Author: Harut Sassounian

Armin Wegner, a German soldier and medic, was sent to the Ottoman Empire during World War I, while the two countries were allies. Wegner was stationed along the Baghdad Railway in Syria and Mesopotamia, where he witnessed the deportations and mass killings of Armenians, subsequently known as the Armenian Genocide. He wrote several books describing his eyewitness accounts.

Contrary to the Ottoman prohibition of taking pictures during the Armenian Genocide, Wegner took hundreds of rare photographs and smuggled them into Germany. At the Ottoman government’s request, he was arrested and some of his photographs were destroyed. He succeeded, however, in hiding many other negatives in his belt. In 1919, Wegmer sent a letter to U.S. President Woodrow Wilson at the Peace Conference, advocating for an independent Armenia. In 1921, Wegner testified at the trial of Soghomon Tehlirian who was accused of assassinating in Berlin Talaat Pasha, the Turkish mastermind of the Armenian Genocide. Tehlirian was found not guilty by the German court and released from jail. Along with his wife, Wegner visited the Soviet Union and Soviet Armenia in 1927-28. In 1968, he was invited to Soviet Armenia by the Catholicos of All Armenians and awarded the Order of St. Gregory the Illuminator. Wegner died in Rome in 1978, at the age of 91. Some of his ashes are buried in Armenia.

Wegner’s illustrious counterpart was Franz Werfel, a Jewish-Austrian novelist, playwright, and poet. He was well-known for his novel, “The Forty Days of Musa Dagh,” which described the Armenian resistance to the Ottoman troops during the Genocide.

Werfel visited the Middle East twice in 1925 and 1929. While in Damascus, Syria, he encountered Armenian children, survivors of the Genocide, who were in destitute condition, which inspired him to write ‘The Forty Days of Musa Dagh.’ The world famous novel was published in Germany in 1933. Werfel lectured throughout Germany about the Armenian Genocide, as a result of which he was accused of spreading anti-Turkish propaganda. The Nazi newspaper ‘Das Schwarze’ denounced him for carrying out propaganda against “alleged Turkish horrors perpetrated against the Armenians.” The same German newspaper, suggesting a link between Armenians and Jews, condemned “America’s Armenian Jews for promoting in the U.S.A. the sale of Werfel’s book.” His books were burned by the Nazis. He was forced to flee and eventually settled in Los Angeles where he died in 1945. His body was reburied in Vienna in 1975.

Interestingly, these two distinguished pro-Armenian writers clashed with each other when Armin Wegner wrote a lengthy letter on December 14, 1932, asking Franz Werfel not to write his novel, ‘The Forty Days of Musa Dagh,” because he was in the midst of writing his own four-volume book on Armenians. Werfel responded to Wegner with a short letter on December 23, 1932, explaining that their planned books did not conflict with each other, as they were about different aspects of the Armenian Genocide. I would like to thank Zaven Khatchaturian, President of Armin T. Wegner Society of USA, who translated both letters from German into English. The German original of both letters are kept at the Shiller-Nationalmuseum und Deutsches Literaturarchiv, Marbach/Neckar, Germany. Here are excerpts from these two historic letters:

Wegner wrote from his home in Berlin to Werfel in Vienna: “When I returned to Berlin from Meran, a few days ago, after a long and serious illness, the first thing my friends told me, and what I read in the newspaper soon after, was: Franz Werfel is writing a novel about the downfall of the Armenian people. I saw, in the eyes of my friends, that they were afraid to upset me with this news, which they didn’t want to keep from me.

You must know dear comrade and master that I myself have been writing a voluminous novel about the fate of the Armenian people. I am surprised that you have not heard of it through my numerous publications, if not otherwise, by my letter to the Prussian Academy of the Arts, Department of Poetry. In the fall of 1930, I set out in more detail the project of my Armenian novel. This letter became the reason that the Academy gave me more support for my work on it. Or, perhaps, because of my writings on Armenia, and the well-known fact, in literary circles, that I was involved with the development of the fate of the Armenian people, inspired you to turn to this huge thing on your own way.

You can justifiably reply that history is the field of every man and artist, and that no one can deny them the opportunity to choose the area for his artistic work that appeals to them and entices them. However, you will understand that the message of your plan filled me with a certain anxiety, when you hear the lifelong attachment of fate between me and the demise of the Armenian people as a human and artistic experience.

It may happen, and it has repeatedly occurred, that two poets simultaneously and independently of each other (or even knowingly) grab the same substance. It happened recently – two dramatists almost concurrently, wrote a play about the Panama Canal (likewise two writers wrote the play The Captain of Köpenick). Such is the misfortune of the one who comes later, even if he is perhaps the stronger artist, and, as a result, the success of his creation suffers. In such a case, it is one work among other of the artist’s works, which he may or may not give up easily. However, sooner or later he must cope with the flop. In my case it is the work of my life.

In the years 1915 to 1917, I was a member of the Turkish Army in Turkey, and became one of the few individual European eyewitnesses to one of the most terrible tragedies of humanity in the course of the millennia – perhaps, only surpassed by the tragedy of World War I, of which it was a part. As my relationship with Armenia goes back to my boyhood days, and my family’s ties to the Middle East have been around for generations, I did not feel caught up in this shattering experience. The first testimonials I wrote were more human than poetic. In the spring of 1919, before the books of Lepsius could appear in open bookshops, Theodor Wolff published, in the Berliner Tageblatt, my then well-known letter to Wilson on the demise of the Armenian people. I am sending you a copy.

(To be continued next week)

A coalition of 20 Armenian-American organizations announced the formation of a “Pan Armenian Council of Western USA” on August 15, 2019.

The coalition members are:

Western Diocese of the Armenian Church of North America

Western Prelacy of the Armenian Apostolic Church of America

Armenian Catholic Eparchy of Our Lady of Nareg of North America

Armenian Evangelical Union of North America

Armenian Revolutionary Federation of Western USA

Armenian Democratic Liberal Party Western District

Armenian Relief Society of Western USA

Armenian General Benevolent Union, Western District

Armenian Missionary Association of America

Homenetmen Western USA

Hamazkayin Armenian Educational and Cultural Society of the Western USA

Armenian Youth Federation of Western USA

Unified Young Armenians

Armenian National Committee of America Western Region

Armenian Assembly of America Western Region Office

Armenian Bar Association

Organization of Istanbul Armenians

Armenian Youth Association of California

Armenian Society of Los Angeles

Iraki Armenian Family Association of Los Angeles

These are respectable organizations that have carried out admirable work in the Armenian-American community.

The Council announced that “other community organizations which desire to be part of this collective effort and have a minimum of 300 active members are hereby invited to become members of the Council.”

Furthermore, the Council explained that “the advisory nature of this Council and its decisions are not binding on any of its member organizations. Thus, the Council’s existence does not confer upon the Council any authority over the activities of its member organizations.”

The Council stated that its mission is:

 • “To implement and realize projects of a pan-community nature.

 • To encourage and assist projects which advance the collective interests and the rights of Armenian communities across the Western United States.

 • To undertake steps to resist actions and efforts which are contrary to the collective interests and rights of Armenians.

 • To gather and apply the Armenian Community’s resources for the benefit of the Community’s interests as well as the welfare of the Republics of Armenia and Artsakh.

 • To always be mindful of the collective welfare and security of the Armenian Community.”

These are all worthwhile goals for the benefit of the local community as well as the interests of Armenia, Artsakh and the Diaspora. Anytime Armenians of all walks of life join hands, it is a good thing. As we all know, unity is strength. The more Armenians get organized and speak in one voice, the more powerful they become as a global nation.

The member organizations of the Pan Armenian Council met on August 16, 2019, at the Western Diocese in Burbank, California, and signed a joint statement. Even though the event was publicized as a press conference, no opportunity was provided to the attending journalists to ask questions and clarify certain important issues.

Here are some of the questions I would have liked to raise at that conference:

1) What prompted these organizations to establish such a Council at this time?

2) Prior to the creation or recreation of such a Council, a similar coalition with almost identical membership existed from 2013 to 2015, under the banner of “the Armenian Genocide Centennial Committee – Western USA.” Why was the latter disbanded in 2015 and reconstituted now, losing the opportunity for four years of collaborative efforts? As one of the co-chairmen of the Centennial Committee I had repeatedly urged the group not to disband it after the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide in 2015. Furthermore, as I reported in my October 8, 2015 editorial, during the Sept. 26, 2015 worldwide conference of the Armenian Genocide Centennial State Committee in Yerevan, Armenia, with the participation of representatives of Armenian Genocide Committees in 40 countries, a resolution was adopted to form a “Pan Armenian Council” which would supersede the Centennial Committee. An organizing committee was appointed composed of high-ranking Armenian government officials and major Diaspora organizations. Unfortunately, the envisaged Pan Armenian Council did not materialize and the 40 chapters of the Armenian Genocide Centennial Committee were disbanded.

3) If the purpose of the newly formed Pan Armenian Council is to establish a coalition of Armenian organizations in Western USA, the community already has had such a coalition for a decade, functioning under the banner of “United Armenian Council of Los Angeles” composed of 39 Armenian organizations.

4) The name of the new Pan Armenian Council should have been something like “Coalition of Armenian Organizations of Western USA.” Pan Armenian means that all Armenians in Western USA are members of this Council, whereas only members of certain organizations are represented in it. The great majority of Armenians, who are not members of any organization, are not represented in this Council.

5) Even though two of the three traditional Armenian political parties are in the Council, the third one, the Social Democrat Hunchakian Party, for some unknown reason, is not represented in the Council. There are other major Armenian organizations that are not members of the Council, such as the Armenian Professional Society, and Armenian Engineers and Scientists of America. More importantly, the huge community of immigrants from Armenia is not adequately represented in the Council.

Finally, the true Pan Armenian Council or an entity with a similar name should be elected by the votes of all Armenians in the Western USA or throughout the Diaspora, not just by members of several organizations. Only such a democratic entity can claim to represent all Armenians and speak in their name.

A unique lawsuit, not based on the Armenian Genocide, was filed on May 29, 2019, by two Armenian-Americans against the Turkish government in the United States Federal Court, Central District of California.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Barkev Ghazarian, 88, and his son Garo Ghazarian claiming “statutory elder abuse, intentional affliction of emotional distress, violation of international law, breach of fiduciary duty, and intentional interference with expectation of inheritance,” according to a 44-page complaint filed by the law firm of Kerkonian Dajani LLC.

Plaintiff Barkev Ghazarian is a United States citizen born in Kaladouran, Turkey, on April 20, 1931. He currently resides in Glendale, California. His son, Garo, born in Beirut, Lebanon, is also a United States citizen who lives in Glendale.

The complaint alleges that the Plaintiffs suffered personal injury caused by tortuous acts or omissions of the Turkish government’s employees or agents in the United States.

In the 1930’s Kaladouran was a small Armenian village in the outskirts of Kessab, Syria. Barkev Ghazarian was baptized as an Armenian Christian “at a sacred ceremonial site in Ballum, Turkey, in 1931,” according to the lawsuit. Ballum or Barlum is the ancient site of Greco-Roman ruins, located at a short distance from Karadouran. For centuries local Armenians, including Barkev’s family, went on pilgrimages to Ballum to perform their religious and cultural rites.

In 1939, Kaladouran was divided between Syria and Turkey, leaving Barkev’s home on the Syrian side, while his family’s fields and lands remained on the Turkish side. Since Ballum was also left under Turkish control, the Armenians of Karadouran could no longer practice their rituals in that locality.

On October 11, 2017, Barkev decided to go to Turkey to visit Ballum. He submitted his visa application to the Turkish Embassy in Washington, D.C., indicating that his expected entry date would be December, 23, 2017. In the visa application, under the category of “Type of passport,” he checked the box for “Other,” and under “please specify,” he wrote, “Armenian minority Christian (Treaty of Lausanne).” Barkev also indicated that he was born in Karadouran, Turkey, and was seeking entry “for religious pilgrimage” purposes. He intended “to pass native religious and cultural traditions to his son, Plaintiff Garo, and progeny,” according to the lawsuit.

Coincidentally, on October 8, 2017, Turkey suspended issuing visas to U.S. citizens in retaliation to a similar ban by the United States to Turkish citizens until December 28, 2017. Barkev did not possess a U.S. passport, but even if he did, Turkey would have refused to issue him an entry visa under the ban. The Turkish Embassy received Barkev’s visa application 71 days prior to his arrival in Turkey, whereas the Embassy required that such applications be submitted at least 30 days prior to his expected date of departure. Having received no response from the Turkish Embassy, Barkev sent a reminder on December 6, 2017, inquiring about the status of his visa application.

On December 11, 2017, an employee of the Turkish Embassy called the office of Barkev’s son Garo, indicating that the Embassy did not know what type of visa Barkev was requesting, even though it was clearly marked “short stay” on the visa application. In response, Barkev sent an email to the Embassy on December 18, 2017. Then on December 21, 2017, he sent a reminder to the Embassy by overnight mail. On December 22, 2017, on the same day that Barkev was supposed to fly to Turkey, the Embassy’s Consular Section sent an email to Barkev instructing him to reapply to the Turkish Consulate in Los Angeles with a passport. The complaint filed by Barkev’s attorneys stated that Turkey’s representatives “harassed, agitated, confused and thwarted Barkev, intending to devalue his identity as an Armenian Christian born in Turkey.”

The lawsuit also quoted Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the Republic of Turkey in 1923, proclaiming: “Armenians have no rights at all in this prosperous country. The land is yours, the land belongs to the Turks. In history this land was Turkish, therefore it is Turkish and will remain Turkish forever. The land has finally been returned to its rightful owners. The Armenians and the others have no rights here at all. These blessed regions are the native lands of the true Turks.”

The lawsuit further stated that “by such proclamations, and then through a series of legislative, executive, administrative, and other official and/or unofficial acts, Defendant established the Targeted Policy at the very founding of the Republic of Turkey. The core purpose of the Targeted Policy was to strip native Armenian Christians of their rights and identities by dehumanizing, degrading, expropriating, alienating, disenfranchising, liquidating and otherwise severing Armenian Christians from their native lands and their native customs and religious practices on such lands. This Targeted Policy has been pursued, institutionalized, enhanced and adhered to by Defendant’s successive governments and agents.”

The lawsuit accused Turkey and its agents of violating the following international agreements by their mistreatment of Barkev:

— The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights;

— The United Nations Principles for Older Persons;

— The Treaty of Lausanne;

— The European Convention on Human Rights;

— International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;

— Vienna International Plan of Action on Ageing;

— The Madrid International Plan on Ageing;

— United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Unfortunately, Barkev’s health has deteriorated since his planned visit to Turkey in 2017 to the extent that he is no longer able to travel. This was the last chance Barkev had to visit his native land and practice his religious rites as a Christian Armenian. The Turkish government deprived Barkev of that opportunity by not granting him a visa.

On June 10, 2019, the U.S. Federal Court asked the Plaintiffs to show cause, in writing no later than June 28, 2019, as to why the case should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. As requested by the Court, the Plaintiffs filed a 25-page memorandum on June 28, 2019, explaining that Turkey, as a foreign Sovereign, does not have the right to violate U.S. and international humanitarian laws, particularly on American soil.

On July 11, 2019, the Federal Court decided that it would “defer a determination about its jurisdiction until after Turkey has been served and had an opportunity to provide its views on the issue.”

This lawsuit provides a unique opportunity to affirm the rights of Armenians to visit without a visa their native lands now occupied by the Turkish government!

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit made a decision on August 8, 2019 to deny the appeal of two lawsuits brought by several Armenian-Americans demanding compensation from the Republic of Turkey and two of its banks for confiscating their properties shortly after the Armenian Genocide.

The first lawsuit was filed in December 2010 by Alex Bakalian, Anais Haroutunian, and Rita Mahdessian seeking $65 million from the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey, and Ziraat Bankasi. The second lawsuit was filed by David Davoyan (administrator of the Estate of Garbis Tavit Davoyan) and Hrayr Turabian against the Republic of Turkey, the Central Bank of Turkey, and Ziraat Bankasi.

The U.S. Court of Appeals confirmed the 2013 decision of Judge Dolly Gee who dismissed the two lawsuits declaring that “under the political question doctrine which says certain questions — in this case, determining whether Turkey’s actions were genocide — should be handled by the executive branch, not the courts,” according to the Courthouse News Service.

The Court of Appeals, however, rejected the appeal for a different reason, claiming that the two Armenian lawsuits are time-barred. In 2006, a California statute had set the deadline of 2016 for such lawsuits stating that: “Any action, including any pending action brought by an Armenian Genocide victim, or the heir or beneficiary of an Armenian Genocide victim, who resides in this state, seeking payment for, or the return of, deposited assets, or the return of looted assets, shall not be dismissed for failure to comply with the applicable statute of limitation, if the action is filed on or before December 31, 2016.”

Unfortunately, in 2012, Ninth Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber, in the case of Movsesian vs. Victoria Versicherung AG, invalidated the California statute extending the time for bringing certain insurance claims based on the Armenian Genocide. Judge Graber wrote that “the statute was preempted under the foreign affairs doctrine,” according to the Metropolitan News-Enterprise.

The August 8, 2019 decision by the Court of Appeals is contradictory in the sense that while Judge Andrew Hurwitz (who wrote the Appeals Court decision) acknowledged the Armenian Genocide, he ignored the fact that genocides have no statute of limitations, therefore regardless of how much time has elapsed, genocide-related lawsuits could not be dismissed on that basis.

Here is what Judge Hurwitz wrote in the decision of the Court of Appeals: “From 1915 to 1923, in what is often referred to as the Armenian Genocide, the Ottoman Empire massacred, forcibly expelled, or marched to death 1.5 million of its Armenian citizens, seizing the property of the dead and deported.”

In another section of the Appeals Court decision, under the subtitle of ‘Facts,’ Judge Hurwitz added the following comments on the Armenian Genocide: “During World War I, the Ottoman Empire began forcibly relocating its Armenian subjects away from population centers and into the desert, causing the deaths of over a million ethnic Armenians. The Empire confiscated the real property left behind by the victims of the Armenian Genocide.”

Judge Hurwitz agreed with the plaintiffs’ assertions in the lawsuits. He wrote: “We assume for purposes of our accrual analysis the truth of the plaintiffs’ allegations that either the Ottoman Empire illegally seized the property of the plaintiffs’ predecessors, or the Empire and the Banks placed the property in trust under Turkish law but later illegally refused to return it. If the initial expropriation was wrongful, the plaintiffs’ claims accrued by 1923. If the property was placed in trust, the plaintiffs acknowledge that ‘laws passed in 1928 and 1929 formally ended Turkey’s disingenuous attempt at the restitution of immovable property to its rightful Armenian owners.’ Thus, the plaintiffs’ predecessors should have known well more than ten years ago that Turkey did not intend to return their property.”

Judge Hurwitz complained that the lawsuits were filed decades after the Armenian Genocide which does not make them timely. “We have no doubt that the survivors of the Ottoman Empire’s atrocities experienced enormous hardships after the seizure of their property. Indeed, we take as true the allegations in the operative complaints that it ‘was impossible for Plaintiffs’ predecessors to seek compensation for their stolen property or focus on anything but rebuilding their lives.’ But, these suits are brought not by the victims of the Armenian Genocide, but rather by residents of the United States long removed from its carnage, many of whose predecessors relocated to this country decades ago. And the current plaintiffs do not allege any attempts to pursue these claims judicially prior to 2010.”

The attorneys for the Armenian-American plaintiffs reacted with anger at the Appeals Court decision. Kathryn Lee Boyd of the law firm Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht — representing three Armenian-Americans whose ancestors owned 122.5 acres of land that was confiscated — told the Metropolitan News-Enterprise:

“It is a sad day for Armenian-Americans when a U.S. court has stripped them of all access to justice, refused to consider or even recognize the extenuating circumstances of the Armenian Genocide, and left them with no remedy against Turkey, which continues to hold and use their stolen property with impunity.”

Mark Geragos of the law firm of Geragos & Geragos, who represents the second group of plaintiffs, was quoted by the Metropolitan News-Enterprise:

“The Turkish Lobby has bought and paid for the United States Executive Branch and State Department for decades. Sadly the Judicial branch is left with very few options to remedy the blatant mendacity of the Turkish lobbying machine.”

The Court of Appeals took the easy way out by basing its decision on the unconstitutionality of the California statute which had given the plaintiffs more time to file their lawsuits. If the Court of Appeals had based its decision on the occurrence of genocide, the issue of time-limitation would have been irrelevant and would have ruled that the Turkish government and its two banks are liable for confiscating the Armenian properties.

I hope the attorneys for the Armenian-American plaintiffs will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse this unjust decision.

The Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of Germany against the alliance of France, United Kingdom, Russia, the United States, and several others.

Out of 2.6 million Ottoman soldiers, 250,000 were captured by the Allied Powers as prisoners of war. Tens of thousands of them died during captivity from disease, starvation and harsh weather conditions. The great majority of the Ottoman soldiers were Turks, but there were also a smaller number of Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, Jews, Kurds, Laz, Circassians, and Arabs. Most Armenian soldiers were disarmed and either killed or forced to work in labor battalions. Around half-a-million Ottoman soldiers deserted the army during World War I.

Dr. Hamid Hussain published in the “Defence Journal” of Pakistan a fascinating account of the fate of Ottoman war prisoners captured by the British army in Iraq and subsequently dispatched to India and Burma (today’s Myanmar). Burma was then part of India before it was separated in 1937.

The largest number of Turkish prisoners of war were captured by the British and held in Cyprus, Egypt, and Malta, in addition to Iraq, India and Burma. Russia, France, Romania and Italy also captured a large number of Turkish war prisoners.

Dr. Hussain wrote that the Turkish POWs (prisoners of war) captured in Iraq by the British were first held in two camps in Basra, an isolation camp “to quarantine prisoners with disease and an observation camp. Usually prisoners stayed for 2-4 weeks at [the] observation camp before transportation to India and Burma. Prisoners were transported by boats to Karachi and Bombay and were then transported by rail to two camps in India. At Bellary, most POWs were ethnic Turks, while [the] majority of [3,336] POWs at Sumerpur were non-Turkish (Arabs, Christians and Jews).”

Interestingly, Dr. Hussain revealed that at the Sumerpur camp “two Armenians fluent in English, French and Arabic acted as interpreters. The Muslims prayed in a small mosque of the camp. A French monk came regularly to camp for mass for Catholic Christians of the camp. Armenian Bishop of Cairo Thorgom Koushagian visited the camp during Christmas of 1916.”

Dr. Hussain also reported that the POW camp at Bellary, India, contained only 137 Ottoman prisoners, almost all officers. Later, more prisoners were brought there. “Turkish officers were [the] product of military reforms and secular in outlook. Many regularly consumed alcohol that was forbidden for Muslims. It needed doctor’s order and an officer could buy three bottles of liquor per month. Whisky and soda were popular among officers. Some POWs who died here were buried outside the camp. Most of the graves disappeared during expansion of the military airport. In 1997, [the] Turkish government erected a memorial at the camp site and restored two remaining graves.”

The camp in Thayetmyo, Burma, “contained 3,591 Ottoman prisoners of which the majority were Turks but there were some Armenians, Syrian Christians and Jews. Muslim, Armenian and Jewish religious communities of Rangoon sent gifts to their co-religionist prisoners,” according to Dr. Hussain.

Interestingly, “the British camp commandant recommended to Turkish officers that a mosque should be built, however, Subhi Bey, who had significant influence among prisoners, opposed the suggestion on religious grounds. He stated that when POWs left, the mosque would be abandoned and that was not permitted in religious texts,” wrote Dr. Hussain.

The camp at Meiktila, Burma, housed around 10,000 Ottoman POWs. “Most prisoners spent the day sitting idly and playing cards or backgammon. Some Ottoman prisoners were used as laborers on tobacco plantations, digging for a dam and on Shan state railways,” according to Dr. Hussain.

Around a thousand Ottoman prisoners died at the two camps in Burma. “In 2012 relations between Myanmar and Turkey improved and the two governments agreed to restore the cemeteries. Thayetmyo cemetery was restored with Turkish funding and work was completed in 2016,” reported Dr. Hussain. However, due to anti-Muslim emotions in Burma, a false rumor was spread that a mosque would be built in addition to restoring the “old and dilapidated cemetery where Ottoman prisoners were buried at Meiktila…. [The] Turkish government had agreed to restore the cemetery, however, there was no plan for building a mosque. This rumor resulted in anti-Muslim violence and the plan to restore the cemetery was shelved…. Gravestones were plundered in the Second World War and seventy years of neglect erased most marks of the past. Over the years, local Muslims retrieved around 200 gravestones and moved them to the courtyard of a local mosque. In 2013, the Turkish government also planned to restore [the] POW cemetery at Sumerpur [India] that had about 149 graves. This area is [the] heartland of proud Rajputs who fought on [the] British side in First and Second World Wars. Some locals protested the restoration project arguing that there is no memorial of Rajputs who fought all over the globe while a memorial was being planned for foreign soldiers.”

It is heartbreaking to learn that Armenian soldiers in the Ottoman Army were captured and held in India and Burma during the years of the Armenian Genocide. They escaped from one disaster to end up in a horrendous situation in captivity. Many of them died and were buried in those faraway lands.

Armenian, Turkish and soldiers of other ethnic groups suffered tremendously because of the reckless decisions of the Young Turk junta to enter World War I on the side of Germany and give the death warrant to millions of Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks.