The Syrian people were the first to be aware of the Armenian Genocide as tens of thousands of Armenians were deported by Ottoman Turkey to the killing fields of the Syrian Desert at the beginning of the 20th Century. A large number of Armenian orphans were adopted by local Arabs who raised them as their children. The surviving Armenians in Aleppo, Raqqa, Deir Zor, Damascus and elsewhere were welcome by the local population. Armenians settled in their new homeland, rebuilt their lives, reestablished their cultural structures, including churches, schools, and societies and gradually prospered.
I was born in Aleppo, Syria, as some of my grandparents’ family had survived the Genocide. I had a happy childhood and had not experienced any prejudice or discrimination, despite the religious differences. Syria had its own dispute with the Republic of Turkey, such as the annexation of Iskenderun (Alexandretta) to Turkey in 1939, after an illegitimate referendum. Nevertheless, the Syrian government, in an Islamic solidarity with Turkey and unwilling to antagonize its more powerful Northern neighbor, had declined to raise the issue of the Armenian Genocide.
I recall that during the deliberations of the United Nations’ Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities in 1985, the Syrian human rights member told me that even though he was aware of the Armenian Genocide, he could not vote to adopt the report that recognized it, as he would be dismissed from his job. Under the circumstances, I asked him to be absent from the hall during the voting. He did, and the UN report was adopted by an overwhelming majority.
In the years prior to the 2011 civil war in Syria, the relationship between Syria and Turkey had improved to the point that the the presidents of the two countries met often and went on vacation together. The Syrian government even banned the sale of books on the Armenian Genocide in Syrian bookstores. During those honeymoon years, I was informed that during the visit of Catholicos Aram I to Damascus, Pres. Bashar al-Assad had told him that Armenians should forget about the Armenian Genocide, open the border and establish friendly relations with Turkey.
When I visited Damascus in 2009, an Armenian friend with access to the Presidential Palace, tried to arrange a meeting for me with Pres. Assad. I wanted to warn Pres. Assad that his honeymoon with the Turkish President could come to an abrupt end and Erdogan, as an untrustworthy ally, could betray him. Of course, I had no idea that two years after my visit to Syria, there would be a massive invasion of Syria by radical Islamic terrorists armed and supported by Turkey. Unfortunately, I did not have the chance to meet Pres. Assad. His Chief of Staff refused to arrange the meeting, telling my Armenian friend that he could not allow such a meeting given my many critical writings of Turkey. He said that Turkey would cut off its friendly relations with Syria if Erdogan found out that Pres. Assad had met with me!
Edmon Marukyan, head of the Bright Armenia opposition party in the Armenian Parliament, told reporters last week that when he met Pres. Assad in Damascus during his trip to Syria in 2014, Assad said: “I was being told in Armenia that I shouldn’t trust Erdogan so much, I didn’t listen to you.” Pres. Assad made an official trip to Armenia in June 2009. However, violating Armenian protocol, he refused to visit the Armenian Genocide Memorial in Yerevan to pay homage to the Genocide victims out of concern for Turkish criticism.
Pres. Assad told Agence France Presse (AFP) in January 2014 that the brutal attacks on Syria reminded him of “the massacres perpetrated by the Ottomans against the Armenians, when they killed a million and a half Armenians, and half a million Orthodox Syriacs in Syria and in Turkish territory.”
The unanimous decision by the Syrian Parliament on February 13, 2020 is the first official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Syria. The text of the parliament’s resolution also referred to the genocide of Assyrians and Syriacs. Some have expressed their unhappiness that the Syrian government finally recognized the Armenian Genocide only when it suited its own political interests. While that is true, Armenians have to be realistic. No country is going to adopt a decision that is contrary to its national interests. It is true that the Syrian Parliament’s decision is mostly due to the recent Turkish invasion of Northern Syria. However, the decision is not wrong. It is the right thing to do. It is never the wrong time to do the right thing. The wrong was not recognizing the Armenian Genocide for all those years. Thus Syria became the second Arab country after Lebanon to have recognized the Armenian Genocide. We hope other Arab countries, such as Egypt, Iraq and Jordan, will follow suit.
Two immediate benefits of the Syrian Parliament’s recognition of the Armenian Genocide are:
1) The mass media once again reminded the world’s public opinion about the dastardly act of the Armenian Genocide committed by Ottoman Turkey, putting one more nail on the coffin of Turkish denial.
2) The Turkish government issued a statement denying the Armenian Genocide and condemning the Syrian government which further publicized the Turkish genocide of the Armenians.
Armenians around the world welcomed Syria’s recognition of the Armenian Genocide, further squeezing the noose around Turkish denialism. As the saying goes, “Better late than Never!”
In the wake of a nearly unanimous House resolution on the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, powerful voices are now calling for an accompanying Senate resolution and presidential action. The former, at least, is likely. Turkey bitterly opposes such action for obvious reasons and, to be honest, the reason that the resolution has gained traction at this moment has more to do with authoritarianism in Turkey and the invasion of Kurdish-held northeastern Syria than with history. Former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power published a strident op-ed in the NewYorkTimes demanding that the United States acknowledge the “facts” and recognize the events of 1915 as a genocide.
As a matter of international convention the crime of genocide has a specific definition, the most important element of which is “the intent to destroy.” Another important element of such a charge is that it pertains to individuals rather than to entire countries or groups. You cannot hold a nation-state accountable for genocide (and, in this case, the Turkish Republic did not yet exist). Rather, you must charge individuals. Genocide is an accusation to be taken seriously and brought with the most stringent standards of evidence. Assertions of the need for ex post facto recognition of such a crime are inflammatory and dangerous, if for no other reason than that, in this case, the accused are long dead. Political recognition of a genocide in the House of Representatives or the halls of power in any other country do not endow the charge with factual legitimacy.
Examinations of the authentic historical evidence available today should be undertaken by historians. This might seem like an obvious claim, yet much of the literature on this topic tends to be dominated by non-historians. For example, Samantha Power is a lawyer, Taner Akcam is a sociologist by training, Fatma Müge Göçek is a sociologist, and Peter Balakian is a literature professor. We should keep in mind that professionally trained historians are highly specialized academically and the military and civil history of the late Ottoman imperial period is a very narrow field. It is easy to lodge an accusation today, but it is far harder to provide authenticated evidentiary material that passes a high standard of veracity. In the case of what happened to the Ottoman-Armenians 100 years ago, historians are left with archival documents, the accounts of witnesses, and the accounts of secondary observers. Reconciling why things happened and even the truth of what actually happened, from these sources, is enormously difficult even for trained historians with the appropriate linguistic and research skills.
Further, what we commonly call “history” is not the truth. History is always an interpretation of a set of facts concerning events in the past and, sadly, often skewed by preexisting and partisan views. Regarding the massacres in eastern Anatolia in 1915, the fact that thousands of Armenians were deliberately killed is not in question. However, the facts about who the perpetrators were and the level at which decisions were made to kill Ottoman-Armenians are in question. Moreover, the larger question about whether there was or was not a centralized plan of extermination remains hotly contested in academia. Unlike the evidentiary trail historians have followed investigating the Holocaust, there is, in late 2019, no authentic documentary evidence available that conclusively answers these questions. Rather, there is a body of speculative conjecture based on the presumption that correlation equals causation — these are not truths, these are arguments by assertion.
In terms of the extant scholarship today, there are six major theses about why the mass killings of Ottoman-Armenians occurred in eastern Anatolia in 1915, which I reviewed in my book on the topic. All six embrace the same existing evidence but weigh it and interpret it differently. These are, in no particular order:
The ethnic homogenization, or Turkification, of Anatolia
The intent to destroy, or premeditated genocide
Cumulative radicalization, or non-premeditated genocide
Retaliation and justification, or a response to the killing of Ottoman Muslims
State security and the existence of a large insurgency
Operational security and counter-insurgency by relocation
What can actually be proven? First, there were many, many well-documented episodes of localized massacres of Ottoman-Armenians. Second, many Ottoman officials actively helped to save large numbers of Ottoman-Armenians. Third, Armenian revolutionary committees actively conspired with the Russian empire to raise rebellion in the Ottoman army’s rear areas in support of Russian offensives. Fourth, the Ottoman army used contemporary practices of relocation employed by the British in the Boer republics, the Americans in the Philippines, and the Spanish in Cuba as an operational counter-insurgency approach (which I review in detail in my latest book).
What cannot be proven at the present time? First, the number of Ottoman-Armenians who were killed or died as a result of relocation, and second, the motives of Ottoman officials at national, provincial, and local levels who participated in the relevant events.
There is a large amount of archival evidence that has been excluded from the Armenian version of the narrative. Much of this evidence is inconvenient for the Armenian diaspora because it provides counterpoints to the notion that an actual genocide occurred. The exclusion of inconvenient evidence has led to a mythology about World War I that presents the entire Ottoman-Armenian population solely as victims. British, French, Russian, and Turkish archives provide ample probative evidence on a number of facts that do not support the case that a genocide took place. I will briefly review some of them here. Please keep in mind that I am not providing the full story here, but rather reporting established facts that counter the narrative that recently took the U.S. House of Representatives by storm.
Ottoman authorities had reasons to be gravely concerned by the activities of Armenian revolutionaries and their external sponsors and supporters. In the late 1880s, the Ottoman-Armenians formed a number of secret cell-like terrorist revolutionary groups called committees. The well-armed Armenian Revolutionary Committees (the Dashnaks and Hunchaks in particular) actively rebelled against the Ottoman state in 1914 and 1915.
Both the Central Powers and the Allies actively tried to foment rebellions in the Middle East during World War I in order to weaken their enemies. And these Armenian Revolutionary Committees were encouraged to rebel and were supported by the Russians, British, and French. As the war dragged on, prominent Armenians (both Ottoman and Russian Armenian citizens) led Russian-based conventional Armenian military forces against the Ottomans. Famous Armenian leaders such as Andranik and Dro formed Druzhiny (legions) which fought side-by-side with the Russian Army.
They had help from abroad from their diaspora activities. Like the Greek, Serbian, and Bulgarian communities before them, the Armenian diaspora, such as it existed in 1914, actively conspired with the Allies to bring an independent Armenia into existence. This effort continued after the war through 1921.
Critically, while many Ottoman-Armenians supported the revolutionary committees, many also supported the government. In fact, many loyal Ottoman-Armenians fought for the Ottoman state throughout the war and, by 1918, some 350,000 Ottoman-Armenians remained safely in their homes in the western regions of the empire. It is worth considering that the western provinces, such as Istanbul, Edirne, Izmir, and Bursa, which were not in the war zone, were excluded from the relocation orders. In the post-war period, however, most of these would choose to emigrate from the new Turkish republic, leaving only around 50,000 to 70,000 Armenian-Turks there today.
What were Ottoman authorities to do when faced with these real threats to their empire’s territorial integrity in the midst of a war that was like nothing the world had even seen? The removal of the Ottoman-Armenian population from the six eastern provinces effectively constituted a counter-insurgency campaign. And by turning to the relocation of populations, the Ottomans were using a method widely used by other empires both before and after World War I. This is not meant to defend these methods, but to accurately describe them and place them in historical context.
The Ottoman campaign contrasts with what Nazi Germany did to European Jewish victims of the Holocaust in some important ways. For example, Nazi Germany clearly sought to destroy all of European Jewry and, in an effort to do so, removed nearly complete Jewish populations to extermination camps in a way accurately characterized as systematic. In contrast, the removal and mass murder of Ottoman-Armenians in 1915 was localized and not systematic in eastern Anatolia. In some places such as Diyarbekir and Sivas, almost all Ottoman-Armenians were killed, while in other places, such as Adana and Aleppo, very few Ottoman-Armenians were killed.
As a matter of historical record, the Ottoman Empire — in comparison with Russia or Austria-Hungry — treated ethnic minorities with respect. As the news of civilian Armenian victimization reached Istanbul, the Ottoman state took active measures to halt and alleviate the localized mass murder of Ottoman-Armenians in the summer of 1915. The accused were often rogue provincial officials and sometimes Kurds or Circassians. In subsequent trials conducted by the Ottoman Ministry of Justice, hundreds of individuals were held accountable in 1916 for crimes against Ottoman-Armenians.
Now let’s turn to these crimes and atrocities, of which there were many. It is important to keep in mind, however, that there was no single period of mass killings. There were three historically discrete periods of the mass murder of Ottoman-Armenians during and after World War I. The first was during the 1915 eastern Anatolian removal. The second was during the 1918 recovery of Erzincan and Erzurum by the Ottoman army. And the third was in 1921 during the Turkish nationalist recovery of Cilicia and Kars/Ardahan.
Further, there was no Ottoman premeditated plan of extermination against the empire’s Christians. In fact, many Ottoman officials (like Cemal Pasha) directly protected and helped relocate Ottoman-Armenians in 1915, enabling thousands to survive.
It is commonly said that 1.5 million Ottoman-Armenians — a number that amounts to nearly 100 percent of the pre-war population — were killed. In reality, some 300,000 Ottoman-Armenians fled to Russia, became refugees there in 1914–1915, and survived the war. Combined with the known Ottoman-Armenians who were not relocated, it is clear that large numbers (we do not know exactly how many) survived the experience of war. And there were, of course, other victims. It is largely forgotten today that during periods of Armenian and Russian occupation of Ottoman territory hundreds of thousands of Ottoman Muslims were killed by the Armenians. While this never justified the reciprocal killing of Armenians, it inflamed the already tense and dangerous situations.
The Ottoman Teşkilatı Mahsusa (the Ottoman Special Organization) stands accused of genocidal acts and has been labeled as the model for the Nazi Einsatzgruppen. However, the Ottoman archival records tell another story that disassociates the organization from relocating Armenians. Like its British counterpart in Cairo, the Special Organization was not organized to kill civilians. Rather, it was a CIA-like intelligence organization that also attempted to raise Muslim rebellions in Allied territories.
Opinions among the professional historians specializing in the late Ottoman imperial period about the genocide question are mixed and most try to avoid the topic entirely. It can ruin a budding academic career when researchers are characterized incorrectly as “genocide deniers.” The late American historian Donald Quataert, a specialist in Ottoman history, called it “the elephant in the room” for historians of the Ottoman Empire. Was there a genocide? This is an open question, and one that is more complicated than the recent House of Representatives resolution lets on. Much more research in the Turkish archives, which are open to historians, should be done to answer this important historical question conclusively. I do not need to convince you that history is often politicized to advance personal or collective aims — you know this already. In this case, let’s not forget the context: This House vote was paired with a vote on the PACT Act, which “imposes sanctions and various restrictions related to Turkey’s military invasion of northern Syria.” I am not writing to defend what Turkey is doing in Syria, but to point to a problem: The politicization of history in this particular case further damages Turkish-American relations at a time when neither country can afford it.
Dr. Edward J. Erickson is a retired professor of military history from the Marine Corps University. He has published extensively on World War I in the Middle East. Some of his recent books include A Global History of Relocation in Counterinsurgency Warfare, Palestine, The Ottoman Campaigns of 1914-1918, Gallipoli, Command under Fire, and Ottomans and Armenians, A Study in Counterinsurgency. He is currently writing a book on the Turkish Army in the War of Independence (1919 to 1923).
CORRECTION: A previous version of the article misspelled the name of a professor at the University of Michigan; it is Dr. Fatma Müge Göçek, not Gökçe.
WASHINGTON — For years a resolution condemning the slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians by Turkish nationalists during World War I has failed to gain traction in either chamber of Congress. Though lawmakers have long promised a resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide, they have been hampered by Turkey’s role as a critical ally whose significance has only increased with the rise of violent extremism across the Middle East.
As soon as next week, Democrats in the House of Representatives could ratify a measure recognizing the Armenian genocide, moving it out of committee and to the chamber floor, where it is likely to pass. The House Rules Committee is set to announce Thursday that it is going to take up the resolution next week, a final formal process before it can receive a vote.
Rep. Adam Schiff and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan over a 1917 photo depicting a scene from the Armenian genocide. (Yahoo News photo illustration; photos: Culture Club/Getty Images/AP)
“I’m proud that the Rules Committee will be considering this resolution next week,” that committee’s chairman, Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., told Yahoo News, noting that his Worcester-area district has the oldest Armenian diaspora community in the United States. “Not acknowledging the genocide is a stain on our human rights record and sends the exact wrong message to human rights abusers around the world,” he added.
“It’s time to start holding Turkey accountable for its actions,” said Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va. “Both Congress and the White House have remained silent on this issue for far too long, and I look forward to changing that next week.”
Members of the Senate have introduced a genocide-recognition resolution of their own, though its fate is less clear.
Having either one or both chambers endorse such a resolution could prove awkward for President Trump, who is fond of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Sensitive to Turkey’s geopolitical influence, American presidents have shied away from recognizing the Armenian genocide. The only president to do so was Ronald Reagan, in 1981. And though Congress has passed similar genocide resolutions, it has been more than two decades since it last did so.
“With the president caving in to Erdogan, it’s up to Congress to speak out for America,” Aram Hamparian, the executive director of the Armenian National Committee of America, told Yahoo News. He added that the resolution would be a “signal” to the Turks that “Washington won’t be bullied, U.S. policy can’t be hijacked and American principles are not for sale.”
Protesters in L.A. rally in 2017 outside the Turkish Consulate in commemoration of the 102nd anniversary of the Armenian genocide. (Photo: Mike Blake/Reuters)
Democrats and Republicans alike have framed the measure in similar terms.
The House measure would be largely symbolic but significant all the same, given Turkey’s opposition. And it would be another instance of Congress rebuking Trump on his handling of foreign policy. The president was put in a similar position over his affinity for Russian President Vladimir Putin, after both chambers imposed new sanctions on Russia in 2017 as a punishment for interfering in the 2016 presidential election. Trump groused but signed the sanctions into law.
On the Armenian front, the new push for genocide recognition does not come because of historical revelations or newfound reserves of moral courage. Consensus that the killing of Armenians by Turks constituted a genocide is universal among those who have studied it. Yet Turkey has consistently denied that a concerted ethnic cleansing took place, and it has strenuously lobbied on Capitol Hill to keep the killing of Armenians from being classified as genocide.
A genocide recognition resolution nearly made it to the House floor in 2010. Then, as now, the lead sponsor was Rep. Adam Schiff, whose Los Angeles district is home to a significant Armenian-American population. The difference, of course, is that Schiff is now one of the top congressional antagonists to Trump, while Turkey has emerged as a major point of contention between the White House and Capitol Hill.
Genocide recognition measures are usually introduced to coincide with Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day on April 24. The measure is receiving a renewed push now because Democrats want to punish Erdogan for his treatment of the country’s Kurdish minority.
Some of the Kurdish forces are based in Syria, where they were until very recently protected by U.S. military forces. Trump’s decision to withdraw those forces has led to accusations that he has “betrayed” the Kurds by leaving them effectively defenseless against the ninth most powerful military in the world.
He lifted sanctions on Turkey on Wednesday following an agreement to a ceasefire. “Let someone else fight over this long bloodstained sand,” Trump said during his announcement.
For its part, Turkey has portrayed its military incursions into Syria — which it calls Operation Peace Spring — as necessary to curbing the activities of “terrorists,” which is how it tends to portray armed Kurdish forces. State-controlled media in Turkey have described that operation in glowing, humanitarian terms.
The upper chamber of Congress could take up an Armenian genocide resolution of its own, as it enjoys the support of many Democrats and also of generally pro-Trump conservatives like Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. A spokesperson for Cruz provided a statement about the need for congressional recognition of “the horrific genocide suffered by the Armenian people” but did not provide specifics about a potential Senate resolution.
That leaves the House resolution as the most immediate means of rebuking Turkey at a time when tensions with the NATO ally are at a historic high.
The White House would not say how Trump would respond to the measure, which as a standalone House resolution does not need his approval.
An encampment of Armenian refugees from the Ottoman Empire on the deck of a French cruiser that rescued them in 1915. (Photo: Photo12/UIG/Getty Images)
Democrats are making no effort to hide the fact that the measure — known as House Resolution 296 — is being introduced as a rebuke to Erdogan. In a letter to fellow members of Congress, Schiff and Rep. Gus Bilirakis, a co-chair of the Armenian caucus, wrote last week that “it weakens our standing and our moral clarity that the Congress has for too long been silent in declaring the events of 1915 as a genocide.”
Speaking on Capitol Hill earlier this week, Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., chairman of the influential Foreign Affairs Committee, said that he expected the Armenian genocide resolution to be voted on soon, along with new sanctions on Turkey. He said that he believed Turkey was “not happy” with these developments, which reflected what was in his view prevalent unhappiness on Capitol Hill with Turkey’s treatment of the Kurds.
In an unlikely development, the measure will see support from Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who as ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee is a top nemesis of Schiff and a spirited defender of Trump. Asked about how Nunes expected to vote on the issue, an aide in his congressional office forwarded a statement from 2018 in which Nunes called Erdogan’s denial of the genocide a “disgrace,” adding that it was “now more important than ever that the U.S. administration commemorate the tragic genocide of the Armenian people.”
The aide strongly suggested that nothing about the congressman’s position in the intervening months had changed.
And another staffer, this one a Democratic aide on the House Rules Committee, cautioned against tethering the resolution to ire at Erdogan, pointing to long-standing efforts by the likes of House Rules Chairman McGovern.
“A lot of people,” the staffer said, “have worked for a very long time on this.”
Turkey’s president Erdogan bluffed Trump out of Syria. Now what does he want?
360: Can sanctions curb Turkey’s assault on Syria?
PHOTOS: Season of discontent – protests around the world
In recent years and months, Arab countries have been liberating themselves from the nefarious political influence of the Turkish government and are beginning to take an honest position on the Armenian Genocide.
The Arab governments, despite their long-standing sympathy and support for survivors of the Armenian Genocide who sought shelter in various Middle Eastern countries, had been reluctant to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide due to their shared Islamic faith with Turkey.
The first Arab state to break the yoke of the Turkish blockade to acknowledge this genocidal crime was Lebanon. On April 3, 1997, the Lebanese Chamber of Deputies (Parliament) adopted a resolution recognizing the Armenian Genocide. A second resolution was adopted by the Lebanese Parliament on May 11, 2000, stating that it “recognizes and condemns the genocide perpetrated against the Armenian people and expresses its complete solidarity with demands of its citizens.”
Since then, Syria’s President and various Parliament members have spoken about the Armenian Genocide several times, but have yet to adopt an official Parliamentary resolution recognizing it as genocide.
There have been similar moves in Egypt where a lawsuit was filed against Turkey on the Armenian Genocide. However, no formal resolution has been adopted by the Egyptian Parliament.
In March, the Interim Libyan government that is attempting to overthrow Libya’s central regime issued a statement recognizing the Armenian Genocide. This came as a complete surprise since there is no Armenian community in Libya.
Another Arab country is rumored to be considering the acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide, but I prefer not to name it in order not to alert the Turkish government and prevent it from lobbying against it.
More recently, an unexpected acknowledgement was made on April 25, 2019 when The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) issued its first official statement recognizing the Armenian Genocide.
According to its website, “ADC is a civil rights organization committed to defending the rights of people of Arab descent and promoting their rich cultural heritage. ADC was founded by former U.S. Senator James Abourezk in 1980. Today, ADC is the largest Arab American grassroots organization in the U.S. ADC supports the human and civil rights of all people and opposes racism and bigotry in any form.”
Here is the full text of ADC’s sympathetic statement: “Over 100 years ago, the Ottoman Empire systematically massacred 1.5 million Armenians and forcibly displaced the Armenian people from their historic lands. Today, we remember the Armenian Genocide and commemorate all of those who lost their lives and homes. The ADC stands in solidarity with the Armenian people. Following the systematic massacre that took place between 1915-1918, many Armenian survivors fled to nearby Arab lands to seek refuge to later build new homes. Over the centuries, Armenians established thriving communities in Arab countries, particularly in the Fertile Crescent. The Armenian community has been an intrinsic part of Arab society, existing in Palestine for centuries, as well as in Lebanon and Syria. As we mark our moral stain on our global society, the ADC stands shoulder-to-shoulder with our Armenian brothers and sisters. Our communities know too well the price of systematic dispossession and oppression, and together we will continue to defend those facing injustice and persecution.”
I am sure Armenians worldwide thank ADC for its compassionate stand. In response to an email I sent to ADC, Abed Ayoub, ADC’s legal and policy Director, wrote that this is the first time that ADC has issued an official statement on the Armenian Genocide.
In response to my question as to what prompted ADC to issue such a statement this year, Mr. Ayoub stated: “Over the course of the past couple years we have had the privilege of working with young Armenian-Americans on issues that impact us all, and as a result of this relationship we began exploring the idea of issuing a statement as a show of solidarity. Additionally, many of our members have connections and roots to the community. Finally, with the rise of hate and bigotry across the world we felt now is an important time to issue a statement.”
When I asked if ADC is planning to issue a similar statement on next April 24, Mr. Ayoub responded affirmatively.
I also asked Mr. Ayoub if ADC had received any criticism for its statement from the Turkish government, and Turkish or Islamic groups in the United States, he stated that ADC had received no such criticism. However, “our membership was overwhelmingly supportive of the statement.”
Finally, when I asked what ADC thought about Pres. Trump’s refusal to use the term Armenian Genocide, Mr. Ayoub answered: “Most of what President Trump does is troubling, however, his refusal to use the term Armenian Genocide is in line with prior Administrations. Failure to use the term is a failure to recognize the pain and suffering inflicted on millions of innocent lives.”
Naturally, I welcome ADC’s statement on the Armenian Genocide and Mr. Ayoub’s answers to my questions. I suggest that Armenian organizations send ADC’s statement to Embassies of all Arab countries in Washington, D.C., asking them to urge their governments to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.
Unlocated mass graves of alleged Armenian Genocide
Yurdagül Atun , Ata Atun Cyprus Science University TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS yurdagulbeyoglu@hotmail.com, ata.atun@atun.com
Abstract According to some sources, The Armenian Genocide Appeals (the so-called Armenian Genocide or the Unfounded Armenian Claims) indicate that the Armenian deportation, which was carried out by the Ottoman State in Eastern Anatolia for internal security reasons from May to November 1915, was aimed at destroying the Armenian community in the region, Millions of Armenians are alleged to have been killed by this reason.
In the early years of the First World War, the Ottoman State while fighting in many fronts with Allied Powers, the Armenians attacked the Ottoman army jointly with the Russian army in the region up to Central Anatolia in the East, and rebelled in many cities. In order to overcome these rebellions, the Ottoman State held a joint meeting with the Armenian Patriarchs, especially the Armenian Members of the Tanzimat Parliament, and the leaders of the Armenian community, and informed them that the Ottoman State would take countermeasures if the Armenians continued to kill local Muslim people in Eastern Anatolia. On the basis of this notion, the Ottoman State in April 24, 1915 arrested 235 people who had organized the rebellions and closed down all the Armenian Committees and local organizations that supported and organized the rebellions. The Ottoman State promulgatiated the Temporary Law of Deportation, in 27 May 1915. Accordingly, it was decided some of the Armenians in Eastern Anatolia would be displaced to Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. According to the Armenians’ claims, massacre and genocide were carried out under the deportation title and 1.5 million Armenians were killed. This article is about the mass graves of 1.5 million Armenians which would form the basis of the massacre allegations, the size, how and by whom they were dug, how the massacred Armenians buried and how the mass graves covered with soil. The paper is written to investigate whether there are mass graves or not.
Keywords: Ottoman, Armenian, Deportation, Mass grave, Genocide
Introduction
According to Halaçoğlu:
“The Ottoman archives carry instructions to the effect that Armenians and their properties are not to be subject to any harm and ill treatments during their journeys, and protection for them is also to be provided. The Ottoman Ministerial Council decided on 30 May, 1915 to provide all necessary means including housing, tools and funding from the immigration policy including medical check-ups. In addition, those who attacked Armenians during this transportation are to be arrested and punished under severe circumstances by the Court of Divan War.” (Halaçoğlu, 2013)
Therefore It is quite incompatible with the facts to claim that the Ottoman State, taking into account the lives, health and residence of the Armenians during their journey, committed a genocide under the referral of the Ottoman State, which issued a law ordering sick, elderly and children to be looked after. It is incompatible with logic as well as mathematical computation.
Mathematical Evaluation
According to the Armenians’ allegations, the so-called genocide was carried out within five and a half months from the end of May to the middle of November. It is not possible to actually claim that “Thousands of Armenians were forced to die freezing from the cold” as this can not be realized due to the climatic conditions within the period.
There is also a major calculation error in terms of the claims against the conduct of the Ottoman State that must be looked at more closely. Suffice to stay, if a total of one and a half million Armenians were killed during this so-called massacre or genocide, which began at the end of May and ended in the middle of November, the law enforcement officers, ordained by the Ottoman State on average, must systematically kill tens of thousands of people every day.
If one decides to approach these claims optimistically, assuming that every single Armenian murdered is killed by a single bullet, 10,000 bullets must be spent each day and 1.5 million bullets in total. According to the Ballistic Table, a bullet weight of 7.65 mm is 6.5 grams on average. . (Ballistic Table,
The total daily requirement of 10,000 bullets is 65 kg, together with casings 85 kg. Therefore a total of 12.75 tons of bullets are required. Since these bullets can only be carried on the backs of animals in the mountains, this would be only possible with 2 donkeys or 2 camels and 4 people doing at least 2 shifts in order to carry the necessary daily bullets to the slaughter area.
Also, in order to keep 10 thousand people under control and execute them, it is necessary to have a military unit or armed enforcement force available in the area.
We are talking about the past, and therefore must know that it is not possible that such deep pits cannot be dug without the aid of trucks, excavators and the technology of today. Since thousands of excavators and trucks cannot be used in the past, thousands of people are needed to dig the mass graves, and to throw the slaughtered into the pits, and to cover them again. A service team providing food, beverages, toilets, and bathing for these thousands of armed people who are supposed to have carried out the massacres or genocide must also be in the vicinity of the slaughter field to address the needs of the alleged murderers.
Massacres and Mass Graves Found in the World
In 2018, five new mass graves were uncovered in the Arakan province of Myanmar, revealing the severity of the massacre against the Muslim population. )
According to the Associated Press (AP) news agency, the discovery of at least 5 mass graves buried 400 unknowns in the Gu Da Pyin village of Buthidaung province, northern part of the province of Arakan province, has been confirmed. (Atwood, 2018)
According to Amor Mashovic, president of the DNA Center in Tuzla, “…When you include the year 2015, the number of public cemeteries in the country is 800. I cannot believe that the war in which 32 thousand 152 people were “lost” to records is still not officially considered “genocide”. In 1995, the mass graves of the corpses were buried with shovels and were seen by the American satellites. Some mass graves have 1200, some have 200 people…”
To sum up, Amor Mashovic declares that 32,152 people have been massacred and that these people have buried 800 mass graves that have been replaced three times. (Masovic, 2015)
According to the news of Yeni Safak Newspaper dated March 24, 2018; “110 ÖSO soldiers were killed by the PKK / PYD’deki in Syria in the empty square of the Hallubi village, mass graves were found near the dam.” (Yeni Şafak, 2018)
According to Türkiye Newspaper’s news on 24 April 2001; “Algeria (UAE) – The traces of the massacres carried out by the French during 1954-1962 in Algeria have still not disappeared. In the city of Tebessa, east of Algeria, there was a body of 300 Algerian fighters who were estimated to have been killed during the Algerian-French war between 1954 and 1962, the corpses were found during a water-pipe dig. The spokesman of the Ministry of War explained that the corpses belonged to the soldiers of the National Liberation Front and that there were traces of torture on their skeletons. It was stated that this mass grave was the largest mass grave in the last decade. ” (Türkiye, 2001)
The news about the three different regions of genocide and mass graves in the world reveals that the mass graves buried after the massacres are revealed that investigations prove that no mass grave can be hidden, despite the fact that the burial sits have been changed three time, as is the case in Bosnia.
Dimensions of the Human Body
In order to be able to generalize calculations, it is necessary to take the average of the dimensions of the human body.
The average size of people living in Eastern Anatolia region: Shoulder width: 0.50 m. Height: 1.68 m. Body thickness: 0.35 m. The body is covered horizontally Area: 0.84 m2 The volume produced horizontally by the body: 0.294 m3
According to unfounded Armenian allegations that 1,5 million Armenians were killed in five and a half months, the average number of people killed per day: 10,000 people.
Assuming that three people were placed on top of a mass grave: Man in each horizontal row: 3334 people The height of the volume created by three people on top of each other: 1.05 m. The minimum soil height that must be covered by 3 people: minimum 0.65 m. Total excavation depth: Minimum 1.05 + 0.65 = 1.70 m.
Total excavation area: 3334 (one horizontal row human figure) x 0.84 (horizontal area of the body) = 2800 m2 Volume to be excavated: 1.70 m. (Excavation depth) x 2,800 m2 (Total excavation area) = 4760 m3
Size of a football field Football field measurements are in the form of a rectangle. The width of the football field should be between 45 and 90 meters and the length between 90 and 120 meters. Regular football stadiums made in international standards are between 64 and 75 meters in size and between 105 and 120 meters in height.
The average width of a football field is 50 m and the length is 100 m. , the soccer field covers an area of about 5,000 m2.
Since the area of the mass grave to be excavated must be at least 2800 m2, in terms of making comparisons this field is about 1/2 football field or 50 m. in width and 56 m. It can be defined as a rectangle in its length.
Excavator excavation capacity Today, with an excavator capacity of 0.75 m3 bucket capacity and 90 percent bucket capacity, an excavator is able to excavate only 258 m3 in one hour with easy, medium and medium difficulty. Such a scoop can excavate a 4760 m3 cavern at 18.5 hours without stopping and 22.5 hours with food and catering. (Celal et al, )
Manual excavation capacity According to calculations of King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, the excavation capacity of 3 workers and the top head is 40 m 2 per 16 hours or 2-4 m3/hour according to soil structure. According to this finding, the average excavation capacity of a worker for 1 hour is 0.5 m3. (King Fahd, 2017)
According to another source; the average amount of excavation that a person can do in a total of about 10 hours by working 2 hours per day for a 15 minute break and for a 45 minute break during lunch is about 4.0 m3. (Calin et al, 2003: p 201). According to this finding, the average excavation capacity of 1 hour is 0.4 m3.
According to the empirical findings of Goldenseal, 1 worker can excavate 1,308 m3 in 2.5 hours. (Goldenseal, 2017) According to this finding, the excavation capacity of one worker is 0.52 m3 per hour according to soil structure.
When the average of these 3 differences are taken, the excavation capacity of 1 worker can be taken as 0.48 m3 per hour according to soil structure.
According to the empirical findings of Goldenseal, a worker can emit 1,308 cubic meters of excavated soil in an excavation pit in 2.5 hours. According to this finding, the earth-throwing capacity of one worker is 0.52 m3 per hour according to the soil structure. (Goldenseal, 2017) Another worker puts this land in a hand-held car with an average capacity of 1,308 cubic meters in 2.6 hours and pours back 10 meters away. According to this finding, the carrying capacity of one worker is 0.50 m3 per hour according to soil structure. (Goldenseal, 2017) According to these findings, on average 3 workers are required to excavate 0.5 m3 of soil in 1 hour, to be thrown out of the shovel and to be taken out of the buried area.
Minimum mass grave area required to bury 10,000 people: 2800 m2 Minimum excavation depth: 1.70 m. Soil volume to be excavated: 2800 m2 x 1.70 m = 4760 m3
4760 m3 Number of persons required to be able to perform soil excavation in maximum 10 hours: 4760 m3 ÷ 10 hours ÷ 0.48 m3 / hour / worker = 992 workers. (Digging the pit)
Amount of soil excavated in 1 hour = 4760 m3 ÷ 10 hours = 476 m3 The number of workers required to discharge 476 m3 of land excavated in 1 hour; 476 m3 ÷ 0.52 = 916 workers (landing)
The number of workers required to move one third of the land (1.70 – 1.05 = 0.65 m) out of the excavation pit in one hour to outside the excavation area: One third of the soil mined in one hour = 476 m3 ÷ 3 = 159 m3 Number of workers required to remove 159 m3 of soil from the excavation area: 159 m3 ÷ 0.5 m3 = 318 workers (carrying the surplus of the disposable soil out of the field)
Movement of the bodies of the slaughtered people to the burial site to be thrown immediately to the pits without waiting for it to finish, 3 rows above and 65 cm above them. The number of additional people required for each 1 m2 excavation area to be covered with soil is 2.
Excavation area = 2800 m2 Area to be excavated per 1 hour over 10 hours = 2800 m2 ÷ 10 hours = 280 m2 280 m2 Number of additional people required for burial in the excavation area: 280 m2 x 2 people = 560 people (burial and covering)
The number of workers required for excavation (992 persons), landing out (916 persons), carrying out the land (318), burial and covering (560 persons) within 1 day with a working time of 10 hours: 992 + 916 + 318 + 560 = 2786 people. The minimum total number of workers required for 5 days shifts and 2 teams per day is estimated to be 2786 x 2 = 5572 workers, since it is not possible for the mentioned workers to work 10 hours each day without interruption for 150 days.
The number of people required to meet the food, drinking water, rest, sleep, cigarette, disease, treatment, first aid, wash water and toilet needs of 5,572 people working five hours a day, two shifts, this being the most optimistic and minimum estimate; Delivery of food: 25 people Travel kitchen and dishwashing: 50 people Drinking water and washing water supply: 45 people and 20 water transport vehicles, 40 cows and caring. Establishment and deterioration of the traveling dormitory: 50 people Expedition hospital and treatment hospital: 15 people Total service staff: 185 people
Even assuming that tens of thousands of captured prisoners are left hungry and thirsty, if there are no prisoners surrounded by barbed wire around the Nazis, and the prisoners are confiscated outdoors, the minimum number of soldiers required to prevent such prisoners from escaping and revolt is at least 2500.
Systematically slaughtering 10 thousand people a day, so that 1.5 million people can be slaughtered in the timeframe of five and a half months, the opening of the pits in the size 50 x 56 m., the burial of the slaughtered and the covering of them. A total of at least 8257 people are required to perform these operations. (5572 workers + 185 kitchens and supply + 2500 soldiers)
In addition to human power, there are approximately 1,000 digging tools (992 people for excavation), 1000 shovels (916 people for throwing out land), 200 shovels (318 people for carrying out land), and 600 shovels for burial and 560 people to cover it), in total: 1000 pieces of digging and 1800 shovels are required together with the backups.
Armenian population in Anatolia in 1915
The archives have censuses from 1882 to 1915. Instead of Ottoman documents, the population declarations given by the French, British, Germans, Americans and the missionaries there, and especially the Armenian Patriarch to the Ottoman Empire in relation to taxes, helped the determination of the Armenian population in Eastern Anatolia in 1915.
The Armenian population declared by the Armenian Patriarch N. Varjabedian in 1881:
According to the Armenian Patriarchate, the figures of Catholic and Protestant Armenians in six provinces are explained as follows. (Atun, 2013) State Year 1881 Erzurum 128,478 Van 133,859 Bitlis 130,460 Diyarbekir – Elaziz 107,059 Sivas 243,515 Total 743,371 According to the explanation made in 1882; (Atun, 2013) State Year 1882 Erzurum 280,000 Van 400,000 Bitlis 250,000 Diyarbekir – Elaziz 270,000 Sivas 280,000 Total 1,630,371
When the lists are placed side by side, it is seen that the population increase within a year is 887 thousand people, 120 percent, it appears that the increase is not normal and quite misleading.
Colonel Henry Trotter, the British Embassy specialist concerning population reports noticed inconsistent figures in the explanation of Patriarch and made a report. On February 15, 1882, the number of Armenians residing in the regions of Erzurum and Van was 372,500 and Nasuri was 85,000. (Atun, 2013)
Other official documents and explanations about the Armenian population in Anatolia:
The total number of the population living in Erzurum, Van, Bitlis, Harput, Diyarbakır and Sivas regions is 2,615,000 – 666,000 Muslims and 1,018,000 Armenian population in a 1912 study by Marcel Leart. (Atun, 2013)
In his book “Armenia On The Road To Independence”, Richard Hovannisian explains that the population of Armenians living in the borders of the Ottoman State in 1914 is between one and two million, including Istanbul.
In his book “Histoire de l’Armenie”, Hrant Pasdermadjian explains that 2,100,000 Armenians lived in 1914, including Istanbul, within the borders of the Ottoman Empire, while the world had an Armenian population of 4,100,000. The number of Armenians living in Anatolia as of that date is 1,400,000 according to the content of the memorandum signed by A. Aharonian and Boghos Nubar on February 12, 1919 and submitted to the Paris Peace Conference by the Armenian Delegation. (Atun, 2013)
The number of Armenians living in Anatolia is about 1,400,000, according to the content presented by the Greek Prime Minister Venizelos at the Paris Peace Conference on 12 February 1919. (Atun, 2013)
Near East Relief Report on Armenians living in Syria in 1921: (Near East Relief Report) According to the report, after the F. Boullion Agreement signed with the Government of Ankara, the British-French occupations subsequently returned to the 300,000 Armenian Cilicia region and emigrated from the region in 1921. The report clearly states that between 200,000 and 300,000 Armenians are alive in the Syrian territory and that they want humanitarian assistance. (Atun, 2013) Near East Relief Report on Armenians living in Armenia in 1921: (Near East Relief Report) The report says that the number of Armenians living in Armenia in the Caucasus in 1921 was one million and half of them (500,000) applied to the Aid Group for help. (Atun, 2013)
According to the US Senate’s Resolution 266 of 22 April 1922, the number of Armenians living in Anatolia, Syria and Russia as of December 31, 1921 was 1,414,000 and no mention of genocide by any word, meaning or implication. (Atun, 2013)
The total population of Armenians living in the world according to the contents of the Proof of Entitlement 1-8-58, a US government document signed by US Secretary of State W. R. Anderson in 1922, was 3,004,000. 817,873 of them have migrated from Anatolia and 281,000 of them still live in Anatolia. (Atun, 2013)
760,000 Armenians were living in the Ottoman territories according to the content of Andıç on 2 February 1923 presented to the Lausanne Peace Conference in 1923. (Atun, 2013)
According to the information given by Şükrü Server Aya in the conclusion of the US Senate’s review of the “Near East Assistance Report” dated December 31, 1929, the number of Armenians alive in history is 1,300,000 and the number of Armenians who died is incredibly low. The number of Armenians who die as a result of hunger, poverty, illness and regional conflicts is at most 300,000 if the official report of the US Senate is trusted. (Atun, 2013 & Aya, 2013)
Conclusion
According to the records in the Ottoman archives, the death was not found in the deportation records starting in May of 1915, to November. The Report of the Near East Assistance Group, created by the US Government, does not refer to the deportation as a massacre or genocide. (Atun, 2013 & Aya, 2013 &
If one and a half million (1,500,000) Armenians were killed within the five-month period of migration as the Armenians claimed, an average of ten thousand (10,000) people a day should be killed by a simple mathematical calculation. According to this average, at least 150, 2800 m2 in size, about 50 x 56 m. is necessary as a mass grave in its dimensions to be found.
According to the most basic principle of law, in order for a murder claim to be prosecuted in court, the body of the person killed must also be found and presented to the court as proof. (David, 2003, 817) Despite the fact that the mass graves of 8 thousand Bosnians, which were slaughtered by the Serbs mercilessly and the location changed 3 times, were found, some people doubt the alleged Armenian genocide allegations as they have not been revealed.
The fact that none of the 8,257 people involved in such a massacre or genocide have not opened their mouths or and that no one has even been able to show a mass grave involving people killed in the alleged genocide, casts a shadow over the claims of genocide and undermines its credibility .
When the reports on Armenians living in Anatolia, Syria, Iraq and Armenia in 1915 were examined, it is seen that the number of Armenians ranged from 600 hundred to 1 million 700 thousand. If one and a half million Armenians were slaughtered in 1915 as it was alleged, as in the reports published by the US Senate after the war, the number of Armenians living in Anatolia, Syria and Russia in 1923 could not be 1,414,000 and the number of Armenians migrating to USA and Europe could not be 817,873. These mathematical calculations and population censuses made in various years, given by the French, British, Germans, Americans and the missionaries there, especially the Armenian Patriarch, to the Ottoman Empire every year, and especially after the First World War reveal that the Armenian Genocide allegation is met with doubt, is groundless, and unfounded.
Slumber Jack, (12.2.2011). Hand Excavation Productivity. Contractor Talk.
Calin M. Popescu, Kan Phaobunjong Nuntapone Ovararin. (2003). Estimating Building Costs, New York: Marcel Dekker Inc. s.201
Goldenseal Reference Manual. (2017). Goldenseal Unit Costs. Soil Removal Cost, Difficult Hand Loading. USA. 15 Nisan 2018 tarihinde alıntı yapılan yer; https://www.turtlesoft.com/Construction-Costs/Excavation/Remove_Soil_Hand_Hard.htm
King Fahd University. (2017). Pricing Excavation & Backfill. King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Saudi Arabia. 15 Nisan 2018 tarihinde alıntı yapılan yer;
David A. Moran. (2003). In Defense of the Corpus Delicti Rule. Detroit: Wayne State University Law School, Detroit, Michigan. Ohio State Law Journal. Vol. 64 no. 3 (2003). 817-854
Halaçoğlu, Yusuf. (2015). Sürgünden Soykırıma Ermeni İddiaları. İstanbul: Babıali Kültür yayınları.
TASAM. (2011). Tarihi Gerçekler Işığında Ermeni İddiaları. İstanbul: Türk Asya Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi.
Atwood, Haleigh. (2018). AP finds evidence of mass graves, systematic killings in Myanmar. AP, February 5, 2018. 15 Nisan 2018 tarihinde alıntı yapılan site;
Masoviç, Amor. (24.12. 2015). Bosna Hersekteki Soykırım unutulmaz. 15 Nisan 2018 tarihinde alıntı yapılan site;
Yeni Şafak Gazetesi. (2018). PKK/PYD’nin şehit ettiği ÖSO’lulara ait toplu mezar bulundu. İstanbul: Yeni Şafak basımevi, 24 Mart 2018 15 Nisan 2018 tarihinde aşağıdaki siteden alınmıştır.
Türkiye Gazetesi. (2001). Cezayir’de Fransızlar’a ait bir toplu mezar daha. İstanbul: Türkiye Gazetesi Basımevi. 15 Nisan 2018 tarihinde aşağıdaki siteden alınmıştır.
Atun, Ata. (2016). Armenian Population in Eastern Anatolia between Years 1878-1915.
Atun, Ata. (2013). ARMENIAN POPULATION IN EASTERN ANATOLIA AROUND 1915: A BRIEF HISTORY OF ARMENIAN HOAXES. Asian Journal Social Sciences & Humanities
Atun, Ata. (2013). ARMENIAN POPULATION IN EASTERN ANATOLIA AROUND 1915.Academic Research International
Hovanissian, Richard. (1963). Armenia On The Road To Independence, Los Angeles, s.9
Aya, Şükrü Server. (2013) Review of Near East Relief Report 31 Dec 1921, US Senate, 67th Congress 2nd Edition, Document No. 192, Washington, Government printing Office, 1922
THIS ARTICLE IS WRITTEN IN RESPONCE TO THE BILL INTRODUCED IN CALIFORNIA
By an Armenian-American senator, to claim $$$$$ from certain parties for
the decendents of non existing GEnoside…
“I REGRET TO INFORM YOUR LORDSHIP THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THEREIN
WHICH COULD BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS WHO ARE
PRESENTLY BEING DETAINED IN MALTA… NO CONCRETE FACTS BEING GIVEN
WHICH COULD CONSTITUTE SATISFACTORY INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE …THE
REPORTS IN QUESTION DO NOT APPEAR IN ANY CASE, TO CONTAIN EVIDENCE
AGAINST THE TURKS. R.C.Craigie,of American Archives,Washington,DC to:British Foreign Secretary, Lord George Curzon- 13 July 1922
FRUITFUL LIKE A COTTAGE INDUSTRY
Before we go any further, let us review what the expression ‘cottage
industry’ means. The newest edition of a well known dictionary calls it
“activity carried out or job done in workplace or at home.” Nothing could
fit better than this to describe the labor-intensive work of Armenians in
Diaspora. These people struggle slavishly, day and night, at home or office
to achieve their obsessive objective: To ruin the good name of Turkey and
Turks by every possible means. Some of their self-admitted confessions
indicate that “they live every minute of every day just to hate Turks.”
This hatred -charged loyal labor force, religious to the core, is supported
one hundred per cent by the mother Church. Tens of thousands of its members
work in a strictly organized fashion, following a unified agenda to create a
product, which will represent to the world, on their behalf, the sum total of
all the alleged misery and calumny ever befallen on the Ottoman Armenians in
a far-away land, almost a century ago. The product they’re busy fashioning
is an item, vital for their existence, as much as the air they breathe. It
is extremely in demand, because without its indispensable support their house
of cards won’t have a chance to stand up .
The name of this much sought after profitable product is “GENOCIDE,” and the
enterprise set up to produce it is called “GENOCIDE.COM ”
(armenians@genocide.com) There is a HUGE amount of hunger generated for this
item. Every Armenian wants to acquire it in large quantities, to be taken
out hot from the presses, to be distributed lavishly by Armenians of every
walk of life, to every corner of the world. The item is used during their
interminable discourses, especially while the non-Armenians are being wooed
to join their side. These people could be the members of domestic or
international Media, representatives of various legislatures. They say that
this article, “Genocide,” should be abundantly used at the beginning, in the
middle, or at the end of all statements. This official procedure is to be
strictly followed during all encounters with academics, city and state
legislative bodies, or plain members of the local Press. As precious and
indescribable an item the product may be, it is neither vegetable, nor
animal, nor mineral. One may, however, call it ‘verbal.’ In normal
conditions, excluding the ‘Armenian sacred’ month of APRIL, the principal
place and time for this item to be used is very important. It is crucial
that the propagation of the made-up scenarios, such as the improvised sob
stories, the sorrowful narration of human sufferings of all kinds,
experienced by their ancestors, and the “brutal” treatment they received
from the rulers of the now defunct, Ottoman Empire are sensitive anecdotal
materials ,and they have to be made quite believable. Needless to say, a
majority of Americans do believe them. “Genocide” has been an item whose
definition these people have been improving over the years, ever since they
heard it first introduced in a publication by a non-Armenian . Now,
however, having been appropriated from him, it is being honed and refined to
an etymological perfection. Then it is sent everywhere to be subliminally
transmitted into the cranium of every peaceful, and unsuspecting American
citizen. This has been a proven method in which the targeted person or
persons are made to learn to acclimatize themselves to the wrongdoings of
the Turks as perpetrators of the “genocide.” Nothing is ever left to
chance. All captive audiences are lectured time and again on the subject of
a variety of cataclysms which allegedly occurred to their poor down-trodden
Armenian relatives. Never mind the fact that the Armenians were the favorites
of the Turkish Sultans and the
One thing is certain though, the dates of these horrible events may
constantly be changing. They could be referred to, at times, as having
happened between the years of 1915 and 16, at other times between 1914 and
1922. The most popular of them lately, has been the one of 1915 to 1923.
However, this tedious, monotonous and definitely confusing work, is a labor
of love for these unwavering, obdurate Armenians. Their work is believed to
be generating from ghetto-like enclaves of Southern California. In ‘Silicon
Valley’ alone 200,000 of them live, and many of them infiltrate the local
computer-age cyber companies where they unload their one-sided views on the
mythology of “genocide”. Unknown to these captive audiences is the fact that
the “disinformatsia” the Armenians are passing on to their listeners, is
worse than its original form employed by the Soviet Union’s KGB apparatchiks.
The product these people are disseminating comes from their “mental
rumination.” because they feed each other constantly stories of the distant
past, most of them are, the purposefully-embellished semi-fictional stories
depicting vague events allegedly taken place in geographically untraceable
locales, with funny sounding Armenian names having replaced the original
ethnic Turkish ones. Armenians make out of all this, a lucrative propaganda
Industry. By collecting, packaging and peddling around these mythical fables
passed on from generation to generation, rehashed by semi-senile
grandmothers with their characteristically confused memories, they score
success after success and thus recruit new turcophobes.
The well- known French writer, and member of the “Academie Francaise”, Pierre
Loti, despised the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire when he lived there and
had dealings with them intimately on a personal basis. He is rumored to have
said once : ” ..their vociferous blabber is the only claim to fame.”
Actually, there could be no objection to what they’re saying and writing
among themselves. But, this is not the case at all. With great deliberation
and determination they use every cunning methodology and ‘modus operandi’
to disseminate these venomous views of theirs, and shove them down the
throats of uninterested American public and Media. This is the saddest part
of the whole story, because, in most cases the same Media, accepts their
drivel without further research or verification of authenticity. And the
newspapers represented by the members of the Press, publish them verbatim,
swallowing hook, line and sinker, every falsehood provided to them by the
Armenian organizations. However, there seems to be an awakening observed of
late. Some of the members of state legislatures are speaking up, saying :
“resolutions dealing with 85 year old political events which may or may
have not occurred, at another part of the world should have no relevance to
the affairs of the state we represent in this country today.”
Meanwhile, back in the Cottage Industry, oblivious to all this, writers of
all caliber of talent and background grind out stories by the dozens. Every
Spring when the month of April approaches a ‘frenzy and delirium’ take over
these Armenian institutions. Everyone competes with everyone else, to outdo
each other in sending letters, faxes, and e-mails, even telegrams to any and
all publications possible. After all, Spring is the season of
resurrection, and their stale concoctions left over from the previous years
have to be revived once again and expedited to their new destinations as if
they were some freshly cultivated crop. So, now is the perfect time to go
out and plant in various journals and magazines these fictional accounts.
Get them published in a myriad of bogus articles, then take those printed
materials to show to the state legislators , to US Congressmen and
Senators and demand that they pay attention to them and consider them in
their future proposals, etc… And , low and behold ! their insidious system
works. The routine goes on, people are fooled, the deception continues with
no end in sight. The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) is
happy, and the lackeys of the Armenian constituents, the unabashed
bootlickers, the Boniors, the Porters, the Gilmans, the Pallones, the
Radanoviches are the ones who keep on getting elected and sustain the
“GENOCIDE.COM” operations. Their ultimate goal is to reach and inundate
and infest the inhabitants of every conceivable location in this universe
and beyond.
The “drone-like” members of this cottage industry keep busy reproducing
the tools needed to use against the Turkish nation and its government to
force them to admit the “butchery” of millions of ‘innocent’ ancestors of
theirs, and force the Turks to repent on the altar of history their
systematic liquidation of the ‘millions’ of the Armenians in Anatolia.
However, the figures used in this so-called “genocide” is an ever-changing
thing. Every time they have reference to it the number of the victims
fluctuates, varying between 300,000 to three million. This discrepancy does
not bother the Armenians. They are used to this kind of thing. They are
known to have lied and having deliberately misrepresented figures, and forge
documents before. Interested parties should refer to the scandalous forged
documents known as ANDONIAN papers. On various occasions when they organize
“genocide” shows around the country, usually a disgusting “photograph” is
exhibited. It shows hundreds of skulls piled up in a most gruesome
fashion. The caption says: IN MEMORY OF THE 1,500,000 MARTYRED ARMENIANS
WHO WERE MASSACRED BY THE TURKS IN 1915. The truth about this perfidious
claim is that it is a lie. The photo is a counterfeit. It is far from being
a photograph taken in 1915, it is in fact the photocopy of a Russian
masterpiece painted in oil by Vassili Vereschagin who died in 1905. His
original painting is still hanging at the Tretyakov Gallery in Moscow
today. The Armenians know this forgery quite well, but continue using it
throughout the world on pamphlets and postcards. They did this as recently
as last month in France.
Soon after the First World War, the high ranking Ottoman officials were
arrested and imprisoned by a victorious England, on the island of Malta. the
men who numbered 140 were detained, while an Armenian scholar named HAIG
KHAZARIAN was appointed by the British to locate evidence of war crimes and
persecution of Armenians. After researching the archives of a captive
Ottoman government, the British archives, and finally the U.S. Department
archives, all the detainees were released after three years . Although
Britain suffered a great deal of humiliation, at least, they thoroughly
researched the matter and were decent enough to admit their mistake before
releasing these unjustly accused people. ( Erol Bulur, Media Watch report,
Oct.3,1990)
WHAT ADOLPH HITLER DID NOT SAY!
The oft referred to infamous “quotation” of Adolph Hitler: “Who still
speaks today of the extermination of the Armenians” etc… is as phony as a
three dollar bill. Hitler had never uttered those words. However, he is
reputed to have used frequently the following quotation , which sounds like
it was borrowed from his Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels : “The
more you repeat a lie, the more it becomes the truth. To be able to give a
more authoritative answer to the above Hitler quotation, let us read a short
passage from Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataov, Chairman, International Relations
Division, Ankara, Turkey. Professor Ataov categorically refutes the quotation
and says in part: “As a matter of fact, Hitler had probably made only one
reference to the Armenians in a talk delivered on December 12, 1942, in which
he described them as unreliable (unzuverlassig) and dangerous (gefahrlich.).
Adolph Hitler was not the only one who had negative feelings about the
Armenians. It was Pierre Loti, the French novelist and world traveler, whose
name was mentioned above proudly defended the Turkish position, when others
sided with the Armenians because they were closer to their religious feelings
and beliefs. Loti knew the Turks intimately for having lived in Turkey and
written books about his friends, the Turks, about whom he once said the
following : “Their loyalty… unblemished honesty,…endless
hospitality…religious tolerance …moral elegance and natural tact, do give
affectionately deposition for the Turks in front of great Tribunal of
Humanity. Letters continue to arrive to me everyday, from officers, soldiers,
even Catholic priests, who were able to know them closely at the Dardanelles
and who remain amazed to have found the Turks to be as I had described them.
One of the most touching came from a soldier who had been their prisoner for
a long time, to express his tender gratification of the Turks who took care
of him with brotherly love. Thank God, the truth about them is beginning to
make headway at home.” (France)….He continues, “To speak …about the
Armenian race is for me more painful than one would believe, because the
amount of their unfortunate ‘incidents’ rendered me almost scared; also… If
I were able to claim and support that all the French who have lived in
Turkey, even our monks and nuns, give the Turks their esteem and their
affection, on the contrary, I believe that we would find barely one out of a
hundred of us who has good memories of these ‘unfortunate’ Armenians. All
who have had any relationship whatsoever with them, mundane or business,–
business affairs above all, were turned away with antipathy.
There are other testimonials . The well-known student of Turkish affairs,
Dr.Stephan Ronart wrote the following in his, “La Turquie d’Aujourd’hui”
The Turkey of Today, Paris 1937
“….Three times in the same millennium, Turks have built three
inter-continental empires- the mightiest that history has ever recorded. This
expansive spirit has always been the normal pattern in Turkish social life.
None of these early Turkish empires allowed the slightest religious
intolerance to take hold among themselves, nor did they advance the
superiority of one faith or of one sect over another.
Alphonse de Lamartime,in his 9 volume essay on Turks wrote long before anyone
else that Turks were generous and sensitive, that their country was that of
gentle, heroic people. He proclaimed that to be
the foe of such a people would be like being the foe of humanity. He
finished his words by saying :
“God preserve me from such a sin.”
Having remembered the injustices perpetrated on the Turkish people by the
Armenians and Greeks in these
United States, and having just finished reading the above unsolicited
testimonials, I cannot refrain myself from asking the following question:
“Could our ancestors ever commit the crimes they are accused of? Were the
Turks of the old Ottoman Empire capable of harboring within their hearts a
burning desire compelling them to annihilate a human race, the Ottoman
Armenians? Invariably the answer comes up a resounding “NO”, no, no, never!
There are times when I find it impossible to comprehend the enormity of the
accusation we Turks have been confronted with. To be able to endure for
a long time, such a horrendous indictment, a “Genocide” we had to be totally
innocent of the charges and we are. There was no such thing as a “Genocide”
For those who ask themselves, “If Turks were such a fair, magnanimous, and
gentle people why then the Armenians in Diaspora accuse them for such a
horrendous crime of Genocide?” Here’s the answer which they will never
accept because it runs against their profitable enterprise of GENOCIDE.COM
. They will always refute the truth. The wholesale Armenian insurgence in
the Ottoman Empire for a pipe dream called Independence, and the extortion
of a piece of valuable Turkish real estate did not pan out ever since the
Armenians have been playing the role of “bad losers” and selling a
deportation/resettlement issue as
plain old “Genocide”
But why take the prejudicial words of a person like me? Why not listen to the
an American, General James G, Harbord, the head of the U,S. Government’s
investigative Commission, sent to Anatolia in the Fall of 1919 by none other
than President Woodrow Wilson? In his report to President Woodrow Wilson,
and to the U.S Congress,General James G. Harbord said the following: “The
Turks and the Armenians lived in peace, side by side for centuries ; that
the Turks suffered as much as the Armenians at the time of the deportations,
that at the start of World War I and before, Armenians never had anything
approaching a majority of the population in the territories they called
“Armenia”; they would not have majority even if all the deported Armenians
were returned; and the claims that returning Armenians would be in danger
were not justified.”
Finally as a definitive answer to the accusations of the profitable Armenian
Enterprise “GENOCIDE.COM
and to its tireless contributors, we have here, one more time, for every
Armenian to see and to learn by heart, the official words used on the
declaration of the British Government from the island of Malta, where 140
high ranking Ottoman government officials suspected of having engineered the
“Genocide” were kept incarcerated, and then let go free at the end of their
third year of imprisonment in 1921. From 13 July 1922 British Foreign Office
Archives, 371/6504/8519, Mr. R.C.Craigie of American Archives in Washington
,DC written to Lord Curzon, of England saying that :
“I REGRET TO INFORM YOUR LORDSHIP THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THEREIN WHICH
COULD BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS WHO ARE PRESENTLY BEING
DETAINED AT MALTA…NO CONCRETE FACTS BEING GIVEN WHICH COULD CONSTITUTE
SATISFACTORY INCRIMINATING EVIDENCE…THE REPORTS IN QUESTION DO NOT
APPEAR, IN ANY CASE, TO CONTAIN EVIDENCE AGAINST THE TURKS.”
I’d like to bring this essay to a close with the words one more time of the
great friend of the Turks Pierre Loti who in his book : “Fantome d’Orient”
1928 wrote: “One should be blind to history not to understand the Turks.
The dignified silence of the Turks against the mounting unjustified attacks
and mean slanders can only be explained by their pity for the blind. …How
beautifully this attitude of theirs answers the undignified calumnies.”
Mahmut Esat Ozan
Prof. Emeritus, Dept.
International Studies
MDCC, Miami, Fl.
