Everyone knows the saying, 'A picture is worth a thousand words.' Life in Turkey has shown me that a word can be worth a lot too. April 24th, 2010 marked the 95th anniversary of the killing of hundreds of Armenians by Ottomans following World War I. Most people would call it a genocide but Turks refuse to acknowledge it as such. Instead, they see it an unfortunate after-effect of WWI where both Turks and Armenians slaughtered each other. Since 1915, there have been strained relations between Turkey and Armenia because of this, and other countries tread on eggshells about the issue unless they want to lose allies. The US House is currently trying to pass a non-binding resolution declaring the deaths in the post-WWI Ottoman Empire and genocide, but both Obama and Hilary Clinton have spoken against the resolution, saying it will just work to damage peace talks between the countries. Turkey has, of course, spoken out against this resolution saying it will weaken the close allegiance between the US and Turkey. The US can't afford to lose Turkey's friendship as its strategic location in the Middle East is very beneficial to the US.
I always turn to wikipedia first for all information and it was interesting to find that while the English headline for the page on this topic is Armenian Genocide, the Turkish title for the same page is Crimean Armenians. The Turkish page mentions that some historians view it as a deliberate government order calling for genocide of intellectual Armenians, but the Turkish official policy states that the cause of death was war conditions, diseases, climate, local gangs and tribal attacks rather than a systematic state policy. They also make sure to draw attention to the fact that the Christian Armenians also massacred the Muslim Ottomans/Turks. The English page states that it was the first modern genocide and that it's the second most studied genocide after the Holocaust. There's an entire page about Turkey's denial of the genocide (unsurprisingly, this page does not have a Turkish language equivalent).
To commemorate the day, there were peaceful protests and counter-protests in multiple locations in Istanbul on Saturday and less-peaceful protests in Yerevan, Armenia. There, flags and pictures of Turkish leaders were burned. In Turkey, police were on hand to keep fights from breaking out.
In the English-language Turkish newspaper I get at work, Today's Zaman, two pages were devoted to articles about the Armenian issue and all four op-ed columnists chose to voice opinions on the issue as well. All clearly agree that it was indeed a genocide but are careful not to focus their piece on labeling the event and rather "let the sides share their stories without a language of accusation, to create empathy, understanding" and "work together toward learning, sharing and reconciling past agonies without categorical accusations of genocide." (İhsan Dağı, 1915 Beyond 'Genocide,' Today's Zaman 26.04.10)
I learned that every year the US president makes a speech on April 24th about the issue. As Obama was campaigning for president, he made it clear that if he were elected, he would call it a genocide. However, in his speech on Saturday this was not mentioned. Instead, he referred to it as 'Meds Yeghern,' Armenian for 'great tragedy.' He said,
"On this solemn day of remembrance, we pause to recall that ninety-five years ago one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century began. In that dark moment of history, 1.5 million Armenians were massacred or marched to their death in the final days of the Ottoman Empire. Today is a day to reflect upon and draw lessons from these terrible events. I have consistently stated my own view of what occurred in 1915, and my view of that history has not changed. It is in all of our interest to see the achievement a full, frank and just acknowledgment of the facts. The Meds Yeghern is a devastating chapter in the history of the Armenian people, and we must keep its memory alive in honor of those who were murdered and so that we do not repeat the grave mistakes of the past.”
He also praised those Turks who helped save Armenians in 1915, but his middle-of-the-road approach doesn't appear to have satisfied Turks or Armenians. Armenians wish that he had stayed true to his word during campaign season and called it a genocide, while some Turks feel that his accusations could still be read between the lines and that saying "Meds Yeghern" is no different from calling it a genocide. You can read the whole article here.
It seems so childish to me for one word to have such a strong effect on an entire nation, but it might because I am not very patriotic or nationalistic. Imagine if the American government and its people refused to admit that slavery had happened and rather stubbornly carried on, year after year, stating that it was an unfortunate turn of events where blacks and whites both suffered equally. This is perhaps not the same thing, but the general idea is that nothing bad would come if/when we finally admitted that the facts were actually true. Nothing bad will happen to Turkey if they ever acknowledged the genocide as such. Germany has apologized for the Holocaust and no one thinks less of them.
On the other hand, how short-sighted of the Armenians to still need an apology. The dead are dead, those who killed the dead are now dead too. Armenians should understand that they themselves weren't harmed by anyone and also that the current leaders of Turkey were not the ones who killed their loved ones. Turkey should be willing to admit it to smooth world relationships, but Armenia should also be able to let go and move forward. Admitting it won't bring back the loved ones, while at the same time denying it won't make it go away. Forging forward with peace talks doesn't mean forgetting what happened, but wouldn't it be nice to normalize relations with a neighboring country, open a long-closed border, and stop dwelling on/being defensive about the past?
No comments:
Post a Comment