Turkish Forum

Category: Armenian Question

“The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught to Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory.”Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary

  • Obama Urged to Encourage Turkey to Acknowledge Armenian Genocide

    Obama Urged to Encourage Turkey to Acknowledge Armenian Genocide

    WASHINGTON and ZURICH, June 12, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ — Taner Akcam Speaks at Christian Solidarity International (CSI) Event on the Future of Religious Minorities in the Middle East

    nm taner akcam haber 1226

    Taner Akcam, Professor of History at Clark University, has urged President Obama and his European allies to encourage “Turkey to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, and to follow the post-Holocaust example of Germany by making appropriate compensation for lives and property.”

    Dr. Akcam made this plea last week while contributing to CSI’s spring 2012 conference series on The Future of Religious Minorities in the Middle East. (See www.formime.ch for videos of Akcam’s lectures in English and Turkish.)

    Akcam said Turkey’s willingness to recognize the Genocide, in which approximately 1.5 million Christians – mainly Armenians and Assyrians – perished, and to provide compensation, is a litmus test of its fitness to fulfill its aspiration for Great Power status and leadership in shaping the destiny of the Middle East. Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu calls for the “reintegration” of territories in Syria, Greece, Bulgaria, and Georgia with Turkey – a policy often referred to by political commentators as New Ottomanism. (Davutoglu, “Vision 2023: Turkey’s Foreign Policy Objectives,” London, November 22, 2011.)

    Launching his new book, The Young Turks’ Crime against Humanity: The Armenian Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in the Ottoman Empire, (Princeton, 2012), Akcam noted that “under the Islamic law of the Ottoman Empire, Christians were not allowed to become fully equal,” and that “it was, in fact, impossible for equality to be realized under the Islamic law of the Empire.” The Turkish Republic, Akcam maintains, has to break decisively from the tradition of Turkish and Islamic supremacism if it is going to gain the confidence of non-Muslim minorities and non-Turkish communities and become a source of regional democratic stability, rather than repression.

    Turkey’s Islamist Prime Minister, Recep Tayyib Erdogan, persists in denying the Genocide process, which has reduced the country’s Christian population from approximately 30% in 1914 to less than 1% today. He has furthermore sought to use religion as a last line of defense with the claim that “it is not possible for a Muslim to commit genocide.”

    Taner Akcam is the first scholar of Turkish origin to publicly acknowledge the massacres, forced deportations and assimilation of Turkey’s Christians during World War I as Genocide. His latest book, based on the Ottoman Archives in Istanbul, demonstrates that the Genocide was premeditated, planned and executed on orders from the Turkish Government, and aimed at creating “ethno-religious homogenization.”

    Dr. John Eibner, the CEO of CSI-USA, observed that Prof. Akcam’s research was “a chilling reminder of the consequences of ethnic and religious supremacism.” Eibner called on Christians to “join others of good will to stand in solidarity with all endangered religious minorities of the Middle East that face violence from Islamic supremacist governments and movements today.”

    CSI has issued a Genocide Warning for endangered religious minorities in the Islamic Middle East, and has called on President Barack Obama to make their survival a priority as the United States responds to the Middle East’s ongoing political turmoil.

    Contact:Joel [email protected]

    SOURCE Christian Solidarity International (CSI)

    via Obama Urged to Encourage Turkey to Acknowledge Armenian Genocide – MarketWatch.

  • Armenia waits for formation of a new coalition

    Armenia waits for formation of a new coalition

    Armeniya

     

     

     

     

    Gulnara İnanch,

     

    Director of Information and Analytical Center Etnoglobus (ethnoglobus.az), editor of Russian section of website www.turkishnews.com  , ([email protected]) 

     

    Declaration of statement by the chairman of “Bargavac Ayastan” (Prospering Armenia)

     

    (PA) party Gagik Tsarukyan not to form a coalition with the ruling Republicans Party has yet proved to be a game. Upon PA party officials statement that they will not agree on coalition with the ruling party and that they will declare their decision regarding minister portfolio in the government until May 31 enables us to think that Tsaraukyan is conducting discussions with ruling party.

     

    Next year’s presidential elections and ruling party’s wining 30% against the 44% increased the pretention of PA party. Party, for the purpose of justifying the confidence of voters, attracting those hesitating for presidential elections to OY and consequently obtaining majority of votes, demonstrates its power in this way.

     

    Head of Armenian government Tigran Sarkisyan in his response to the question who can hold the post of Prime minister confirmed that OY chairman Gagik Tsarukyan can lead the new government answering that he is happy to have people to hold high posts.

     

    Afterwards, Armenian government head Tigran Sarkisyan’s statement “who said PA would go to opposition” indicate how the ruling party is aware of processes and secret negotiations are under way.

     

    G. Tsarukyan’s name is mentioned among the presidential candidates along with L.Ter-Petrosyan, R.Kocharyan and S. Sarkisyan.

     

    The fact that Tsarukyan won the votes of half million of citizens enables him to be more confident in presidential elections along with flirting with the Republicans fearlessly and being pretentious for prime minister in the newly formed government.

    To change the situation to his benefit G.Tsarukyan may form a coalition lead by himself creating a new plan for presidential elections.

     

  • Is Turkey Sincere in its ‘Efforts’ to Find a Just Solution to the Armenian Question?

    Is Turkey Sincere in its ‘Efforts’ to Find a Just Solution to the Armenian Question?

    – May 23, 2012

    appo13By Appo Jabarian
    Executive Publisher/Managing Editor
    USA Armenian Life Magazine

    For decades, hardly a month went by without Turks worrying about what new actions would the Armenian Diaspora take. No year went by without Turkish officials acknowledging the nightmare “caused by the Armenian Diaspora.”

    In late 2010, at a time when he was searching for ways to render the Armenian Diaspora “powerless” through the infamous Protocols with Armenia, Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu lamented that some of the Diaspora’s actions were like “the sword of Damocles hanging above our heads.”

    Mr. Davutoglu’s comments were followed by Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan being dealt with an official embarrassment in Lebanon when the Lebanese Armenians mounted a remarkable protest against him. Like much of the world, Lebanon has been home to hundreds of thousands of Armenians who harbor deep animosity toward Turkey over the 1915-1923 Armenian Genocide and the resulting massive dispossessions and illegal occupation of their ancestral homeland in Western Armenia and Cilicia.

    During Erdogan’s visit, several hundred Lebanese Armenians clashed with army troops during a protest in Beirut. They tore up Erdogan’s billboard-size giant posters in the capital’s Martyrs’ Square to denounce his presence.

    In early 2010, Erdogan was ‘greeted’ with similar ‘stately’ embarrassment in Argentina when he abruptly cancelled the Argentina leg of his tour of Latin America because city officials in Buenos Aires called off an event inaugurating a monument to the ‘revered’ founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

    Despite the fact that on numerous occasions, Erdogan called on the First Forum of the World Azerbaijani and Turkish Diasporas Organizations to “counter the intensifying attacks from the Armenian Diaspora,” no tangible results were achieved in subduing or overpowering the descendants of the Armenian martyrs and survivors.

    Now, some eighteen months later, taking valuable time out his busy schedule, FM Davutoglu has once again opted “to initiate a personal ‘dialog’ with the Diaspora on Armenian-Turkish issues. Earlier this month, Davutoglu met with Armenian-Americans, as follow up to the meetings he held in Washington last March. During their conversation in May, the Armenian interlocutors frankly advised the Turkish Foreign Minister that Ankara must address Armenian demands for genocide recognition and restitution before any ‘reconciliation’ could be achieved. The Turkish side reportedly indicated a willingness to discuss these thorny issues with Diasporan representatives. Despite the seeming openness of Foreign Minister Davutoglu, Armenians have well-founded reasons to mistrust such overtures, given Turkey’s decades-long denial of the Armenian Genocide and its antagonistic policies toward the Diaspora, Armenia and Artsakh. Armenians also suspect that Turkish officials may exploit meetings with the Diaspora to score propaganda points with world public opinion,” reported Harut Sassounian, Publisher of The California Courier.

    Is it possible that Ankara has learnt that honesty is the best policy; and that political courage is a lasting virtue? Are these values driving Turkey’s policy of ‘overtures’ to the Armenian Diaspora?

    During his presidency, in an effort to eliminate Turkey’s festering problems with world Armenians, Turkish Pres. Turgut Ozal seemed receptive to the idea of addressing the Armenian issue in a more open and fair manner.

    According to a recent article in Turkish daily ‘Today’s Zaman,’  “behind closed doors, Pres. Ozal defended the idea of holding negotiations with Armenians to settle a dispute that has had great potential to deal a serious blow to Turkish interests in international politics. Ozal’s close friends and former aides spoke to the newspaper about the politics of the day. In 1980’s Armenia was still part of the Soviet Union and Ozal defended the idea of holding negotiations with the powerful Armenian Diaspora. His close friends and advisers say that if Ozal were alive today, the problem of the Armenian Genocide might have already been solved.”

    Pres. Ozal’s “aim was to solve the [Armenian] problem before it got too late and through few concessions after reaching a deal with the Armenians. … Ozal sought to learn what Armenians wanted from Turkey. … In 1984 he ordered his advisors to work on possible scenarios about the economic and political price Turkey would have to pay if Turkey compromises with the Armenian Diaspora, an early Turkish acceptance of the term ‘Genocide.’ Another scenario was also prepared. This plan sought to gauge the political cost of a Turkish acceptance of genocide within 20 to 30 years if Turkey is forced to accept it one day,” Vehbi Dinçerler, 71, a former education minister and a state minister in Ozal’s Cabinet, said to “Today’s Zaman.”

    Ozal was right. The decades following his predictions, the list and the magnitude of Armenian political victories in much of the world proved to be fairly impressive. Turkey was dealt with one political defeat after another.

    In all fairness to a growing segment of Turkish society, many lucid and courageous voices from Turkey have been speaking out against the long-standing official Turkish policy of cover-up and deception regarding the Armenian Genocide and the legitimate Armenian demands for restitution.

    Righteous Turks have acknowledged the Genocide at the cost of risking their freedom and lives. I would like to name a few of them: Award-winning Turkish Publisher Ragip and his son Deniz Zarakolu; Turkish writers/ journalists: Elif Safak, Ayse Gunaysu, Ahmet Insel, Baskin Oran, Cengiz Aktar, Ali Bayramoglu, Erol Ozkoray, Kemal Yalcin, Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk, Dogan Akhanli, Sait Cetinoglu, Ahmet Altan; Turkish scholars: Ayse Nur Zarakolu, Omer Asan, and Taner Akcam.

    In a March 6, 2010 article titled “Genocide,” popular Turkish writer Ahmet Altan had written in Taraf Turkish newspaper: “When a commission of the US Congress votes for ‘genocide,’ we are ‘humiliated’. Do you know what humiliation is? Humiliation is millions of people holding their breaths for the outcome of a few votes in somebody else’s parliament. That is humiliation. … Turkey is humiliated because it itself cannot shed light on its own history, has to delegate this matter into other hands, is frightened like hell from its own past, has to squirm like mad in order to cover up truths.” Mr. Altan then lambasted Turkish officialdom’s nearly century-old policy of denial.

    Turkish officials can only blame their defunct policies of denial for causing the escalation of anti-Turkish international backlash.

    Back in early 2010, I had written: “Maybe it’s high time for Ankara to consider adopting Mr. Altan’s approach, because time will prove him as being genuinely patriotic and pragmatic. His clear thinking regarding the dark pages of Turkish history can certainly illuminate an atoned Turkey’s pathway to a bright future.”

    Are Turkish Pres. Gul, PM Erdogan, and FM Davutoglu sincere in their efforts to echo Mr. Altan’s and other courageous Turks’ wisdom? Are Messrs. Gul, Erdogan, and Davutoglu genuinely vying to emulate the late Turkish Pres. Ozal?

    Sooner or later their true intentions will be revealed.

    In the meantime, in my humble opinion, prudence and vigilance on the part of all Armenians are the orders of the day.

  • Armenian Issue – Ermeni Meselesi (Video)

    Armenian Issue – Ermeni Meselesi (Video)

    IF YOU HAVE YOUR OWN WEB SITE OR YOU ARE WEB MASTER OF A TURKISH ASSOCIATION WEB SITE, PLEASE ADD THE FOLLOWING URL’S to your web site or the address in turkish forum web pages..

    EGER WEB SITENIZ VAR ISE BU BILGIYI KALICI OLARAK VE EN GOZE CARPAR KOSEYE YERLESTIRINIZ , 2015 SENESI ICIN EN GUZEL KARSI CEVABIMIZ , DUNYA HALK TOPLULUKLARINA ERISME BAKIMINDAN SAYIN FUNDA HANIMIN CALISMALARI OLACAKDIR..

    ENGLISH

    TURKISH

    ermeni

  • ETHNIC CLEANSING’ AGAINST ARMENIANS?

    ETHNIC CLEANSING’ AGAINST ARMENIANS?

    t

     

     

    Maxime Gauin
    JTW Columnist

    This column is a reaction to one of Mustafa Akyol’s in Hürriyet Daily News, published on April 25, 2012.

    There is absolutely nothing personal, or even ideological, in this response; I want only to respond to these precise points, as a historian working on the Armenian question.

    Mr. Akyol alleges that “the nationalist Young Turk government decided to expel almost all Armenians to Syria” and that “The ‘Turkism’ of the Young Turks, Kaplan reminded, yearned for not a plural nation of many faiths and ethnicities, but an exclusive ‘Turkish homeland.’”

    The Ottoman census counted around 1,300,000 Ottoman Armenians on the eve of 1914. This census undercounts both Muslims and non-Muslims, for technical reasons (a lack of material and human power to count everybody, especially in eastern Anatolia and Arab lands). The most serious estimations count around 1,700,000-1,750,000 Armenians.[1]

    There is no definitive study on the number of relocated Armenians. The Ottoman sources indicate that 438,758 Armenians were relocated until the beginning of 1916 to Arab provinces, including 382,148 who arrived at their destination and 56,612 who perished.[2]Certainly, more perished due to illness or being attacked by Arab tribes, especially during the year 1916; others had been killed in inter-communal clashes in Van, Urfa, and some other cities. There are also reasons to believe that the account of relocated Armenians is not comprehensive.[3]

    Now, let’s look at the Armenian sources. In 1918, Boghos Nubar, co-president of the Armenian delegation in the Paris peace conference, estimated the total to be 600 or 700,000.[4] In addition, the Russian army relocated about 300,000 Armenians (half whom perished, surely not because of any “ethnic cleansing” design)[5], and some others were relocated from one Anatolian town to another.

    As a result, to pretend that “the nationalist Young Turk government decided to expel almost all Armenians to Syria” is at least questionable and an overly simple assertion.

    Most of the Armenians of Ystanbul (160,000), Yzmir (13,000), Edirne (33,650), Kastamonu (13,700), Kütahya (several thousand), Antalya (at least 500), Mara? (6 or 7,000), and Aleppo (22,000)were not relocated during WWI, and neither were thousands of Armenians who were Catholics, Protestants, artisans or parents of soldiers.[6] They were not because they did not represent a threat to the Ottoman State’s security.

    Indeed, it should be noted that there was no “Turkism” in the main reasons for the relocation. If the CUP “yearned for not a plural nation of many faiths and ethnicities, but an exclusive ‘Turkish homeland,’” why did this party accept Christians, Jews and non-Turkish Muslims, not only as members, but also for high positions, like mayors, deputies and ministers?

    The presence of Jews, including Emmanuel Carasso, a leader of the Young Turks, provoked anti-Semitic reactions against the CUP from various factions. The Young Turks supported the election of its sympathizer Bedros Kapamaciyan as mayor of Van in 1909. Kapamaciyan was assassinated by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation in December 1912.[7]The CUP promoted Gabriel Noradunkian to minister of commerce in 1908, despite him havingmade his career as a top-rank civil servant under Abdülhamid. Noradunkian served as minister of foreign affairs in the anti-CUP government of 1912-1913. Regardless, the CUP, coming back to power in January 1913, proposed several times, in vain, that Noradunkian remain in his position.[8] From January 1913 to November 1914, the minister of PTT, Oskan Mardikian (member of the CUP), was Armenian, and the minister of public works, SülaymanBustani, was a Christian Arab. Both resigned because they supported the neutrality of the Ottoman Empire; the majority of the CUP leaders considered maintaining the neutrality to beimpossible.

    In summer 1914, the CUP proposed in vain that Boghos Nubar become the Ottoman minister of foreign affairs. The Armenian insurrections (see below) did not provoke an absolute and general distrust of Armenians by the CUP leaders. Indeed, Berç Keresteciyan, deputy director general of the Ottoman Bank, was promoted to director general during WWI. Keresteciyan supported the Kemalist movement during the Turkish war of independence, and was a deputy of Afyon from 1935 to 1946.

    It should also be noted that even Enver Pasha was a staunch supporter of the full integration of non-Muslims in the Ottoman army, at least until 1914.[9]

    Mr. Akyol rightfully praised the book of Guenter Lewy on the Armenian question. This book contains a devastating analysis of the allegations against Ziya Gökalp, an intellectual and member of the CUP central committee, wrongly presented as a chauvinist and anti-Christian.[10]

    What motivated the Ottoman government in 1915 to relocate a portion of the Armenian community? Chiefly, military and security reasons. In addition to the well-known insurrection in Van (April 1915), other important revolts took place in Zeytun (August 1914, February 1915) and Bitlis. Insurrectional activities were organized in Cilicia as well, with the Armenian committees hoping for and repeatedly making claims of an Anglo-French landing. Even in the Bursa region, there were Armenian gangs attacking the Ottoman army and Muslim civilians. Considering the atmosphere of panic in spring 1915 and the limited number of roads in the Ottoman Empire, the decision is easy to understand.[11] The gradual reaction of the Istanbul authorities is another argument against the “ethnic cleansing” allegation: The insurrectional movement in Zeytun was crushed in the relocating of the Armenians of this city to Konya, instead of Arab lands; and as late as May 2, 1915, Enver suggested relocating only the Armenians living in the vicinity of Lake Van.[12]

    “Ethnic cleansing” was so far from the Ottoman government’s mind that, as early as 1916-1917, several thousand Anatolian Armenians were allowed to goback to Urfa.[13]

    It is perfectly true, however, that the Armenian committees, assisted by the Greek government, prevented the coexistence of communities in Cilicia through intense and misleading propaganda.[14] Similarly, the Greek army practiced a scorched earth policy during its retreat of 1922, which not only included a general burning of all villages and cities, as well as numerous massacres, but also the forced exile of Christians, to undermine the recovery of the Turkish economy after the peace treaty.[15] This was a kind of “ethnic cleansing.”

    If the descendants of Christian Anatolians want to present grievances, if Turks want to show a “common pain,” they should logically begin presenting their critiques to Athens and to the headquarters of the three old Armenian nationalist parties, namely the ARF, Hunchak and Ramkavar.

     

    [1] Guenter Lewy, The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey, Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2005, p. 235; Justin McCarthy, “The Population of the Ottoman Armenians,” in TürkkayaAtaöv (ed.), The Armenians in the Late Ottoman Period, Ankara: TTK/TBMM, 2001, p. 70, https://web.itu.edu.tr/~altilar/tobi/e-library/TheArmenians/thearmenians_table2page70.gif

    [2] Yusuf Halaço?lu, “Realities Behind the Relocation,” in TükkayaAtaöv (ed.), The Armenians in the Late…, pp. 130-133, https://web.itu.edu.tr/~altilar/tobi/e-library/TheArmenians/Relocation.pdf

    [3] GuenterLewy, The Armenian Massacres…, pp. 198-203, 209-220 and 236.

    [4]

    [5] Richard G. Hovannisian, Armenia on the Road to Independence. 1918, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London: University of California Press, 1967, p. 67.

    [6]Kemal Çiçek, “Relocation of the Ottoman Armenians in 1915: A Reassessment,” Review of Armenian Studies, n° 22, 2010, pp. 120-121; Yusuf Halaço?lu, The Story of 1915. What Happened to the Ottoman Armenians?, Ankara: TTK, 2008, pp. 52 and 91; GuenterLewy,The Armenian Massacres…, pp. 158, 165, 180, 186-187, 191, 203-205; HikmetÖzdemir and Yusuf Sarynay, Turkish-Armenian Conflict Documents, Ankara: TTK/TBMM, 2007, pp. 119, 127, 175, 201, 203, 207, 213- 221, 237, 265, 283, 321, 339, 341.

    [7]HasanOktay, “On the Assassination of Van Mayor Kapamacyyan by the Tashnak Committee,” Review of Armenian Studies, I-1, 2002, pp. 79-89, http://www.eraren.org/index.php?Lisan=en&Page=DergiIcerik&IcerikNo=94; KaprielSeropePapazian, Patriotism Perverted, Boston: Baikar Press, 1934, p. 69.

    [8]YücelGüçlü, The Holocaust and the Armenian Case in Comparative Perspective, Lanham-Boulder-New York-Plymouth: University Press of America, 2012, pp. 85-86.

    [9]Odile Moreau, L’Empire ottoman à l’âge des réformes. Les hommes et les idées du « Nouvel Ordre » militaire (1826-1914), Paris : Maisonneuve et Larose, 2007, pp. 49-50 and 70-71,

    [10] Guenter Lewy,The Armenian Massacres…,pp. 43-47.

    [11]Numerous references in MaximeGauin, “The Convergent Analysis of Russian, British, French and American Officials Regarding the Armenian Volunteers (1914-1922),” International Review of Turkish Studies, I-4, Winter 2011-2012, pp. 13-16,

    [12]Yusuf Halaço?lu, “Realities Behind the Relocations…”, pp. 109-110; Facts on the Relocation of Armenians. 1914-1918, Ankara: TTK, 2002, pp. 58-60 and 67-68; GuenterLewy, The Armenian Massacres…, p. 307, n. 4.

    [13]GuenterLewy, The Armenian Massacres…, pp. 203 and 215.

    [14] Background and references in MaximeGauin, “The Convergent Analysis…”, pp. 34-41.

    [15] See, for instance,MevlütÇelebi (ed.),Greek Massacres in Anatolia on Italian Archive Documents, Ankara: AAM, 2010, pp. 102-110; Rapport d’ElzéarGuiffray, administrateur délégué de la Société des quais de Smyrne, 27 juillet 1922 ; Raymond Poincaré au colonel Mougin, 7 septembre 1922 ; Colonel Mougin au général Pellé, 8 septembre 1922 ;Ministère des Affaires étrangères au représentant français à Athènes, 8 septembre 1922 ; ministère aux ambassadeurs à Londres, Rome et Washington, 8 et 9 septembre 1922 ; Général Pellé au ministère des Affaires étrangères, 12 septembre 1922 ; ministère au chargé d’affaires à Washington, 26 septembre 1922, Archives du ministère des Affaires étrangères, P 1380 (the microfilm P 1380 is full of French documents regarding the Greek scorched earth policy).
    “Statements of facts or opinions appearing in the pages of Journal of Turkish Weekly (JTW) are not necessarily by the editors of JTW nor do they necessarily reflect the opinions of JTW or ISRO. The opinions published here are held by the authors themselves and not necessarily those of JTW or ISRO.Materials may not be copied, reproduced, republished, posted without mentioning the mark of JTW or ISRO in any way except for your own personal non-commercial home use. For the news and other materials republished by the JTW you must apply the original publishers. JTW cannot give permission to republish this kind of materials.”
     OTHER COMMENTS OF MAXIME GAUIN
    Did the Ottoman Government Practice ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ against Armenians?
    7 May 2012
    Clearing Some Misconceptions About the Armenian Issue
    5 May 2012
    The Revenge of Law on Politics
    5 March 2012
    Nicolas Sarkozy, Victim of Himself
    14 February 2012
    France-Turkey: The Night Will End
    2 February 2012
    France-Turkey: What Went Wrong?
    16 January 2012
    Resisting Nicolas Sarkozy
    10 January 2012
    ASALA’s Day in the French National Assembly
    7 January 2012

     

    MUSTAFA AKYOL

    [email protected]

    Armenian ethnic cleansing as ‘de-Islamization’

    Yesterday was the 97th anniversary of what Armenians call the “Great Catastrophe,” or the ethnic cleansing of Ottoman Armenians from Anatolia, their historical homeland, in 1915. Those who commemorated the tragedy included some Turks, such as the group that gathered in Istanbul’s Taksim Square.

    With the slogan, “Let’s meet with the common hope that comes out of common sorrow,” these were a group of liberal activists who defy both the anti-Armenian enmity of Turkish nationalists, and the anti-Turkish bias of the Armenian Diaspora. And, most notably, they included not only secular liberals, who have always been at the forefront of “revisionism” on “the Armenian issue,” but also some Islamic figures.

    One such figure was Hilal Kaplan, a young veiled lady who has degrees in sociology and writes an influential column in Yeni Şafak, a mainstream Islamist daily. She not only joined the Taksim commemoration, but also called on fellow Muslims to do the same in a significant piece she wrote the day before.

    Titled “1915 as a move of de-Islamization,” Kaplan’s piece defined the ethnic cleansing of Ottoman Armenians as a part of secular Turkish nationalism’s onslaught against Islam. Islam, she reminded, was the very reason why Armenians had lived safely under Ottoman rule for centuries, for Islamic law had defined Christians as “People of the Book” with inalienable rights. That is why in 1915, when the nationalist Young Turk government decided to expel almost all Armenians to Syria, some Islamic opinion leaders, such as the famous mufti of Boğazlıyan, Abdullahzade Efendi, defied Istanbul’s orders and tried to protect the Armenians.

    The “Turkism” of the Young Turks, Kaplan reminded, yearned for not a plural nation of many faiths and ethnicities, but an exclusive “Turkish homeland.” This led not only to the destruction of Armenians, but other tragedies of the Republican period, such as the ethnic cleansing of other Christian groups, or the Kurdish massacres in Dersim.

    In her piece, Kaplan also called on all conservative Muslim Turks to revisit their respect for “our forefathers.” “Isn’t it worth asking,” she wrote, “whether your forefathers are those who formed and protected the multi-religious [Ottoman] structure, or those who brutally wasted it?”

    In fact, Kaplan’s piece was only one example of a new rhetoric that is emerging among a new generation of liberal-minded Islamic intellectuals: They see the ethnic cleansing of Ottoman Armenians, along with all the oppression that non-Muslims of Turkey have faced in the past century, as an abomination against Islamic values. And they argue for what one can dub as “neo-Ottomanism,” which is basically a call for a pluralist Turkey of many faiths and ethnicities.

    Of course, the historic accuracy of this argument can be debated. What is perhaps more important, however, is its political promises. For one of the reasons why liberal pluralism did not flourish in modern day Turkey is that its supporters remained an elite group of Westernized secular liberals, who often had the best of intentions, but also lacked the cultural connections with the common Turk.

    However, Islamic liberals such as Hilal Kaplan speak within the Islamic values that are engrained in large segments of Turkish society. And that is why their message is more promising for building a more democratic, self-critical, and, I would say, virtuous Turkey.

    April/25/2012

     

     

  • Armenian Issue – Ermeni Meselesi (Video)

    Armenian Issue – Ermeni Meselesi (Video)

    IF YOU HAVE YOUR OWN WEB SITE OR YOU ARE WEB MASTER OF A TURKISH ASSOCIATION WEB SITE, PLEASE ADD THE FOLLOWING URL’S to your web site or the address in turkish forum web pages..

    EGER WEB SITENIZ VAR ISE BU BILGIYI KALICI OLARAK VE EN GOZE CARPAR KOSEYE YERLESTIRINIZ , 2015 SENESI ICIN EN GUZEL KARSI CEVABIMIZ , DUNYA HALK TOPLULUKLARINA ERISME BAKIMINDAN SAYIN FUNDA HANIMIN CALISMALARI OLACAKDIR..

    ENGLISH

    TURKISH

    040420111655460194447