Between the years of 1915 and 1923 in World War I, about 1.5 million ethnic Armenians died in Ottoman, Turkey. These victims died either from the merciless Turkish soldiers or from starvation and disease. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, genocide can be classified as "the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political or cultural group." Turkey indicted leaders of the massacres after World War I, and even acknowledged that the atrocities did occur but insisted they were not "systematic" killings. Systematic or not, a significant number of Armenians were mass-killed.
Controversy concerning this issue and the definition of genocide is raising questions and arguments in Washington D.C. During his presidential campaign, President Obama promised the American people he would, in fact, deem the mass killings genocide. All of a sudden, his standpoint has changed and with a 23-22 House of Representatives vote, the Obama administration has urged the House to push back the resolution.
In 2006, the French Parliament voted that not recognizing the killings in Armenia as genocide was a criminal act. In response to this ruling, Turkey denounced any former relationship established with France. Several other countries have come forward to recognize the genocide but the U.S. stays stagnant.
First of all, when you kill hundreds of thousands of people from a single country, it is, in my opinion, genocide. Secondly, this resolution has been on the horizon for years, with the Bush administration in 2007 pushing the matter to the back burner to relieve any tension that might ensue with Turkey. Obviously, this is due to the Iraq war and Turkey's involvement and ties with the U.S. and the war effort.
Turkey has claimed a vote determining the events as genocide would undoubtedly hurt the relationship between the U.S. and Turkey, as well has hinder any resolution occurring between Armenia and Turkey.
Our excuse for backing out of the resolution is simply that we now believe it would hurt the on-going negotiations between Armenia and Turkey. The real truth is that Turkey, due to its ongoing trade relationship with Iran, will be able to help the U.S. limit the nuclear program in Iran. We refuse to identify the monstrosity that occurred for the sake of our own political agenda. Even Mrs. Clinton, a key leader on this issue, has publicly acknowledged that the change of mindset in Washington is due to ongoing circumstances that have "changed in very significant ways."
Letting another country threaten us because we plan on holding them accountable for their actions is not the American way. America is at war and we do need to stay loyal to our allies, but the recognition of the massive loss of Armenian life is long overdue.
What kind of a truth are you seeking? The one which exists or the one you want to imagine?
And I want to ask the world opinion:Your sensitivity about the news condemning genocides, mass murders is appreciable. But while doing this, are you ready to be unbiased? Will you be able to discard all the prejudices the history has instilled you up till now? Will you be able to prefer scholar research rather than your prejudices? Will you be able to acknowledge the great massacres inflicted on the Turks and Muslims by the Armenians before and after 1915 and condemn the Armenians who slaughtered the Turks and Muslims and buried them into large holes and even threw alive children into these holes in the Eastern Anatolia?(see diary of Russian Lieutenant Colonel Twerdo-Khlebof 'I wittnessed and I Lived Through Erzurum, 1917-1918'; www.tsk.mil.tr/ermeni_sorunu/arsiv_belgeleriyle...).
(Ahmet Refik Altınay. İki Komite ve İki Kıtal. İstanbul, 1919;p.71-72; 321-23). So, I am afraid, it is actually you the world opinion who should face himself and review his identity and missions.
8) The most dramatic lie is about the outcome of the Armenians who were relocated. Because the majority of these Armenians returned to their homes.Because, on December 18, 1918, a law which let the Armenians return to their homes and claim their properties was issued by the Ottoman State. Here are non-Ottoman evidences:*In a report prepared by the Armenian Patriarchate in 1921, the Armenians who lived on the Ottoman territory in Anatolia, Middle East and those who returned to their previous locations were shown as 644 900. It was added that the Armenians who became Muslim, who were hidden and who did not encourage to return their homes were not included but they were assumed to be 20 000 (US ARCHIVES NARA, Mikrofilm No.T1192, Roll8; Department of State Papers….,860).
*In an article published in Der Neue Orient Magazine, it was reported that the number of Armenians in Ottoman Armenia was thought to be 470 000 (including those who lived in İzmir and İstanbul but excluding the Armenians who escaped to Caucasia). Additionally more than 30 000 Armenians lived in Adana and 40 000 in Aleppo (Der Neue Orient May 1919, p.178) *The Armenian population in Cilicia (Çukurova) was reported as 218 000 in a document dated July 1920 (US ARCHIVES NARA, Mikrofilm No: T 1192R 2;860J.01/395. Appendix. From Acting High Commissioner Dulles to the Foreign Minister). * In a memorandum presented by Bogos Nubar Pasha, chief of the Armenian delegation in Paris Conference which started in December 1918, it was announced that 150 000 Armenians were given financial support and taken to Cilicia from Syria, by the French government (US ARCHIVES NARA T1192. Roll 4.860J.01/431).
6) Falcified allegations of speeches attributed to Atatürk: The first claim about Atatürk was that he was one of the witnesses, who supported Armenians in the “Court Martials” in İstanbul. In this claim, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was confused with the Chairman of the “Court Martials”, Mustafa Kemal, whose nickname was Nemrud. During the trials in İstanbul, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was in Ankara as a leader of the national struggle. James H. Tashjian, the Armenian editor of the Armenian periodic ‘The Armenian Review’ stated that Mustafa Kemal, then a Pasha, never appeared before such a tribunal, nor did he render such a statement (The Armenian Weekly Boston, Mass, USA, March 20, 1982 and The Armenian Review Volume thirty five, Autumn 1982); however James H. Tashjian was fired from his work later on.The second claim was about the statement, which attributed to Atatürk, given to Los Angeles Examiner in 1926. However, it was proven that this claim, which was made by Armenians in various platforms, was false. There was no evidence that a Swiss journalist, who was called Emile Hilderband, came to Turkey. Moreover, it was not found a journalist named Hilderband in the documents of Swiss authorities.The third claim about Atatürk was put forward in Yeni Binyıl newspaper on 8 October 2000. According to this claim in his speech in Turkish Grand National Assembly, on 24th of April 1920, Atatürk condemned the leaders of Jön Turks for their genocide policies. After the research of the speech records of Turkish Grand National Assembly in both open and secret sessions, it was proven that Mustafa Kemal did not make such speech.One of the last claims about Atatürk was put forward by European Parliament, Foreign Affairs Committee’s report on Turkey on 22nd of November 2001. In the footnote of this report claimed that Mustafa Kemal gave a speech in Turkish Grand National Assembly on 10th of April 1921, in which he said Jön Turk regime followed genocide policy against Armenians in the First World War. After the research of the speech reports of Turkish Grand National Assembly, it was seen that Mustafa Kemal did not speak in Turkish Grand National Assembly in April 1920. He even did not attend any session of Assembly during April 1920.
2) Aram Andonian’s book (The telegrams which were claimed to have been sent by Talat Pasha to order the massacre of the Armenians which were pressed in the book of Aram Andonian in 1920, in three languages): It was proven by both the Turkish and foreign historians that these telegrams were fake too.
After these telegrams were published in Daily Telegraph in England, in 1922, the English Foreign Ministry made a scrutiny and denounced that they were prepared by an Armenian association.
3)Diary of American Ambassador Morgenthau published in 1918. Professor Heath Lowry, an American historian from Princeton University displayed that the events depicted in the book depended on lies or half true events, by comparing the information Ambassador Morgenthau sent to American Foreign Ministry, with those written in the diary, in his book entitled ‘The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story’, in 1990.Moreover, after the Ottoman State was defeated in the 1st World War in 1918, the French and English invaders arrested 144 high level Ottoman veteran or civil officials including the ex-prime ministers, ex-deputies, governors and many newspapermen, and banished them to Malta Island, claiming that they were responsibles for the death of Armenians. The English seized all the Ottoman Archives and also all other archives in other cities, like those in Urfa Governer House. No evidence could be found neither in the Ottoman and English Archives. The Americans, whom the English applied, failed to find any proof in American Archives and reports of American Orthodox church or missioners either. Nor could Damat Ferit Pasha, then the Ottoman Prime Minister who was in absolute collaboration with the English could find any evidence. And, they had to make all these 144 Ottomans free in 1921, since they could not find any proof to be able to verdict them.
The Armenians vehemently resist to present their thesis in historical commissions or even to admit international courts. It is simply because of that their thesis depend on forgeries and lies and they know it very well. If the protocols are substatiated and if all their lies are displayed in historical commissions, how can they look at the face of their youngsters whom they fed with Turkish hatred and how can they live? Here are a few of these forgeries, lies and falsified documents:
1)The number of Armenians who were relocated: The number of the Armenians who were relocated was reported as 600-700 thousand by Bogos Nubar Pasha who attended to the talks of Sevres Treaty as a chief of Armenians; however this number is given as 1.5 million, 2 and even 2.5 million by different by some Armenian sources. However, 1.5 million was the total number of Ottoman Armenians including those who live in the West Anatolia (therefore who were not relocated) according to Encyclopedia Britannica’s 1910 edition which was edited by an English editor. It is another striking point that the total number of Ottoman Armenians was increased to 2.5 million in 1953 edition of the same encyclopedia which was edited by an Armenian editor.
This means that:
1) Since genocide is accepted as a reality fort he Armenians, it will not be possible to discuss whether the 1915 events are genocide or not in the Sub-commission on the Historical Dimension mentioned in the Second Protocol. Therefore, the question arises of what this Sub-commission’s task will be. In response, it has been expressed that its task will include the discussion of issues like returning back of Armenian properties left behind after the Armenian relocation, giving compensation to descendants of the relocated Armenians, and preserving Armenian monuments, such as churches, in Turkey. Turkey is not willing to re-examine these issues which have already been resolved with the Treaty of Lausanne. 2) By putting forth that some of the Turkish lands are in fact Armenian, Armenia indirectly claims a right over these territories. In other words, again indirectly, it does not recognize the border between the two countries.
I want to remind you that The main trigger to force USA to join WWI was the letter sent by German Foreign Minister Zimmerman to Mexico expressing support to Mexico to get back the Mexican states Arizona, Texas which had just been annexed by the USA. Germany's claim on Zudetland and Gdansk just because they were its historical lands caused burst of World War II! The Worls history is a history of wars which broke up because of territorial claims of states. While territorial claims are so important to be reasons of war, it is not possible to understand the indifference of the USA to the Armenian claims as an ally. Armenia and the US have a false conviction that under such a pressure, Turkey will be forced to ratify the protocols. Experiences of previous years have shown that it must not be expected from Turkey to submit to such pressures and change their stance. Adoption of the resolution in the House of Representatives, clearly will damage the US-Turkey relations. Whether it is brought to the House Floor does not change the negative feelings of the Turks against the American politicians including the president. This will also push Turkey-Armenia relations which have already reached a deadlock to enter into an irreversible path and will harm the normalization process. Rejection of the protocols by Turkey can even be possible. This situation could harm Turkey, but will also harm the US and hinder the Turkey-Armenia relations. Moreover, it will also increase anti-Americanism which already exists in Turkey.
Just as almost every year, Armenian propaganda and the initiatives of the Armenian lobby have gained momentum again prior to April 24 and the pressure upon the US President over the speech he will deliver on April 24 has increased.
But the difference now compared to the previous years is that the aim of the draft resolution being considered again by the Foreign Affairs Commission is to corner Turkey into ratifying the protocols.
However, they are the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia’s decisions which have brought the process to point of zero. Because:
The court stated that the protocols can not be interpreted or applied in a way that would contradict paragraph 11 of Armenian Declaration of Independence. Article 11 of the Armenian Declaration of Independence of August 23, 1990 refers to Eastern Anatolia of Turkey as Western Armenia and as such beholds that this area is part of Armenia.
Since the Armenian constitution recognizes as a basis “the fundamental principles of the Armenian statehood in the Declaration of Independence of Armenia”, it likewise accepts the characterization of Eastern Anatolia as Western Armenia and this, albeit indirectly, translates into the advancement of territorial claims.
Additionally paragraph 11 also states that The Republic of Armenia stands in support of the task of achieving international recognition of the 1915 Armenian genocide in Ottoman Turkey and Western Armenia.
and thinks it moral. I am ready to die for what I have done, and I know I shall die for it."In 1921, the former Turkish Interior Minister and central architect of the genocide, Talaat Pasha, was assassinated
by an Armenian in Berlin. It was the assassin's trial and subsequent acquittal that caught the attention of Raphael Lemkin.