolished. As long as there is such a board, it is a fancy to believe Turkey will launch an initiative about genocide.
The second step is to open up border crossings. We can solve a past issue only by normalizing ties today. As long as the border crossings are kept closed and no diplomatic ties are established with Armenia, this issue cannot be solved. If people don't know each other and if they don't talk to each other, how will they settle a problem among themselves? Dialogue is a sine qua non component of communication among people. If Turkey opens up the border crossing with Armenia and calls it "Hrant Dink Border Gate," this would be a good gesture.
The third step is to pay an apology. In our time, heads of state and government pay apologies in connection with past tragedies. When they do, this does not humiliate them. Rather this boosts their prestige. Turkey must take this step. Given the fact it expected Israel to pay an apology for an attack against a vessel, Turkey should know that Armenians nurture similar expectations about the death of about 1 million people in 1915. This problem cannot be solved if the Turkish government does not accept the fact that 1915 incidents were a crime that cannot defended ethically. For two societies and sides to make peace, Turkey must denounce the crimes against the Ottoman Armenians in 1915 and declare that those crimes were morally/ethically unacceptable.
The third step is to launch a number of moves to compensate for the past's losses. In this scope, Armenians who have roots in Anatolia may be automatically granted Turkish nationality. Another step may be to recognize and promote the Armenian cultural heritage in Turkey. In this framework, religious, cultural and historical Armenian buildings may be renovated. Reviving the destroyed or damaged Armenian cultural heritage and civilization in Anatolia will be the best response to the past's subversive mentality.
Another symbolic yet significant step might be to return the churches, buildings and fields seized in Çukurova region that belonged to Sis Katolikos Church, which is of secondary or even equal importance to Mother Cathedral of Holy Etchmiadzin.
There are also things we, as a society, can and should do. For instance, we may organize mevlit ceremonies at major mosques such as Kocatepe of Ankara or Sultanahmet of İstanbul on April 24 to commemorate the victims of 1915. It is religious duty for everyone to pay respect to the people who died tragically. Other religious ceremonies may be organized as well. Religions teach us how to pay respect to human beings. Therefore, I assume, religious ceremonies would be very meaningful for the victims of 1915.
Another thing we can do is to raise awareness of people. To ensure public access to correct information and eliminate the negative effects of 100-year old brainwashing and denial policies, programs may be organized to inform the public, through participation of Armenian scholars, and via the press. Joint committees at various levels (Parliament, universities, etc.) between two countries may be established and civilian initiatives to boost relations may be developed.
The primary purpose is to eliminate prejudices. To this end, we must learn to develop and use a language that fosters peace and solution. After these steps, the parties may start to talk about what they can do to redress the past injustice.
What do you expect to happen in 2015 as the 10th anniversary of forced relocation?
If Turkey does not seriously change its policies and if the US, the UK and Israel do not modify their stance, I don't think anything special will happen. And there is nothing to suggest that these countries will change their position. I think people will conduct demonstrations and repeat the same arguments. And then April 25 will come.