: Ergun KIRLIKOVALI [ergun@cox.net]

letter To:  Media Contact, Linda Millman Guller, Knights & Daughters of Vartan, Ph: (203) 454-9800,  Email: mgmarcom@aol.com

Re:  “New Theme Launched: ‘Turkey is the Question, America is the Answer’ ”

; NEW YORK, Feb. 4, 2010, PRNewswire — “… On Sunday, April 25, 2010, for the 25th year, thousands of Armenian Americans and people against genocide will gather in Times Square from 2-4 PM to commemorate the first genocide of the 20th Century, the Armenian Genocide (Medz Yeghern). …”

ARMENIA IS THE QUESTION, TURKEY & AZERBAIJAN ARE THE ANSWERS

The arrogant and deceptive Armenian message “Turkey is the Question, America is the Answer” is replete with falsifications, omissions, and errors, but perhaps more grimly, it is   dishonest  and racist.

24 April is the Ottoman Guantanamo, not genocide

First, April 24 is a concocted day for a bogus genocide to deceive people into believing that somehow 1.5 million Armenians were killed by the Ottoman Empire.  That is a day when several hundred Armenian terrorists, agitators, and suspects, were arrested by home security forces and moved to safe locations for imprisonment, questioning, and trials.  This operation is almost identical to the current Guantanamo operation of the United States.  If the U.S. can take such a home security measure in 21^st century and reach out to furthest continent to do it, why should it be wrong for the Ottoman Empire do the same in 20^th Century and smack in the middle of its capital?  After all, terror is terror is terror.  Armenians were involved in propaganda, agitation, raids, feuds, terrorism, revolts, treason, territorial demands, assassinations, bombings, fatal bank robberies, for 30 years prior to April 24, 1915.  What’s more, Armenian leaders, cleric and lay, turned a deaf ear to all the Ottoman government warnings about ceasing and desisting in subversive and terrorist activities.  To add insult to injury, Armenians had staged the bloodiest armed revolt to date in February-April, 1915 in the city of Van, killing thousands of its Muslim inhabitants and turning the city over to the Russian invader.  All this took place when the motherland was subjected to brutal attacks and invasions on at least three fronts and engaged in a war of survival in the middle of a world war.  The police action taken on April 24, 1915, was not genocide; it was a well justified home security measure taken during a wartime on a blatantly treasonous group.

Armenian information is incorrect and deceptive

Second,  Armenian claims are factually, historically, and legally incorrect.  The Young Turk governments lasted from 1908 to 1918, NOT 1915-1923.  The Ottoman government lost the WWI in 1918 and was occupied by victors in 1920, thus completely powerless between 1918-1923 period.  In fact, a brand new government in Ankara, fighting for independence for Turkish lands, was established in Ankara which the Ottoman government rejected, even fought against.  After a bloody war of independence in many fronts lasting from 1919 to 1922, the Turkish lands were freed, independence was recognized by the allies and much of the world (and the U.S. a few years later) by Lausanne  agreement and the Republic of Turkey was established in 1923.  To deliberately misrepresent this complex history by the deceptive phrase  “the Young Turk Government of the Ottoman Empire (1915-1923)” is not only obviously incorrect but also unethical and ethocidal.

1915 Van Revolt by Armenians was the 9/11 for the Ottoman Empire

Third, what followed April 24 was also not genocide, but TERESET (temporary resettlement.)  The 1915 Van rebellion by the Armenians was to the Ottoman Empire what  9/11 terrorist attacks represent to America.  If the U.S. can plan and wage a war half a world over in Afghanistan (and later in Iraq) in 21^st century, why should it be wrong for the Ottoman Empire to TERESET (temporarily resettle) its treasonous citizens who attacked and killed members of their own government, armies, state, nation and joined the invaders?

Reading the racist Armenian message, one would never know that Armenians took up arms against their own government, attacked the rear of their own army, terrorized their Muslim neighbors, joined the invading enemy armies, demanded territory for an apartheid (greater Armenia), and caused the death of 524,000 of their countrymen, women and children.  One would never appreciate that the TERESET (temporary resettlement)  was a wartime home security measure and that Turks were only defending their home in the face of brutal foreign invasions and equally savage Armenian nationalists and revolutionaries.

The Armenian bias and bigotry …

… show in the selection of speakers to validate claims of genocide; all other sources and proper authorities are ignored.  Genocide scholars, for instance, is an Armenian invention created by the notoriously anti-Turkish Zoryan Institute in 1994.  These genocide scholars are not even historians.  Most are English teachers and sociologists.  There are some psychologists and government majors among them.  And seventy-five percent of the board of directors are ethnically Armenians.  But they all like to pose like authorities in history which they absolutely are not.  They vie for winning the confidence of their unsuspecting readers.  What the Armenian claims lack in the credibility department, the Armenian lobby tries to fill the gap with new inventions like these so-called genocide scholars and other avenues like films, exhibits, and panels where only the Armenian side is represented and the Turkish side is censored.  Anything to avoid history, primary sources, facts, peer review, and debate seem to be fine with the Armenian lobby.  They think they are winning on the political side where opinions can be manipulated, political candidates, legislatures, and voters can be convinced without having to deal with legitimate, non-partisan historians and scholars driven by facts only.

One so called genocide sponsor listed as a speaker, for example, was one of the sponsors of Taner Akcam , the poster boy of sorts of the Armenian lobby.  Akcam was exposed to be a paid Armenian agent showing how the Armenian lobby deceives people.  In a letter dated 17 January 2008, the University of Minnesota legal counsel stated that Akcam’s salary was funded by Cafesjian Foundation  (an Armenian institution) and Zoryan Institute (also an Armenian institution.)  What’s just as troubling is the fact that that letter said.

“…Dr. Akcam is currently employed by the University as a Research Associate in the College of Liberal Arts (CLA), Department of History. This is an annually renewable, Professional & Administrative (“P&A”) position…”

A few days after this letter was written, Akcam was spotted in New Orleans, presenting himself as “associate professor” in history to unsuspecting audiences.   He was neither employed as a professor nor historian, as his PhD is in sociology.  Is this important?  It ought to be, in the name of truth.  Why is he posing as a historian then if he is a sociologist?  How did he become a professor when he arrived into the U.S. as only a visiting scholar attached to no university only about ten years ago?  The more one digs, the more one finds the Armenian lobby lurking ominously underneath all this stink.

Whereas the facts are simple.  Armenians revolted to establish an apartheid (i.e. greater Armenia) in Ottoman territories, when the motherland (the Ottoman Empire) was fighting for its survival against multi-front brutal invasions.  The Ottoman Empire, as a home security measure, was left with no choice but to  TERESET (temporarily resettle) the treasonous elements to non-war zones of the empire (hence not even a deportation.) Measures were taken for security and safety of the groups teresetted, perhaps insufficient and at times ineffective, but without intent to destroy as claimed.

Unsubstantiated accusations such as race extermination or over 1.5 million Armenians  stand short of truths and the U.S. state archives refute them openly because:

a- “American Military Mission to Armenia” (General Harbord) Report 1920 and Annex Report Nat. Archives 184.021/175  does not mention any “race extermination” but refers to “…refinements of cruelty by Armenians to Muslims…”

b-  Joint US-Congress Resolution no. 192, April 22, 1922 relative to the activities of Near East Relief ending 31.12.1921, has unanimously resolved that a total of 1,414,000 Armenians were alive.

c- George Montgomery, a member of the US delegation at the Paris Conference, had presented a detailed tabulation in 1919,  showing a total of 1,104,000 Armenians alive,  apart from those who had already immigrated to other countries.  ( 29 March 1919 report of the Paris Conference subcommittee on atrocities lists Armenian losses as “…more than 200,000…”  Who may have jacked this number to the current 1.5 million?  Take a guess!)

d- Reliable sources show that THE TOTAL ARMENIAN POPULATION in the Ottoman Empire was less than 1.3 MILLION ( and others saying up to a maximum of 1.5 million) and hence it would be Armenian falsifiers’ liability to defy and annul these official U.S. State Records.  You think Armenian lobby can do that?  That is, use current pro-Armenian politicians to void the records of the U.S. Congress of 1919 with bogus resolutions?

In case you missed it, it bears repeating:  these are the U.S. Congress records of 1919, solidly laying down the situation as it was back then.  Can the Armenians change them with propaganda, intimidation, and political pressure today?

If Armenia, the tiny, land-locked, poverty-stricken, violent, and corrupt  country, wants to avoid bankruptcy and famine, which would turn it into a distant, inaccessible, and irrelevant province of Russia, then Armenia should stop the military occupation of Azeri lands (including Karabakh), allow the return home of one million Azeri refugees, and agree to opening and scholarly studying all relevant archives of WWI era soon.  Nothing short of that will save Armenia… and the time is ticking!

***

Some useful reference sites:

www.ataa.org

www.ethocide.com

www.turkla.com

www.historyoftruth.com

www.turkishjournal.com

www.turkishny.com

www.tallarmeniantale.com

www.mediawatchnow.com

www.turkishalert.com

Some PDF Documents:

a. (Part 1 & 2)

b. (Part 3)

c. https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2009/04/2813-conditions-in-near-east-report-of.html (General Harbord Report)

d.

e.

size=2 width=”100%” align=center>

Further reading:

BIAS IN THE PHRASE “ARMENIAN GENOCIDE”

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

Turks believe it was a civil war within a world war, engineered, provoked, and waged by the Armenians with active support from Russia, England, and France, and passive support from the U.S. diplomats, missionaries, media, and others with anti-Turkish agendas, all eyeing the vast territories of the collapsing Ottoman Empire. [1]

Most Armenians claim that  the wartime Tereset (temporary resettlement) of the Armenians was genocide, based on dubious evidence, hearsay, forgeries, and highly refutable arguments, totally ignoring the Armenian complicity in war crimes ranging from raids, rebellions, and terrorism to treason, causing many casualties in the Muslim, mostly Turkish, community, all of which which triggered the Tereset.   Genocide is  a legal term with a very specific definition requiring, not a political, but a LEGAL judgment, which the Armenians lack.  There is massive evidence to the contrary, clearly pointing to a civil war fought by Muslim and Christian irregulars.

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

While some amongst us may be forgiven for taking the ceaseless Armenian propaganda at face value and believing blatant Armenian falsifications [2] merely because they are repeated so often, it is difficult and painful for people like us, sons and daughters of  the Turkish survivors most of whose signatures you see below. [3]

Those seemingly endless “War years” of 1912-1922  (seferberlik yillari) brought wide-spread death and destruction on to all Ottoman citizens. No Turkish family was left untouched, those of most of the signatories’ below included.  Those nameless, faceless, selfless Turkish victims are killed for a second time today with politically motivated and baseless charges of Armenian genocide.

Allegations of Armenian genocide are racist and dishonest history.

They are racist because they imply only Armenian (or Christian) dead count, the Turkish (or Muslim) dead do not.  [4]  The former must be remembered and grieved; the latter must be ignored and forgotten.  Do you know how many Muslims, mostly Turks, were killed during World War One?  Answer: About 3 million, including half a million of them at the hands of well-armed, well-motivated, and ruthless Armenian revolutionaries and para-military thugs. [3,5]  Compare that with less than 300,000 Armenian casualties [8] which number is gradually magnified to 1.5 million over the years through Armenian propaganda.

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

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

1) TUMULT (as in numerous Armenian armed uprisings between 1890 and 1920)  [6,7]

2) TERRORISM (by Armenian nationalists and militias victimizing Ottoman-Muslims between 1882-1920)  [8,9]

3) TREASON (Armenians joining the invading enemy armies as early as 1914 and lasting until 1921)  [6,7,8,9,10]

4) TERRITORIAL DEMANDS (from 1877 to present, where Armenians were a minority, not a majority, attempting to establish Greater Armenia.  Ironically, if the Armenians succeeded, it would be one of the first apartheids of the 20th Century, with a Christian minority ruling over a Muslim majority )  [1-11]

5) TURKISH SUFFERING AND LOSSES (i.e. those caused by the Armenian nationalists: 524,000 Muslims, mostly Turks, met their tragic end at the hands of Armenian revolutionaries during WWI, per Turkish Historical Society. This figure is not to be confused with 2.5 million Muslim dead who lost their lives due to non-Armenian causes during WWI. Grand total: more than 3 million, according to Justin McCarthy) [7-10]

6) TERESET (temporary resettlement) triggered by the first five T’s above and amply documented as such; not to be equated to the Armenian misrepresentations as genocide.)  [12]

Armenians, thus, effectively put an end to their millennium of relatively peaceful and co-habitation in Anatolia with Turks, Kurds, Circassians, and other Muslims by killing their Muslim neighbors and openly joining the invading enemy. Muslims were only defending their home like any citizen anywhere would do.

VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS AMOUNTS TO LYNCHING

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

1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the U.N. 1948 convention (Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive to 1915.)   [13]

2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a “competent court” after “due process” where both sides are properly represented and evidence mutually cross examined.  [14]

3-  For a genocide verdict, the accusers must prove “intent” and “motive” at a competent court and by allowing due process to run its natural course.  This was not, perhaps cannot ever be, done by the Armenians, whose evidence mostly fall into five major categories:  hearsay,  mis-representations, exaggerations, forgeries, and “other”.  [15]

4- Such a “competent court” was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist  (save a Kangaroo court in occupied Istanbul in 1920 where partisanship, vendettas, and revenge motives left no room for due process.)  [8]

5-  Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual.  It reflects bias against Turks. Therefore, the  term genocide must be used with the qualifier “alleged”, for scholarly objectivity and truth. [1-15]

6- Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide will deeply insult Turkish-Americans  as well as Turkish-Europeans, and Turks around the globe.  Such a conduct would negatively influence the  excellent relations currently enjoyed between the U.S. and Turkey, if not the West and Turkey.  It will, no doubt, please Armenian lobbies in the U.S. Europe and Turkey but disappoint, insult, and outrage Turkey,  one of America’s closest allies since the Korean War of  1950-53. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and more.   Armenian lobbies will have been allowed to poison  the U.S.-Turkey relations.  American gratitude and thanks will appear to come in the form of the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation.

7- History is not a matter of “conviction, consensus,  political resolutions, propaganda, or public relations.” History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful debate, and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved only for a “competent tribunal” with its legal expertise and due process.

8- What we witness today, therefore, amounts to lynching [14] of the Turks by Armenians and their supporters to satisfy the age old Armenian hate, bias, and bigotry.  American values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, balance, honesty, and freedom of speech are stumped under the fanatic Armenian feet.  Unprovoked , unjustified, and unfair defamation of Turkey, one of America’s closest allies in the troubled Middle East, the Balkans, and the Caucasus, in order to appease some nagging Armenian activists runs counter to American interests.

9- Hate-based, divisive, polarizing, and historically biased proclamations, such as Schiff’s HR 106, have never been an American way to do business. Why start now?

10- Those who claim genocide verdict [14]  today, based on the much discredited Armenian evidence, are actually engaging in “conviction and execution without due process”, which is the dictionary definition of “lynch mobs”.

APOLOGY ?

Those who claim Turks need to apologize or show sensitivity to victims of WWI and/or their descendants—without remembering or respecting the Muslim, mostly Turkish, victims of the same WWI due to same wartime conditions—are insulting the silent memory of millions of Muslim, mostly Turkish, victims of WWI tragedy.  They are also engaging in Ethocide [16],

A new term coined by a Turkish-American in 2003, Ethocide means “systematic extermination of ethics via malicious mass deception for political, economical, religious, social, and other gain.”  Ethocide comes with a new Turkish companion term: “AHLAKKIRIM”  [17]

If an apology is needed today, then the entire humanity should apologize for the mistakes and excesses of the past generations, without resorting to “selective morality” and discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, race, or religion.  And if more sensitivity is required, then it should be provided by all for all, without resorting to division, polarization, hostility, bias, or bigotry.  Our accounst of WWI are replete with expressions of sadness and sympathy for all the victims of WWI, Turk, Kurd, Laz, Circassian, Armenian, Arab, Greek, Jew, and all others.  We do not feel we should segregate the Armenians or others from this lot and grieve only for them.

If an apology is needed today, we should all start apologizing for the world hunger, global warming, aids epidemics, endless wars, inequity in income distribution, plundering human and natural resources, violation of civil rights of women, children, and some cases all humans, global lack of education and health care,  and more.

ISN’T IT TIME TO STOP FIGHTING THE FIRST WORLD WAR AND GIVE PEACE A CHANCE?

As Ataturk so ably put it for all of us:  “Peace at home, Peace in the World.”

………………………..

References:

[1]  History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, Vol I & II, Stanford Shaw (Cambridge University Press, London, New York, Melbourne, 1976)

[2]  The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, Heath W. Lowry ( The Isis Press, Istanbul, Turkey, 1990)

[3]  The Ottoman Peoples and the End of Empire, Justin McCarthy (Arnold, London, U.K., 2001

[4]  Declaration Signed by 69 Prominent North American Academicians, New York Times and Washington Post, may 19, 1985 (for a copy:

[5]  Ermeniler:  Sürgün ve Göç, Türk Tarih Kurumu (Ankara, Turkey, 2004)

[6]  Houshamatyan of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, Centennial, Album-Atlas, Volume I, Epic Battles, 1890-1914 (The Next Day Color Printing, Inc., Glendale, CA, U.S.A., 2006)

[7]  The Armenian Rebellion at Van, Justin McCarthy, Esat Arslan, Cemaletting Taskiran, Omer Turan (The University of Utah Press, Salt lake City, USA, 2006)

[8]  The Armenian File, Kamuran Gurun (Rustem Bookshop, Mersin, Turkey, 1985)

[9]  The Armenians in History and the Armenian Question, Esat Uras (Documentary Publications, Istanbul, Turkey, 1988)

[10]  Free E-Book : “Genocide Of Truth” by Sukru Server Aya, Based On Neutral or Anti-Turkish Sources ( Istanbul Commerce University, Turkey, 2008)  For a copy: https://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2008/04/2429-new-e-book-genocide-of-truth-based.html

[11] “Pursuing the Just Cause of Their People”, Michael M. Gunter (Greenwood Press, New York, USA, 1986)

[12]  “Ermenilerin Zorunlu Göçü, 1915-1917, Kemal Cicek (Turk tarih Kurumu, Ankara, Turkey, 2005)

[13]  Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

[14]  Article 6, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

[15]  Article 2, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948: http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

[16]  Ergun KIRLIKOVALI,  2003, “It Was Not ‘Genocide’; It was – and still is – ‘Ethocide’ “, ;

[17]  Ergun KIRLIKOVALI, 2003, “SOYKIRIM DEGIL, AHLAKKIRIM ”
( )

This is happening in Istanbul, not Armenia.  Yuksel Oktay, Sukru Server Aya, Ergun Kirlikovali, Javid Huseynov or many other contra-genocide view holders are not invited, not welcome, and need not apply…. Peace-loving-dove approaches are easy and they bring in peace of mind to individuals promoting them but they may be naive, selfish, even cruel considering current realities…  What follows below is hard, cold reality.  We have too few people who figght back against nonstop defamation of all things Turkish and even that group is far from being organzied, focused, or even appreciative of the realities…  As if Turks are the ones who occupy Karabagh or have driven a million Azeris into exile…  Reality check please…

ERGUN KIRLIKOVALI ,

Turkish Forum Advisory Board Member & ATAA president Elect

November 13, 2009

By Roland Mnatsakanyan

From Nov. 6-7, Sabanci University (Istanbul) just hosted an international workshop entitled “Adana: 1909: History, Memory, and Identity from a Hundred Year Perspective.” The workshop included scholars from the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Turkey. The event was sponsored by Gomidas Institute (London), Sabanci University, Istanbul Bilgi University History Department, the International Hrant Dink Foundation, and Bogazici University History Department. A capacity audience filled the lecture theatre and included professors, students, journalists, and members of the public. There was simultaneous translation between English and Turkish.  The papers that were presented will be published in English and Turkish editions.

In their opening remarks, Cengiz Aktar and Ara Sarafian welcomed the participants and pointed to new opportunities for holding such meetings in Turkey today. They explained that the Adana 1909 workshop was organized to mark the centennial of the Adana massacres. It began with a call for papers in Turkish, Armenian, and English, and the presentations at the workshop reflected the different interests of the participants.

The first paper was an unusual one, as it was a discussion of Turks who saved Armenians in 1909. The fact that Armenians were massacred was a given, and the speaker presented a sensitive examination of righteous Turkish officials who saved potential victims. The speaker used Ottoman records to show how Ottoman Armenians petitioned the state to recognize one such Turkish official for his role in saving an entire community. This first paper took some of the sting out of the workshop, where the audience could sympathize with the Armenian victims of 1909 without vilifying “Muslims” or “Turks” as single categories. Subsequent papers followed with the same sensitivity.

Each session was chaired by a senior scholar and was followed by a discussion. The workshop thus benefited from the presence of additional senior scholars, such as Selim Deringil, Caglar Keyder, Mete Tucay, and Hulya Adak.

The organizers considered the workshop a success.

The papers that were presented could be summarized as follows (not in the order of presentation at the workshop).

Some new perspectives

Abdulhamit Kirmizi gave a well-nuanced paper discussing the fact that some Muslims saved Armenians during the 1909 massacres. The role played by such Muslims was actually acknowledged by Ottoman Armenians after 1909. The speaker’s focus was Major Hadji Mehmet Effendi and his men who defended Sis, the seat of the Armenian Catholicosate of Cilicia, from attacks by neighboring tribes and villages. Kirmizi used Ottoman documentation to discuss such Muslims, many of whom were decorated by the Ottoman government. The actions of these officials were the opposite of other officials who encouraged the massacres. Another well-nuanced and probing paper concerned a complex range of different factors related to the Adana massacres. It was stressed that some of these factors could only be probed in a speculative but informed manner at this stage of debates. One such factor was identified as the presence of tens of thousands of impoverished migrant workers who could not find work in Adana in April 1909. Sinan Dincer ( Ruhr University, Bochum ) discussed such migrant workers in Adana province that season, and suggested that they could have been drawn into the fighting for no other reason than to loot and steal Armenian property. The speaker stated that he was not arguing that this was a major factor explaining the massacres, but it might have been a significant contributing factor.

Views from Europe

Two presentations discussed French and German records related to the Adana massacres. Vincent Duclert (EHESS) contrasted the position of the French government following the Hamidian massacres, the Adana massacres, and the Armenian Genocide. He noted that the French government was reluctant to press the Ottoman authorities after the Adana massacres because many French officials supported the Young Turk government. Instead, French authorities played down the issue in France. Dilek Guven (Sabanci University) discussed German consular records, as well as the records of the Baghdad Railway company. These records attested to the terrible suffering of the Armenians in 1909. She noted that German policy towards Ottoman Turkey was uncertain at that time, especially as the 1909 massacres were reportedly carried out by supporters of Abdul Hamid II, whom the Germans had backed until the 1908 revolution. Benedetta Guerzoni (independent scholar) discussed how imagery of the Adana massacres was constructed in western newspapers, with particular reference to Italy and France.

Some Armenian sources

Ara Sarafian (Gomidas Institute) and Zakarya Mildanoglu (independent researcher) discussed Armenian records related to the events of 1909. Sarafian introduced Hagop Terzian, who published a powerful report in 1912, on the 1909 events. Terzian included his own testimony in Adana city, as well as the testimonies of others in smaller communities. Sarafian argued that Terzian’s text had a certain popular force-of-argument that challenged official accounts that tried to play down the incidents. Sarafian quoted Terzian to stress the devastating role of the newspaper “Itidal” in agitating and fermenting violence against Armenians. Zakarya Mildanoglu presented the Adana massacres through the Armenian periodical press with many illustrations from different journals. His accounts included satire as a powerful tool to convey what had happened to Armenians. (Mildanoglu was also responsible for a separate exhibition of photographs depicting the Adana massacres. These images and texts were displayed at the workshop.)

American witnesses

The role of American missionaries as witnesses was discussed by Lou Ann Matossian  (Cafesjian Family Foundation) and Barbara Merguerian (Armenian International Women’s Association), with powerful papers related to events in the cities of Adana and Tarsus. Tarsus was also the focus of Oral Calislar, a well-known Turkish journalist who presented the testimony of Helen Davenport Gibbons in her book Red Rugs of Tarsus. Calislar, who has published the Turkish translation of this work, gave a personal reflection regarding his native Tarsus. (The Gomidas Institute has just published a critical English edition of the Red Rugs of Tarsus.)

Human and material losses

The reality of Armenian losses was stressed by Osman Koker, who gave a fascinating paper on Armenian communities in Adana province, illustrated by photographs and postcards. He included images from Antioch, Alexandretta, Marash, Beylan, Sis, Adana, Tarsus, and Koz Olouk.

Sait Cetinoglu (Belge Uluslararasi Yayincilik) gave a forceful presentation on the organization and plunder of Armenian properties in 1909, while Asli Comu (Cambridge University) gave a solid paper based on land records from the Adana region in the 1920’s. These records gave new insights into how Armenian properties were broken up and par celled out to Muslim refugees. The actual number of Armenian casualties during the massacres was discussed by Fuat Dundar, who raised some questions about the demographics of the Adana massacres based on his work on the massacres of Abdul Hamid II and the Armenian Genocide. The fate of Armenian orphans following the Adana massacres became a major concern for Armenian community leaders. Nazan Maksudyan gave a moving paper on the fate of such orphans, especially in “foreign” orphanages. One key concern was assimilation in government-run orphanages where the language of instruction was Turkish and not Armenian.

Literary responses to the massacres

The legacy of the 1909 massacres could not be explained by simple numbers for casualties or lost properties. Literature was a powerful way to convey a sense of violence, loss, and trauma that accompanied events and lingered on in the lives of survivors. Marc Nichanian (Sabanci University) and Rita Soulahian (McGill Univeristy) discussed the literary response to the Adana massacres, with particular reference to Arshagouhi Teotig, Taniel Varoujan, and Zabel Yessayan. (Unfortunately Nichanian could not be at the workshop and his paper was beautifully presented by Hulya Adak (Sabanci University)).

Ottoman Parliament

Anastasia Iliena Moroni (EHESS & Panteion University, Athens ) discussed how the Adana massacres were presented in the Ottoman Parliament.

Adana Massacres Focus of Istanbul Workshop