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

  • Ottoman Armenians

    Ottoman Armenians

     

    OTTOMAN ARMENIANS: “WHO KILLED WHO ?”

     

     

    I. Introduction: “Chronology and History”

     

    These two branches are confused in general; unfortunately, we witness such confusion initiated by several persons, having studied history.

     

    In fact, while the first of these branches places the events in time and place,                     the second branch researches or is obligated to research reasons and consequences of such events. While the history is making the research, it shall stick to the time-table presented by the chronologist, but at the same time evaluate its information on legal, cultural, geographical, sociological matters and the like.

     

    We will able to get the conclusion only after the examination we would carry out under the following titles:

     

     

    II. Reasons Triggering Degeneration of the Ottoman-Armenian Relations

     

    1. Sovereignty Fight Lasted for five (5) Centuries in the Balkans: Bogomilism  

     

    When the Ottoman/Turkish Army entered the Balkans in the mid of XIVth century, both anarchy and despotism existed in the peninsula. The political power was tyrannically exploiting small principalities based on territory and the village class people through these principalities and the village class people were not able to resist impositions and insistences of the political power and were being oppressed by the bandits living in the rural areas.

     

    On the other hand, the real victims of the fight between the churches were the small principalities and the villagers; while the Catholics on one hand and the Orthodoxies              on the other hand were fighting. Large blocks of people were wildly being exterminated by these two denominations, as they have strictly believed in Bogomilism.

     

    The Ottoman Empire has benefited such situation by the way of securing and protecting the oppressed classes; and therefore in a short period of time, it could find the way to settle in the Balkan peninsula. In the meantime, Turk tributes continuously and Sufistic Connoisseurs (“Tasavvuf Erbabı”) migrating from Asia were constantly being placed in the Balkans. Although this spread was suspended and even regressed upon lost of Ankara war in the East and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, it was going to be completed more strongly than ever within fifty years and the South and Central Balkans were going to be Ottomanized/Turkicized. In the mid of the XVth century.                   Ottoman-Germen fight was going to continue for one more century in the North Balkans, constituting the current Hungary. The challenge on the Balkans was going to continue until the beginning of the XVIIIth century and until even today. The difference is that Austria, representing the Germen authority, left its role to the Tsarist Russia since XVIII.

     

     

     

    Russia, which has been more dangerous than the Austrian Empire, has planned the policy of “sailing along the warm waters” for establishing its sovereignty in the territory and considered this as a matter of life and death. However, this has been considered by Austria as an economic development area. Then, having eliminated its powerful neighbor Sweden, it has edged towards the Ottoman Empire with all of its power but had to divide its power, as Austria could not have solved its problems in the Western Europe. However, the most important point is that as Austria was catholic, the Orthodox Church was on the side of the Ottoman Empire. At that time, Russia usurped the church. Furthermore, Russia’s being a Slav Country was going to turn the conflict between the church and the nationalists to its own pims; so the Ottoman was going to gradually be considered to be a foreigner or occupier in that territory.

     

     

    2. Russia and Pan-Slavism: Küçük Kaynarca Treaty and First Political Losses

     

    Nobody should doubt that that the date to be considered to be milestone in                   Ottoman-Russian fight was the execution of 1774 Küçük Kaynarca Treaty. Until this date, Ottoman Empire from time to time lost or won the wars it entered; but, no records other than border arrangements and/or commercial matters have been kept to bear political consequences. However, it was the first time that it was accepted in this treaty that Russia was the protector of the orthodoxies in the Ottoman State and                     they would be able to open a consulate anywhere they wish. 

     

    This situation, considered unimportant by many of our well-known historians, has been described by Hammer, Austrian Historian as follows: “…this peace has been the reason for all the troubles of the Republic of Turkiye (“Turkiye”) since then and has been the commencement of dissolution of this Empire and was going to cause disintegration of the same at least in the West”.

     

    Before ending this matter, we should emphasize: “these provisions, considered to be critical, have been continuously imposed to Turks thereafter and are still imposed even today.” We call you to think on this matter.

     

    However, we would like to draw attention to the expression of “at least in the West”. This is because, at that time, Armenians were still considered “Loyal Nation                        as expressed as “Tebaa-i Sâdıka or Millet-î Sıdıka” in the Ottoman Turkish and they were not expected to have contrary acts against the State. Anyhow, there has been no reason for such a contrary action; this loyal nation has increased their welfare by conducting the activities of trade and by governing the foreign relations of the Ottoman Empire.

     

    Upon the execution of Küçük Kaynarca Treaty, the Russians have increased their activities in the Balkans. They have established consulates and accordingly, sensitive zones. They have firstly formed armed committees by sending weapons and ammunition and even rebels; and afterwards caused rebellions. They had roles in establishment of independent Romania, Greece and Serbia. However, they could not in any way rouse the Armenian public mind in the Eastern Anatolia; because Armenians have preferred to be under the control of the Ottoman Empire where they have dominant situation in economic terms, as they had fear for religious sovereignty to possibly be established by Orthodox Russia. This lasted until the mid of                              the XIXth century.

     

    3. Events until Paris Imperial Reform Edict: The Issue of Minorities

     

    Russia already seized the Eastern Anatolia in 1828s and has been in close contact with the Armenian population. A significant change occurred in the mid of XIXth century. Having expanded, Russia reached the border of India; and England has suffered from this progress and France has suffered from availability of Russian navy in the Mediterranean. In the future these two countries, would on the side of the Ottoman Empire (in the future the Kingdom of Piedmont would join to them) declare war against Russia by using Russia’s request of control of the straits as an excuse.

     

    Although Russia lost the war, the peace settlement was going to cause dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. However, after England had secured the Indian border and together with France, settled the matter of Straits, these two countries put the                                  Matter of Minorities in the Ottoman Empire on the agenda, as if they won the war together with Russia against the Ottoman Empire; and thereafter, commenced to discuss the articles required to be accepted by the Grand Governorship. Sublime Porte, afraid of such a plot hatched against it, was obligated to declare in Istanbul a mandate including a series of arrangement upon recommendation and even intervention of                          a French Representative, while Paris Conference was going on. This mandate was briefly regarding equal rights and liabilities granted to non-Muslims in the Empire.

     

    It is quite strange that the objection to the provisions of this mandate was raised by the non-Muslims, who have been granted equal rights with the Muslims. Moreover,                 even Fener (“Phanar”) Greek Patriarch has read the mandate and stated  I hope it would not any longer come out of its bag” and replaced it into the bag.  The reason is quite simple: “Equal rights and liabilities as well as the status of the Muslim Ottoman Society, who spent 20 years of their lives in the military service and failed to penetrate into the commercial life, do not suit the purpose of the other societies in the Empire, who have been exempted from the military service until that time”. However, Europe has placed pressure on this matter and the non-Muslims would have been exempted from such duty by the way of payment of the “cost” of the military service and would have maintained their economic superiority.

     

    During all of these arrangements, Armenians were still loyal Ottoman citizens,                 who have been stuck to the State.  However, this was not going to last long !..

     

    Due to the influence of the missioners, who have entered from the borders, opened following Paris Conference, and due to enthusiasm for the scholarships granted, Armenians were going to be willing to go to Europe or Russia and start to be organized against the State there. However, it is not coincidence that committees, which were going to be, in the future, a great trouble to both Armenians and Turks, have been established in either Europe or Russia: “Taşnakustyan (“Taşnak” or “Tashnak”) Committee was established in Tiflis and Hinchak (“Hınçak”) Committee was established in Geneva.”

     

    Following the Treaty of Ayastefanos executed on March 3, 1978 after the war called          93 War”, concluded with great defeat of the Ottoman Empire and following the                  Berlin Conference, which is a darned version of the preceding Treaty in terms of borders; the Ottoman shrinked in the east; therefore, 800 years of Turkish sovereignty in the North-East Anatolia ended; and the territories as well as the Muslim society living thereon were left on the hook of the Armenians together with whom they have lived for 800 years. 

    The Ottomans, aware of the aforementioned facts, have been obligated to ignore a series of agitations in the country due to binding treaties and in order to prevent any jeopardy to the Muslims left on the hook of Armenians. Of course, this situation was going to be considered to be soft spot of the Ottoman Empire and the Armenian societies were going to aggravate the situation. For instance, members of Hinchak Committee were going to start consecutive rebellions.

     

    4. Ottoman – Russian War: Erzurum Cemetery, Dram and Muslims Force to Emigrate

     

    While border arrangement was being made following the Ottoman-Russian War in 1978, Russian delegates and Ottoman Delegates gathered at the provincial house. Russians demanded the province of Erzurum in addition to Kars, Ardahan and Ağrı, they occupied in this war. As support, or in other terms proof, for such demand, they asserted the claim that the majority of the population of these territories was constituted by Armenians. Upon such claim, one of the Ottoman delegates took the Russian delegate by the arm to the window and said: this is the Erzurum Cemetery; this large land from here to there is the cemetery of the Muslims and this small part is the cemetery of Armenians. As we know, Armenians bury their corpses as we do, but don’t eat !..” This dialogue is in fact quite dramatic.

     

    Then, the idea adopted in the East was: “If a peace negotiation is held and the population of one of the parties is higher than the other one’s, the other party is going to loose the relevant territories” Therefore, the Muslims on the other side of the border were forced to emigrate with pressure of any nature. When the war was started, Armenians on this side of the border were compulsorily being repressed.                   We should particularly state that while the oppressions to the Muslims in the Russian side were wildly being made by Tashnak Armenian Guerillas,                             the obligatory emigration on this side of the border was conducted by                            the disciplinary gendarme.

     

    5. 1914 Declaration of War against Russia and Armenian Rebellions: Obligatory Emigration-Emigrants

     

    As soon as war was declared against Russia in 1914 autumn, Russia forced approximately 387,000 Muslims to immediately cross the border and emigrate into the Ottoman Side. Afterwards, the Sublime Porte decided that the villages would be evicted excluding Armenians, such as the doctors, pharmacists and veterinaries, offering public services in the villages on the borders; and the emigrant Armenians would be transferred and placed in the South under security; and the immigrants coming from the Russia would be placed in the evicted villages.

     

    Three points should be considered in this decision:

    i.                     The decision was made after Russia had forced the Muslim society to emigrate.

    ii.                   The decision is not related to emigration of Armenians and members of several occupational group living in the provinces. This means that this is not a decision made against a group, as they are Armenians.

    iii.                  The decision has arrangements with respect to that Armenians would be sent to South for residence and the assets of these Armenians would be sold and the costs of the same would be delivered to them or to the Armenian church, in case of failure in finding the owners of such assets. Documents evidencing such arrangements are available.

     

    6. Obligatory Emigration Circumstances: Fatigue, Diseases and Kurdish Bandits

     

    At the preliminary stage, 180,000 – 300,000 Armenians were gathered together and repressed from their villages and collectively caused to depart towards the South.                  This departure lasted under quite hard circumstances and particularly old population died of fatigue and diseases and young population in considerable number died of the attacks of the Kurdish Bandits. There are many telegrams filed by the guardian officers requesting subsidiary forces.

     

    7. Armenian Rebellions: Yozgat and Tokat

     

    In the meantime, there has been considerable number of Armenians stayed. These have been Armenians living in the provinces or those, succeeded in staying in the villages by hiding or bribing. Those staying in the territory (Erzurum, Oltu, Erciş, Van, Malazgirt, Muş surrounding, Tekman), occupied by general attacks of the Russian Army upon Sarıkamış Event and in the provinces left to Russia by 1978 Treaty, have put to the torture and killed the Muslim society in the territory. As for Armenians living in the provinces; the major evidence that these Armenians have not been forced to emigrate is 1917 Yozgat, 1917 and 1918 Sivas Armenian Rebellions. If these Armenians had been murdered, it is so hard to understand how they were up in arms !..

     

    8. The fact of Van: “Paris of the Orient

     

    We kindly ask you to allow us to disclose a fact, the evidence of which still exists today, about Van with respect to which we have talked to the old people:

     

    The city of Van has born the title of “Paris of the Orient” and the Muslim or                   Non-Muslim ladies of Van had been wandering around the lake by silver embossed phaetons at sundown at the beginning of the last century according to the claims.                    The population of Van had consisted of 1/3 Muslims, 1/3 Armenians and 1/3 Jews.

     

    Well off Muslim society had resided in the quarter on the coast of the lake in the skirts of the castle, remained from the ancient Urartu times, and all of the aforementioned societies had lived together in the skirts of the mountain, 4-5 km far from the lake.

     

    After the Russian Army had arrived, a considerable number of Muslims left Van together with the Turkish Army falling back towards Edremit. Afterwards, Armenians of Van set fire to the Turkish quarters and in their own words “they left not a stick standing”. Relevant evidences are available.

     

    Even, according to what told by an old native of Van, “Armenians of Van, who hide their neighbors, have shipped these people in the vessels for the so-called purpose of missing them, brought them to Ahdamar Island under the Armenian Control and shot them”. When the Turkish Army pulled back Van, Armenians of Van, afraid of retaliation, evicted their quarters together with the Russian Army falling back. The Turks coming resided in the evicted Armenian quarters. Then, magnificent city of Van on the coast of the lake disappeared and today’s Van became a land city.

     

     

    9. “Armenian Stateand Armenia in Kars

     

    Armenians, surviving compulsory emigration, has put to the North together with Russian Army falling back in all directions. They have settled down in the “Kars centered Armenian State”. The life of this State has been so short and they have been repelled by Kazım Karabekir Pascha as far as today’s Armenia and left Anatolia.

     

     

    III. Incrimination of Armenian Genocide: Malta and Berlin

     

    1. Malta: “No Evidence

     

    As mentioned in the first section hereof, Cabinet in London had difficulties,                                 as no evidence could have been collected about 140 high officials of the State sent to Malta by English forces, based on a series of crime regarding massacres against Armenians in South Caucasus (refers to Eastern Anatolia within the borders of the Ottoman Empire).

     

    However, the Cabinet in London has called off establishment of courts as per                 Article 230 of Sèvres Treaty, as they could not have found any evidence either in the archives under their possession or in the archives of the Ottoman. Nevertheless, they have decided to request from the USA authorities to submit evidences and documents these authorities have been supposed to possess (!), in order to procure that those in Malta were going to be arrested to no purpose.

     

    In the meantime, the Chief Public Prosecutor of England, with its Note dated                         July 29, 1921, stated that there had been no possibility to file an action based on                the documents submitted to them as evidences or statements, the reality of which had been impossible to be believed by any court.”

     

    Having made the situation worse, the response coming from USA has caused disappointment. Washington Embassy in England (dated 13 July 1921 and by British Ambassador Mr. R.C. Craigie in Washington), in its Letter issued to Lord CURZON Committee, authorized to prepare files of the actions against the arrested officials                     in Malta, has stated: “There is no evidence available regarding the aforementioned arrested officials and there are several groundless oral complaints about two of them. The original of this document is as follows:

     

    ‘………. I regret to inform Your Lordship that there was nothing there in which could be used as evidence against the Turks who are being detained for trial at Malta…..

    Having regards to this stipulation and the fact that the reports in the possession of the Department do not appear in any case to contain evidence against these Turks which would be useful even for the purpose of corroborating information already in the possession of His Majesty’s Government.’.

     

    We would like to draw attention to one point herein: “No evidence could have been found against the arrested officials at Malta”. We would later on return to this matter while evaluating the legal situation.

     

    When the required evidences could not have been found in USA, the English Government has waived from all of its claims and converted the arrested officials into political hostages from the status of possible offenders and accepted their exchange with the prisoner Englishmen in the Anatolia on a subsequent date; but this matter is out of the scope of our matter in respect of its feature.

     

    2. Berlin: “Tayleryan who murdered Talat Pascha” and “Andonian Documents”

     

    The second stage of the request of referral of the event to international platforms has been launched in Berlin.

     

    Talat Pasha, the second important person of the Union and Progress Government (İttihat and Terakki) and the last Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Vizier, was shot by an Armenian commissioner named “Tayleryan” in May 1921. The murderer was caught. At the trial of the relevant case, it was claimed: Talat Pasha is responsible for genocide against Armenians (the first pronunciation of the word “genocide”) and Tayleryan is not               a murderer but an executor and he acted in such a manner under a grievous provocation.” As evidence for this case, telegram texts, which were going to be named “Andonian Documents” in the future; which have been claimed to have been issued from Istanbul Internal Affairs Office (Ministry) (to Şam and Halep Administrations),            then handwriting copies of the same were submitted to the court, as the “originals”, have been burned in a fire, as claimed. In these documents, expressions ordering eradication of Armenians brought for imprisonment were used. The Court REJECTED to take these into consideration as evidence.

     

    These documents have been quite important in claims regarding Armenian Genocide and have even been known as the only source.

     

    Although the Turkish side has claimed that these documents have been false; and that neither the style nor the numbers thereon nor the writing technique has not been compatible; nobody has believed this. Consequently, 75 years has elapsed from these events and falsity of these documents has been detected after the archives were opened and examined.

     

    [* A Technical Matter: A internal affairs telegram may not be deleted from the archives; this is because it is registered in at least six books from the Ministry (Office) to the Administrations (Ministry’s roes, telegram arrival book, telegram acceptance book, receiver telegram house entry book , telegram delivery roes and administration’s entry book). Moreover, nobody claims this; but we wrote for those, who may possibly not know.]

     

    When it was detected that these telegrams were false, came the most ridiculous defense from the Armenian supporters: They firstly claimed; “Armenian genocide has been carried out in the past because Andonian Documents evidence this genocide”, later they started to claim: “Falsity of the Andonian documents does not change anything, this is because it is real that these events occurred.” (Chalian; Les Armenians).

     

     

     

     

     

     

    IV. Sèvres Peace Treaty: “Negotiations”

     

    In the meantime, Sèvres peace negations have been held in Paris. Some of you may perhaps wonder why Sèvres Peace Treaty Negotiations have been held in Paris (and signed on August 10, 1920). This is quite simple; Sèvres Peace Treaty was negotiated by and between the winners at a hotel room in Paris; furthermore, they have neither accepted the interview request of Ottoman Grand Vizier, who has begged for being heard, nor read the letter send by this Grand Vizier.

     

    During these negotiations, any and all opposing groups or ethnic groups, including but not limited to Armenians, were heard but the Turks were REJECTED. After issuance of a decision, the Ottoman delegates were called to Paris and notified of this decision.

     

    Referral of the event to the international platform by Armenians has not come to naught and they have been granted the Eastern Anatolia by a treaty.

     

     When during the war of liberation, the Eastern Provinces were taken back by the 3rd Army, the Armenian events were completely forgotten.

     

    After execution of the Peace Treaty of Gümrü (dated December 3, 1920) which ended this action, the chief delegates of both sides each uttered only one but expressive word:

     

    – “Having left the pen, Turkish chief delegate, asked the Armenian Chief Delegate: “WHY ?.” 

     

    – The response of the Armenian Chief Delegate was “WE’VE BEEN DELUDED !..”.

     

     

    V. Armenian Diaspora: “ASALA and Kurds: PKK

     

    Hereafter, deceptions were tended from Armenians to the Kurds. The requests of Armenians have been forgotten due to the effects of Dersim and Sheik (“Şeyh”) Sait rebellions, financial crisis of 1930s, 2nd World War, Korean War and Cold War.

     

    Communities of interest, which have considered in 1960s that they would do nothing with the Kurds, organized the Armenian Diaspora and founded and supported ASALA.

     

    After each murder by ASALA, the Western Media had repeated the same sentences and supported Armenians. Then, the public, which has not been accustomed to ask any questions, has accepted the same as an “event”. Another update…the number of the lost people, notified by the Patriarchy as 180-300 thousands in 1920s, was mentioned to be  one (1) million as of 1966 and thereafter as 1.5 – 2 million.

     

    Accordingly, we guess that these Armenians, the only nation whose population continues to increase although they die, have losses in 1915.

     

    After seriously acting for approximately 15 years, ASALA has disintegrated officially due to internal conflicts and non-officially as a result of the efforts of the Turkish Intelligence Service.

     

    Afterwards, somehow, the Kurds were started to be used and “PKK” was caused to be established. You know thereafter.

     

    Today, precipitation of PKK, other than small PKK groups, has leaded the effort to               re-agitate Armenians” or “create a new purpose”. What would these excitements lead against us in the future ?.

     

    Sometime several games have been intended to be played on “Alevi society” and they have started to be organized seriously in Germany and Belgium; but the majority of               the Alevi society disregards such efforts for the time being 

     

     

    VI. Armenian Emigration and Rebellions

     

    The act of 1915 Armenian forced emigration (obligatory emigration) was not against                  a group of a religion or a race.

     

    According to the documents under our possession, the political will relating to the event was for non-erudite Armenians, supposed to be Russian comsymps or under the influence of the Russians in the territories adjacent to the front line and it has been understood that such forced emigration was conducted particularly for wiping out of the territory in military terms and making the territory convenient for a military act. However, at the beginning, erudite Armenians such as doctors, pharmacists etc., as well as Armenians living in the cities, Armenians working in the state authorities, sick and older villager Armenians were exempted;

     

    We have a memory; 2 Turkish officers told how they have been taken prisoners and how their imprisonments have been. These two officers could have gone to the 3rd Army in Erzurum from Istanbul in 42 days. The most important reason for their delay has been interruption of their travels due to the Armenian gangs or their short laps. These gangs’ generally being Protestant Armenians might have been taken as basis for issuance of decision on emigration. However, in our opinion, the trigger of the event was the intention to clear a field in the critical zone for about 300,000 Turks, forced                        to emigrate from Russian side to Turkish side. In fact, firstly 300,000 Turks were banished; thereupon 300,000 – 600,000 Armenians were forced to emigrate to              the South.  

     

    Has the Armenian population been as mentioned above? No, but I could not understand the importance of the number of this population; because the entire of this population has not been forced to emigrate. The evidences are the rebellions, which have consecutively broken out after 1915 and particularly upon regression of the Russian Army after dissolution of the Tsarist Russia in the last years of the war. Even if, we disregarded the zones under Russian occupation in 1915s such as Kars, Ardahan,             Doğu Beyazıt. If there have not been Armenians in the zones such as Yozgat, Sivas and Merzifon,  how would these rebellions been explained then ? !…

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    According to what we told in our article relating to lives of the entire of Armenians in the territory of Van in 1916, how could general emigration of Armenians be mentioned without any bad faith? It is hard for a normal person to consider the same! You know that any single Armenian has not been disturbed in the territories of Maraş and Kilikya (“Cilisia”). Moreover, a telegram is regarding refusal by                   the Armenians in the relevant zone of the efforts for placement, in Kilikya, of Armenians forced to emigrate from the East. We should deem well of the same !..

     

    One day, an Armenian Professor, during his visit to Ani Ruins, told us: “The worst behavior of you was conscription of the men and assassination of the women and children in the villages without men”. We told him that “his knowledge was completely wrong. Regardless of whether the women and children in these villages have been murdered, the Armenian men in this zone have established Tashnak gangs and attacked the Turkish villages or taken shelter of the Russian Army and constituted Armenian troops”. We told him that “the Armenian soldiers he mentioned were the aforementioned villagers. He had never heard something like this !..”. We would like to repeat that it was calculated that the Armenian men, taken shelter of the Russian Army and taken part in the newly formed Armenian troops immediately upon commencement of the war before 1915 events counted at least 70,000. Moreover, during the Russian occupation, these are the Armenians, who have caused injustices to the extent these have stroked the Russian officers the wrong way !..

     

     

    VII. Conclusions: “Our Specialists and Our Situation

     

    1. In Terms of Political Will: False Documents of Lewy Aram Andonyan

     

    We told in our article that Armenians’ attitude was so illogical and extraordinary that            the lawyers even could not understand. After the archives had been opened and the falsification of the Andonian documents had been understood, Armenians and their supporters, who at the beginning, made the availability of this political will depend on completely falsified Andonian documents, wisely and coolly stated: “This changes nothing; because the Armenian Genocide is anyhow real and other documents are absolutely available (?!); but, nowadays they are not accessible !..”.

     

    2. In Legal Terms: Burden of Proof

     

    Objective side, contrary to the logic of law, is that the world public opinion has taken the burden of proof from Armenians asserting the claim and given the same to us, Turks.  They asked us to prove that such claim is not true instead of asking Armenians to prove their claim. Moreover, they have even not heard our defense.  Let’s say  “c’est de bonne guerre” in French terms up to that point.  Interests prevail instead of rights and law between the states.

     

    However, the point, which desolates us and which we have difficulty in understanding is that: WE STILL HOLD OURSELVES RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS MATTER; AND WE PREFER ACCEPTANCE OF PRESSURE OF THE FOREIGNERS               TO WHAT TOLD BY OUR MEN OF LETTERS AND OUR HISTORIANS.

     

     

     

     

    3. In Other Terms

     

    Yes, this is true; this act has not been conducted without blood. We guess that approximately 60,000 Armenians have died on the ways and nearly same number of Armenians in the communication zones due to climatic conditions in the territory on one hand and their insufficient supply on the other hand and particularly due to continuous attacks by the Kurdish Gangs to these public processions, emigrating with their precious belongings.

     

    However, Istanbul Armenian Patriarchy has firstly mentioned that 300,000 Armenians have died. The figures, claimed today, are not true and are for the purpose of stirring up disorder in the public opinion. Those wondering the facts may reach information on census of population held during the Constitutional Monarchy (“Meşrutiyet”) and may notice that the population in the territory may not be enough for this.

     

    We would conclude our article with a current event: A program to which a Turkish specialist (?!) attended was held in a Belgian-French Channel. On the matter of acceptance of Armenians by the European Union and request from Turkiye for recognition of the Armenian Genocide and if not acceptable, request from EU Parliament for issuance of a decision on this matter, this Specialist (!) only and only stated that this is not possible under EU negotiation conditions and such a condition may not be claimed. He even uttered any other unfortunate sentences. If we were in his shoes, we would state that there has been no Armenian Genocide and the claims on this matter are factitious instead of stating that negotiation of this matter is not possible.

     

    Do you consider the claim of Armenians that those accepting the Armenian Genocide has been made are sentenced to imprisonment according to the Turkish Former Criminal Code? A specialist (!?), being at the same time a legal advisor, did not state that there is not such a provision in the Turkish Former Criminal Code; but instead he stated that there has been no person put in the prison for such reason. Do you consider                  our situation ?!..

     

    Mustafa Kemal ATATÜRK, at his speech during the opening of the Turkish Grand National Assembly, stated: The problem called as “Armenian Problem” and intended to be resolved according to the economic interests of the world capitalists rather than according to the requests of the Armenian Nation was resolved by the Treaty of Kars              in the most correct manner. Good faith relations of the two hardworking societies living together in amity for centuries were re-established with pleasure.”

     

    Please take into consideration my writings as a knowledge sharing. How come that everybody informs its studies and such studies are not considered to be abnormal,                     we would also like to share our knowledge as they do.

    Kindly submitted…

     

    Hakan HANLI

    Attorney at Law

    International and EU Law Specialist

    Brussels, April 23, 2006         atthakanhanli@skynet.be

     

    Telif Hakkı © 2006 Hakan HANLI. Her hakkı mahfuzdur.

    Copyright © 2006 Hakan HANLI.  All rights reserved.

  • SWEDEN TURNS DOWN ARMENIAN GENOCIDE BILL

    SWEDEN TURNS DOWN ARMENIAN GENOCIDE BILL

    On June 12only 37 of 245 members of the Parliament of Sweden voted for the
    recognition of the Armenian Genocide. According to Vahagn Avetian, head of
    Armenica.org, the Parliaments of Sweden held very long debates on the
    issue the day before.

    The parliamentarians figured out 4 points against the recognition of the
    Genocide. In particular, they explained their position by absence of any
    UN official document on the Armenian Genocide.

    Secondly, the negationists insisted that in 1948, when the relevant UN
    resolution was adopted, the Ottoman Empire existed no more. The last two
    points were rather vague and hardly had any relationship with the issue.
    They said that there are still controversies about the scenarios of the
    downfall of the Ottoman Empire and that the recognition of the Armenian
    Genocide may provoke unpleasant actions by certain nationalistic forces.

    By A. Haroutiunian, translated by A.M.

  • California Republican Party unanimously passed the Genocide Resolution

    California Republican Party unanimously passed the Genocide Resolution

    Resolution designating April 24th of each year a day of remembrance of the Armenian Genocide Sponsored by Albert Abkarian, Armenian American Republican Council

    WHEREAS, the Turkish Ottoman Empire massacred one and one half million innocent Armenian men, women, and children from 1915 to 1923; and

    WHEREAS, the Turkish massacre of Armenians was a crime against humanity and an affront to civilized nations everywhere; and

    WHEREAS, despite overwhelming historical evidence, the present day Turkish government has denied and continues to deny the existence of the genocide committed against the Armenian People; and

    WHEREAS, the California Republican Party is dedicated to the principal of justice for all people; and

    WHEREAS, the many American’s of Armenian ancestry now living in California have asked for the Party to join them in condemning the Armenian Genocide, all genocides and acts of injustice against humanity;

    BE IT RESOLVED THAT, The California Republican Party hereby condemns the atrocities committed against the Armenian people from 1915 to 1923; and

    BE IT RESOLVED THAT, The Party hereby designates April 24th of each year as a day of remembrance in honor of the one and one-half million Armenian victims who died at the hands of the Turkish government.

    Signed by CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN PARTY

  • The Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed Borders

    The Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed Borders

    Title: The Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed Borders
    Location: The House Foreign Affairs, Washington DC
    Description: The House Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on the Caucasus on June 18, 2008
    Start Time: 10:00
    Date: 2008-06-19

    The House Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on the Caucasus on June 18, 2008.  Please contact your Member of Congress and ask them to point out Turkey and Azerbaijan’s positive role in the region.   The Armenian American community will ask members to emphasize “blockade” of Armenia. Please emphasize Armenia’s occupation of Azerbaijan and blockade of Nakhichevan.  Below are additional points for your consideration and a list of Members on their committee and their staff.  It is most effective if you are a constituent or know the office. If you would like to know who your Member of Congress is, go to www.house.gov and put in your zip code.  

    Thank you

    The House Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on the Caucasus on June 18, 2008.  As your constituents, we would like you to keep the following in mind and if possible, raise the following issues:

     

    TURKEY, AZERBAIJAN, GEORGIA AND THE U.S. HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER TO DIVERSIFY ENERGY RESOURCES AND ACHIEVE ENERGY SECURITY IN THE CASPIAN REGION FOR ALMOST TWO DECADES

     

    • At the epicenter of Eurasian energy and transport routes, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Georgia are bolstering global energy security by providing for the safe and secure flow of goods, services, and energy resources to world markets.

     

    • Since the “Contract of the Century” was signed in 1994, Azerbaijan has extensively developed its energy resources to diversify western energy supplies.  The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline became fully operational in July 2006, and will provide one third of new oil to international markets.  

     

    • Turkey and Israel are jointly working for the realization of the Turkey-Israel Multi-Pipeline System which will support global energy security as the North-South energy corridor becomes as important as the East-West energy corridor.

     

    • New opportunities have emerged in Turkmenistan for the realization of the Turkmenistan-Trans Caspian-Turkey-Europe Gas Pipeline Project (TCP).

     

     

    THE ARMENIA-AZERBAIJAN CONFLICT

     

    • Armenia occupies 20 percent of neighboring Azerbaijan, including the Nagorno Karabakh region and seven additional regions. 
    • The State Department’s 2008 fact sheet on the region states: “The United States does not recognize Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent country, and its leadership is not recognized internationally or by the United States.  The United States supports the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and holds that the future status of Nagorno-Karabakh is a matter of negotiation between the parties with the aim of achieving a lasting and comprehensive political resolution of the conflict. The United States remains committed to finding a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict through the Minsk Group process.”  The United States mediates the peace process as a Co-Chair of the OSCE Minsk Group which was established in 1992.

     

    • From a total population of eight million, there are nearly one million refugees and internally displaced Azerbaijanis.

     

    • According to the U.S. Embassy in Baku, Azerbaijan’s Nakhichevan exclave is “blockaded by neighboring Armenia.”

     

    • Four U.N. Security Council resolutions (822, 853, 874, 884) adopted in 1992 and 1993 call for the unconditional withdrawal of Armenian forces from the occupied territories.

     

    • Armenia has not recognized the Armenian-Turkish border.

     

     

    ARMENIA’S RELATIONSHIP WITH IRAN

     

    • Iran is one of Armenia’s largest trading partners.  The two countries are working on a trade agreement.

     

    • An Iran-Armenia gas pipeline was opened by President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Armenian President Robert Kocharian on March 19, 2007.

     

    • Russia and Iran are planning to construct a refinery in Armenia with an annual capacity to refine 53 million barrels of oil and produce gasoline and diesel fuel.  Armenia will only use 1 million tons of refined oil; the vast majority will be exported.

     

    • The State Department expressed concern about relations between Armenia and Iran in its 2007 Country Reports on Terrorism:

     

    “Armenia’s warming relations with neighboring Iran continued, with Armenia hosting official visits by Iranian President Ahmadinejad (October) and Iranian Defense Minister Najjar (November).  In addition to fostering closer diplomatic ties, these visits served to solidify previous bilateral commitments to develop joint energy and transportation projects.  This closer cooperation has made Armenia more reluctant to criticize publicly objectionable Iranian conduct or join other UN member states in advocating for sanctions on the Iranian regime.”

     June 2008

     

    Foreign Affairs Staffers for House Foreign Affairs Committee Members

     

    Congressperson

    Staffer

    Contact Information (office)

    DEMOCRATS

    Berman

    Doug Campbell

    225-4695

    Doug.campbell@mail.house.gov

    Ackerman

    David Adams

    225-2601

    David.adams@mail.house.gov

    Faleomavaega

    Lisa Williams

    225-8577

    Lisa.williams@mail.house.gov

    Payne

    Stephanie Gidigbi

    225-3436

    Stephanie.Gidigbi@mail.house.gov

    Sherman

    Don MacDonald

    225-5911

    Don.macdonald@mail.house.gov

    Wexler

    Jesper Pedersen

    225-3001

    Jesper.Pedersen@mail.house.gov

    Engel

    Jason Steinbaum

    225-2464

    Jason.steinbaum@mail.house.gov

    Delahunt

    Brain Forni

    225-3111

    Brian.Forni@mail.house.gov

    Meeks

    Sophia King

    225-3461

    Sophia.king@mail.house.gov

    Crowley

    Shawn Hodjati

    225-3965

    Shawn.Hodjati@mail.house.gov

    Watson

    Bert Hammond

    225-7084

    Bert.Hammond@mail.house.gov

    Carnahan

    Jeremy Haldeman

    Jeremy.haldeman@mail.house.gov

    225-2671

    Tanner

    Carling Dinkler

    Carling.dinkler@mail.house.gov

    225-4714

    Woolsey

    Jennifer Goedke

    Jennifer.goedke@mail.house.gov

    225-5161

    Jackson Lee

    Yohannes Tsehai

    Yohannes.tsehai@mail.house.gov

    225-3816

    Nina Besser

    Nina.Besser@mail.house.gov

    Hinojosa

    Andrew Jones

    Andrew.jones@mail.house.gov

    225-2531

    Wu

    Scott Olson (Latin America and Europe)

    Scott.olson@mail.house.gov

    225-0855

    Elsa Tung (Asia and Middle East)

    Elsa.Tung@mail.house.gov

    225-0855

    Brad Miller

    Ashley Orr

    Ashley.orr@mail.house.gov

    225-3032

    Linda Sanchez

    Jose Delgado

    Jose.delgado@mail.house.gov

    225-6676

    David Scott

    Gary Woodward

    Gary.woodward@mail.house.gov

    225-2939

    Costa

    Bob Farmer

    Bob.Farmer@mail.house.gov

    225-3341

    Sires

    Jessica Lawrence (Asia, Pacific)

    Jessica.lawrence@mail.house.gov

    225-7919

    Hannah Brown (Western Hemisphere)

    Hannah.Brown@mail.house.gov

    225-7919

    Giffords

    Liz Berry

    Liz.Berry@mail.house.gov

    225-2542

    Ron Klein

    Mira Kogen

    Mira.kogen@mail.house.gov

    225-3026

    Adam Smith

    Katy Quinn

    225-8901

    Katy.Quinn@mail.house.gov

    REPUBLICANS

    Chris Smith

    Sheri Rickert, subcommittee staff member, counsel

    226-7812

    Sheri.rickert@mail.house.gov

     

    Peter Martin

    Subcommittee staff

    226-7812

    Peter.martin@mail.house.gov

     

    Mark Milosch,

    Subcommittee staff

    226-7812

    Mark.milosch@mail.house.gov

    Burton

    Brian Fauls

    225-2276

    Brian.fauls@mail.house.gov

    Mark Walker

    Mark.Waler@mail.house.gov

    225-2276

    Gallegly

    Richard Mereu

    225-5811

    Richard.mereu@mail.house.gov

    Ros-Lehtinen

    Yleem Poblete

    225-3931

    Yleem.pobleteIR@mail.house.gov

     

    Sarah Kiko

    225-3931

    Sarah.kiko@mail.house.gov

    Rohrabacher

    Paul Berkowitz

    225-2415

    Paul.berkowitz@mail.house.gov

    Royce

    Thomas Sheehy

    226-1500

    Tom.sheehy@mail.house.gov

    Chabot

    Keri Sikich

    225-2216

    Keri.sikich@mail.house.gov

    Manzullo

    Nien Su

    225-5676

    Nien.su@mail.house.gov

    Tancredo

    Mac Zimmerman

    225-7882

    Mac.zimmerman@mail.house.gov

    Paul

    Daniel McAdams

    225-2831

    Daniel.mcadams@mail.house.gov

    Flake

    Chandler Morse

    225-2635

    Chandler.morse@mail.house.gov

    Wittman

    Jamie Jones Miller

    225-4261

    Jamie.miller@mail.house.gov

    Pence

    LeAnne Gibbs

    225-3021

    lgibbs@mail.house.gov

    McCotter

    Paul Blocher

    225-8171

    Paul.blocher@mail.house.gov

    Joe Wilson

    Paul Callahan

    225-2452

    Paul.Callahan@mail.house.gov

    Boozman

    Margaret Lemmerman

    225-4301

    Margaret.lemmerman@mail.house.gov

    Barrett

    Carla Campbell

    225-5301

    Carla.campbell@mail.house.gov

    Mack

    Francis Gibbs

    225-2536

    Francis.gibbs@mail.house.gov

    Fortenberry

    Diana Tasnadi

    225-4806

    Diana.tasnadi@mail.house.gov

    McCaul

    Ari Stein

    225-2401

    Ari.stein@mail.house.gov

    Poe

    Nicole Hunt

    225-6565

    Nicole.schouten@mail.house.gov

    Inglis

    David Weil

    225-6030

    David.Weil@mail.house.gov

    Fortuño

    John Laufer

    225-2615

    John.Laufer@mail.house.gov

  • The Allegations

    The Allegations

    The allegation that the Ottoman Empire carried out a systematic and deliberate plan to annihilate the entire Armenian population is not supported by and contrary to historical evidence. Hence, the so-called “Armenian genocide” far from being an historical fact, is disputed by many scholars.

    In the 1870’s, Armenian nationalists began the process of fomenting revolution on the part of their compatriots in Anatolia, against Ottoman rule. This process, which was to culminate in betrayal during World War I, was noted as early as March 18, 1878. The British Ambassador to the Ottoman government was informed by the religious head of the Empire’s Armenian population that the Armenian minority was preparing to overthrow the Ottoman Rule and annex themselves and Ottoman territory to Russia. Forty years before the alleged massacres, Armenian Revolutionaries had succeeded in fomenting a two-fold desire on the part of the Ottoman Armenians: a). a desire for a national revolution, b). a desire for union with the Ottoman Empire’s traditional enemy, Czarist Russia.

    Armenian Revolutionaries sought to incite European intervention on behalf of their cause by massacring innocent Muslim villagers. They hoped to provoke counter violence, which would then serve as a pretext for European intervention. Armenian treachery culminated at the beginning of the First World War with the decision of the revolutionary organizations to assist the invading Russian armies. Their hope was that their participation in the Russian success would be rewarded with an independent Armenian state carved out of Ottoman territories. Armenian Revolutionaries cut Ottoman supply lines by guerilla attacks and armed Armenian civilian populations, who in turn massacred the Muslim population. The Ottoman response was to order the relocation of its Armenian subjects from the path of the invading Russians and other areas where they might undermine the Ottoman war effort.

    The leader of the Armenian delegation in attendance at the Paris Peace Conference after World War I openly acknowledged the fact that it was the Armenian contributions to the Allied war effort, which led to their mistreatment by the Ottoman authorities. There would be no more overt declaration of Armenian betrayal of their own country than the delegation’s demand that the Armenian people be given the status of “belligerents” to qualify for rewards for their treachery.

    In short, the Ottoman officials were clearly justified in their decision to attempt to remove their Armenian populations from the path of the invading Russians they were actively supporting.

    We acknowledge that what transpired in Eastern Anatolia was one of history’s worst human disasters. Its causes lay back 100 years in the Russian conquests and in nationalism and religious separatism. Blame must be apportioned to the Russian government which had no legitimate right to the lands conquered; to the Allies, who ignored their own avowed principles of majority rule; to the Ottoman government which was not strong enough to defend its empire from Russia or to protect its people from each other; but most of all, to the Armenian nationalists who were willing to sacrifice their own people in the name of their ideology.

    Insistence on viewing Armenians as the unique victims of suffering in Anatolia is untenable as competent scholarship on the subject has expanded and the Ottoman archives has been opened for research.

  • A Basic Refresher Summary

    A Basic Refresher Summary

    First contact between Armenians and Turks date back to the early 1100s when nomadic Turkish tribes started showing up in numbers in Anatolia. These tribes begun their immigration from the harsh conditions of the steppes which today are north western China and still home to the Moslem Turkic Uygurs. Armenians at the time were mostly under the prosecution of the decaying Byzantium and/or Persian empires. Decline of the Byzantine increased as the Turks formed the Selcuklu empire which was welcomed by the many of the regions minorities as it brought a new order and a period of tranquility until the Christian Crusades began which in turn became the major cause for the decline of the Selcuklu which bore the full brunt defending the Moslem lands. The Selcuklu was followed by the 600+ year Ottoman empire in which Armenians found a chance like many other ethnic groups to serve in diverse fields in the government as well as live a much more peaceful and protected life.

    The Osmanli Empire (House of Osman) called the Ottoman Empire due to the mistake of Italian traders hundreds of years ago consisted of a multitude of ethnic and religious groups. The relationship of the majority, Moslems and the other religions were almost at all times favorable compared to their previous experiences under rulers of different religions.

    The Ottoman Millet system of self governance was the major reason for the empires more then half millenium existence and in many ways are reflected in the current states model of the USA, except that the regions were at times even less loosely regulated. Simply put the none Moslems were exempt from military service and needed to only pay their taxes as determined together by the leader of their sect or social group and the Ottoman court. Non Moslems were later allowed into the military as a result of colonization efforts of the west which caused periods of non stop warfare on many fronts.

    However during and after the eighteen hundreds the Empire entered a period of decline. It had failed to modernize and very slow to industrialize, nationalism was slowly boiling in Europe. Through a combination of failing to modernize, unsuccessful row of Sultans (Emperors) added with the colonialist moves of the west did not allow the Ottoman to catch up fast enough.

    To give an idea of the expansionist desires of colonialism, the Ottoman armies fought wars in 1806-12, 1828-29, 1832-33, 1839-40, 1853-56, 1877-78, 1897, 1911-13, 1914-18, 1919-23 at great human and material cost. These dates dont even include internal uprisings. The resulting loss in man power undermined the once superior preparedness of the army, loss of land undermined revenue, the slow but steady seeping of ethnic nationalism coupled with the influx of Moslem refugees running from ethnic cleansing in the Balkans and Central-Caucasia stirred inter communal tensions.

    The Ottoman Empire at the time was still a large entity but seen as the sick man of Europe with great wealth to be divided upon his death. Depleted military of the Ottomans required that internal forces which normally patrolled and kept law & order in the rural areas were summoned to the battle fronts. This is when the Russian dream for warmer waters (the Bosphorus/Dardanelles) and expansion in caucasia really fired up. In fact most European powers such as UK, France, Italy, Germany, Austria-Hungary were all interested in getting a piece of the Ottoman lands one way or the other. With the original intent of dividing up the Ottoman Empire, the western nations and Russia drew various plans of intervention to speed up the death and burial of the sick man. With the context of protecting the Christian minorities these powers started demanding things of the Ottoman empire which it was not in position to provide for anyone in the empire.

    The plan was to bring chaos to the internal order of the Ottoman Empire, wreck the tranquility which the Ottomans had succeeded in keeping different ethnic groups living side by side peacefully and then intervening and grabbing large pieces of land with the pretense of protecting its minorities. The Russians & the British were the most successful of the colonial powers. The Russians were able to incite the Ottoman Armenians which shared a common religion with the promise of their own country while the British used a combination of bribes and promises of sheikdoms to local Arabs. As a result of the mostly British (but also the rest of the WW1 Allied forces) intervention most of the middle east’s borders have been drawn artificially without any real ethnical or national basis hence the high level of conflict in the region today. This is also how the Armenian question came up. Czarist Russia saw that a very trusted Ottoman minority (actually called the “trusted millet”) shared common religion (Orthodox) and was directly on the path of its expansion plans. The Russian Armenian relations began in the middle of the seventeenth century when Russia started flexing its expansionist military. In short Armenians were promised a country of their own if they fought on the side of the Russians.

    The plan was two fold; first Armenian revolutionaries would join the ranks of the Russian forces but the second and more importantly Armenian revolutionaries would cause chaos behind the Ottoman lines. Their action behind the lines would not be limited to military but unprotected Moslem villages causing backlashes at Armenian villages and in return Russia would make claims on the Ottomans. Disrupting already limited supply lines, attacking in transit groups and causing terror behind lines against civilians which would require the Ottomans to divert man power from the front lines to the back for policing reasons caused un imaginable harm to the Ottoman efforts to protect its lands and its citizens.

    The Ottoman government realized that it could no longer police the complete “back office” while fighting multiple wars and decided to force the migration of Armenians from the regions of which they caused havoc altogether to other parts of the empire where they would be less useful to the Russians. In the long run with the fall of the Czar, Russians left the Armenians in the cold. The civilian Moslem people (Turks, Kurds, Arabs, etc.) whom they had attacked in the meantime came back to haunt them. The atrocities committed by Armenian revolutionaries on Moslem populations of the region and by the advancing Russian forces on the conquered territories created a backlash. The refugees barely having survived Russian/Armenian massacres lashed back at the Armenians which were left alone by the Russians causing mass deportations and refugees on the Armenian side. The Ottoman Empire which had been reduced in size by more then 50% at this time was in no position to police or control regional violence, a civil war was taking place while it still tried fighting full battles on 3 distinct fronts (Balkans, Middle East, Caucasia) at the same time. The Ottoman Empire was the only Axis power left fighting when Germany and Austria-Hungarian empires fell at the end of World War 1.

    When the Turkish War of Independence was won, peace came with the Lausanne Treaty. Part of the treaty of 1923, established Armenians together with Greeks and Jews as citizens of the new Republic with an official minority status.

    Today Armenians continue their lives in Turkey in diverse fields mostly concentrated in Istanbul and some other Anatolian towns. As it was in the Ottoman Empire they are free to practice the requirements of their religion and continue to be a integral part of the state as they had been before. Of the latest news on Armenians in Turkey; On 11 October 1998 Sunday, 79 lay delegates were elected in the elections held in Istanbul, Kayseri, Diyarbakir, Iskenderun, Kirikhan and Vakifkoy (Antioch). Later in the week 10 clerical and 79 lay delegates forming the Armenian Church General Assembly elected the new Religious Council and Mesrob Mutafyan as the 84th Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul.

    Today most problems on the issue are caused by the anti-Turkish-everything fanatic lobbying of the Armenian Diaspora and the occupation of more then 20% of Azerbaijan’s (Turkic) land by the Republic of Armenia.

    Armenians of Armenia and the Diaspora will be touched upon later on.