DOCSLIB.ORG

The Armenian Genocide: Review of Its Historical, Political, and Legal Aspects Vahakn N

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Armenian Genocide: Review of Its Historical, Political, and Legal Aspects Vahakn N University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy Volume 5 Article 5 Issue 1 Fall 2010 The Armenian Genocide: Review of Its Historical, Political, and Legal Aspects Vahakn N. Dadrian Follow this and additional works at: http://ir.stthomas.edu/ustjlpp Part of the Human Rights Law Commons, and the Legal History Commons Bluebook Citation Vahakn N. Dadrian, The Armenian Genocide: Review of Its Historical, Political, and Legal Aspects, 5 U. St. Thomas J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 135 (2010). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UST Research Online and the University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy. For more information, please contact Editor-in-Chief Patrick O'Neill. THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE: REVIEW OF ITS HISTORICAL, POLITICAL, AND LEGAL ASPECTS VAHAKN N. DADRIAN INTRODUCTION During World War I, the authorities of the Turkish Ottoman Empire carried out one of the largest genocides in world history, destroying huge portions of its minority Armenian population. That genocide followed decades of persecution, punctuated by two similar but smaller rounds of massacres in the 1894-96 and 1909 periods, which claimed two hundred thousand Armenian lives. In all, over one million Armenians were put to death during World War I. Adding to this figure are the several hundred thousand Armenians who perished in the course of the Turkish attempt to extend the genocide to Russian Armenia in the Transcaucus during the spring and summer of 1918, as well as in the fall of 1920 when Ankara's fledgling government ordered General Karabekir's army to "physically annihilate Armenia." The European Powers, who defeated the Turks time and again on the battlefield, were unable or unwilling to prevent this mass murder.1 Of even more consequence, they failed to secure punishment of the perpetrators in the aftermath of the war, despite the fact that they had publicly committed to doing so. The events of that time have subsequently slipped into the shadows of world history, thus acquiring the imagery of "the Forgotten Genocide." To this day, Turkey denies the genocidal intent of these massacres. Such a scale of perpetration, at the very least, warrants a documentary exposure and examination. The results may yet impel the civilized world to show a greater concern for the depth of the anguish that has been tormenting Armenians for generations. It may even move the more enlightened segment of the population of modem Turkey to face the historical fact of the Armenian Genocide and try to come to terms with it. Over the past eighty years, the Armenian nation has struggled to bring 1. The terms "Ottomans" and "Turks" are used interchangeably given the historical interconnections and interplays. 136 UNIV. OF ST THOMAS JOURNAL OF LA W & PUBLIC POLICY [Vol. V the history of the Armenian Genocide to light and examine it. Despite the magnitude of the disaster, the international community has only recently officially recognized its genocidal character. In April of 1984, a group of public figures-including three Nobel Prize laureates, including the late international jurist Sean McBride-conducted "People's Tribunal" hearings on the Armenian Genocide at the Sorbonne in Paris and adjudged it to be a crime of genocide without statutory limitations. In August of 1985, the U.N. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, which had been deadlocked for over fourteen years, "took note," by a 14-1 vote (with four abstentions), of the historical fact of the Armenian Genocide. In June of 1987, the European Parliament declared the Turkish massacres of World War I to be a crime of genocide under the terms of the U.N. Convention on Genocide, stipulating that Turkey must recognize the Armenian genocide before the European Parliament would favorably consider Turkey's application for membership in the European Community. The European Parliament labeled Turkey's refusal to do so an "insurmountable obstacle to consideration of the possibility of Turkey's accession to the European Community." Moreover, on April 24, 1994, the wire services of United Press International and the Associated Press announced that "Israel issued its first official condemnation of the Turkish Genocide of the Armenians, ending a tradition of silence to appease its regional ally, Turkey." Deputy Foreign Minister Yossi Bellin then told the Israeli Parliament that Israel would become part of an effort to ensure that the world remembers the genocide. "We will always reject any attempt to erase its record, even for some political advantage," he said. Rejecting Turkish denials of the crime and its claim that the incident was a "civil war," Bellin declared that "it was not war. It was most certainly massacre and genocide." The relatively low impact of the destruction of one million Armenians on modern public consciousness raises serious questions about the ability of the international community to prevent or punish acts of genocide. Many see the lack of action and reaction following the Armenian Genocide as a critical antecedent of the ensuing Jewish Holocaust during World War 11. Indeed, it has been reported that, in trying to reassure the doubters of the morality and viability of his genocidal schemes, Hitler stated, "[w]ho, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?" This historical connection was raised repeatedly during the U.S. Senate's consideration of the U.N. Convention on Genocide, which the United States ratified on February 19, 1986. A score of senators, most notably Kerry and Wilson, emphasized the historical precedent of the Armenian case and pointed to the enormous calamity of the Jewish Holocaust, which they claimed was a by- product of humanity's callous disregard of the Armenians' fate. Neither were, nor are, other victim groups in the post-Nuremberg world No. 1] The Armenian Genocide exempt from the consequences of the obliviousness to which the Armenians were subjected. Foremost among the series of genocidal massacres that stand out in this respect are those that occurred in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Rwanda, and the Kurdish territory in Iraq. In each one of these cases, a state system was beset by the pressures of centrifugal movements and revolutions before being engulfed by wars. Given certain conditions of simmering international conflicts, war emerges as a catalyst for radical methods of conflict resolution. From the standpoint of contemporary international law, the central issue is the relationship between the concept of war crimes on the one hand, and crimes against humanity on the other. The recognition of the significance of this relationship in deciding to initiate legal actions against the offenders was evident in U.N. efforts to come to grips with the contemporary issues of ethnic cleansing. In its Resolution 808 (1993), the U.N. Security Council unanimously established an ad hoc international tribunal to prosecute and punish the perpetrators associated with the series of wars that were waged in the territories of former Yugoslavia, especially in the province of Bosnia. An almost identical initiative was applied to the Rwandan case in November of 1994. The basis of this initiative was the August 12, 1949, Geneva Civilian Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. The idea was to punish, under international law, the offenders accused of crimes against humanity. A note on a specific category of sources and data used in this study may be in order. They originate from within Ottoman Turkey and her allies during World War I, Germany and Austria-Hungary. Specifically, these sources include: 1. Secret and top-secret Ottoman-Turkish state documents, each one of which was authenticated by ministerial officials before being introduced in the Turkish Court Martial Proceedings. 2. The importance of the preponderance of German and Austrian documents anticipating and corroborating the findings of the Turkish Military Tribunal cannot be overemphasized. As noted above, Imperial Germany and Imperial Austria-Hungary were the political and military allies of the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Their representatives' "confidential," "secret," and "top-secret" reports, mostly composed during the war for internal and in-house purposes only, have an authenticity and immediacy not matched by any other available category of sources and data. EUROPEAN DIPLOMACY AND INTERNATIONAL LAW The interplay of European attempts to impose reforms and the Turkish resistance set the stage for a bellicose Turkish response to the escalation of 138 UNIV. OF ST. THOMAS JOURNAL OFLAW& PUBLIC POLICY [Vol. V the Turko-Armenian conflict. In this clash, the disjunction of European public law and Turkish customary law deteriorated into a sharp conflict between the two legal domains. Taking the series of enacted reforms seriously, the Armenians pressed for their actual implementation as a matter of legal entitlement. The Turks, however, relied on their common law claims of traditional super-ordination vis-A-vis the non-Muslim subjects of the empire. One such cardinal common law principle refers to a rule in the Akdi Zimmet (contract with the ruled nationality), which stipulates cessation of hostility against non-Muslim subjects following their defeat and submission. Once defeated, these subjects are dehalet 'granted refuge and protection.' By attempting to influence Turkish national policy in their favor by enlisting the intercession of foreign powers, the Ottoman Turks argued that the Armenians had violated this fundamental treaty provision, and under the prevailing common law, had therefore forfeited the Berat 'grant of exemption and clemency.' The cycle of massacres preceding the World War I genocide was rationalized essentially in this fashion. In describing the scenes of the 1895 Urfa Massacre and the entire 1894-96 era of Abdul Hamit Massacres, the Chief Dragoman of the British Embassy, who was fluent in Turkish and who based his report on evidence supplied to him by local Muslims, wrote the following: [The perpetrators] are guided in their general action by the prescriptions of the Sheri Law.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Armenian Genocide and the Jewish Holocaust: from Impunity to Retributive Justice*
    The Historical and Legal Interconnections Between the Armenian Genocide and the Jewish Holocaust: From Impunity to Retributive Justice* Vahakn N. Dadrian I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 504 II. THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND AFTERMATH OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ............... 507 A. Outlines of the Problem .......................................................................... 507 B. Conflict in the U.S. Government Regarding the Lausanne Treaty ........................ 511 M. COMPARATIVE ASPECTS OF THE TwO CASES ........................................................... 517 A. The Historical Vulnerability of the Jews and Armenians to Victimization ............... 517 B. The Factorsof Power and Opportunity........................................................ 519 C. Strategiesfor Taking Advantage of the Opportunity Structure ............................ 521 1. The Use of Wartime Emergency Powers by the Executive ......................... 521 2. The Role of PoliticalParties ........................................................... 524 3. Trial Balloons ............................................................................. 529 IV. THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE AS A PRECEDENT AND A PRECURSOR OF THE HOLOCAUST ........... 531 A. Nazi Germany's Knowledge of the Fate of the Armenians ................................. 532 B. Hitler'sAppreciation of the Armenian Genocide............................................. 537 C. The Legacy of Genghis Kum as a Functional
    [Show full text]
  • For More Information About the Venues and Times of the Worldwide
    Commemorating the Centenary of the Armenian Genocide Worldwide Reading on 21st April, 2015 Events in: Appeal for a worldwide reading on April 21st 2015 ARGENTINA Asociación Cultural Armenia, Buenos Aires | ARMENIA 1st Armenian Literary Agency, ArtBridge Bookstore Café / The international literature festival berlin (ilb) and the Lepsiushaus Civilnet Online Television, Yerevan; The Armenian Literature Foundation, Yerevan; Marine Karoyan, Tekeian Art Center, Yerevan; Potsdam are calling for a worldwide reading on 21 April 2015 - the day that marks 100 years since the beginning of the Armenian Goethe-Institut Georgien, Yerevan; Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute, Tsitsernakaberd, Yerevan; Centre of Juridical-political Genocide. and cultural diplomacy NGO, Yerevan; DAAD Armenien, Cafesijan Center for the Arts, Yerevan; The Armenian Educational Several hundred Armenian intellectuals – poets, musicians, Foundation, Yerevan | AUSTRALIA Armenian Book Club Australia, Theme and Variations Studios, Sydney; Pen Melbourne, parliamentary representatives and members of the clergy – were Melbourne | Anna Pfeiffer, FREIRAD 105.9 (Radio), Innsbruck | Thorsten Baensch, Aïda Kazarian, Boulevard arrested in Constantinople (today Istanbul) on 24 April 1915, AUSTRIA BELGIUM and deported to the Turkish interior where most of them were Jamar 19, Brussels; Anita Bernacchia, Ioana Belu, Bookshop EuropaNova, Brussels | BOLIVIA Bolivian PEN Centre, Plaza Callejas, murdered. It was the start of a crime against humanity. The Santa Cruz | BRAZIL Sibila journal, Sao Paulo; Lenira Buscato, Bandeirantes School, Sao Paulo | BULGARIA Armenian General extermination of the Armenians during World War One was the first Benevolent Union (AGBU) Plovdiv Chapter, Bourgas; AGBU Plovdiv Chapter, Haskovo; AGBU Plovdiv Chapter, Rouse; AGBU systematically planned and executed genocide of modern times. More than a million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire died during Plovdiv Chapter, Sliven; AGBU Plovdiv Chapter, Veliko Tarnovo; AGBU Plovdiv Chapter, Varna; Eojeni Sakaz, St.Kliment Ohridski this genocidal campaign.
    [Show full text]
  • THE IMPACT of the ARMENIAN GENOCIDE on the FORMATION of NATIONAL STATEHOOD and POLITICAL IDENTITY “Today Most Armenians Do
    ASHOT ALEKSANYAN THE IMPACT OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE ON THE FORMATION OF NATIONAL STATEHOOD AND POLITICAL IDENTITY Key words – Armenian Genocide, pre-genocide, post-genocide, national statehood, Armenian statehood heritage, political identity, civiliarchic elite, civilization, civic culture, Armenian diaspora, Armenian civiliarchy “Today most Armenians do not live in the Republic of Armenia. Indeed, most Armenians have deep ties to the countries where they live. Like a lot of us, many Armenians find themselves balancing their role in their new country with their historical and cultural roots. How far should they assimilate into their new countries? Does Armenian history and culture have something to offer Armenians as they live their lives now? When do historical and cultural memories create self-imposed limits on individuals?”1 Introduction The relevance of this article is determined, on the one hand, the multidimen- sionality of issues related to understanding the role of statehood and the political and legal system in the development of Armenian civilization, civic culture and identity, on the other hand - the negative impact of the long absence of national system of public administration and the devastating impact of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 on the further development of the Armenian statehood and civiliarchy. Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey was the first ever large-scale crime against humanity and human values. Taking advantage of the beginning of World War I, the Turkish authorities have organized mass murder and deportations of Armenians from their historic homeland. Genocide divided the civiliarchy of the Armenian people in three parts: before the genocide (pre-genocide), during the genocide and after the genocide (post-genocide).
    [Show full text]
  • A Forgotten Siege the Kutul Amare Victory and the British Soldiers in Yozgat City
    Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies 2020; 5(3): 46-52 http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/tecs doi: 10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.11 ISSN: 2575-498X (Print); ISSN: 2575-4971 (Online) A Forgotten Siege the Kutul Amare Victory and the British Soldiers in Yozgat City Mehmet Ertug Yavuz The Foreign Languages School, Yozgat Bozok University, Yozgat, Turkey Email address: To cite this article: Mehmet Ertug Yavuz. A Forgotten Siege the Kutul Amare Victory and the British Soldiers in Yozgat City. Teacher Education and Curriculum Studies. Vol. 5, No. 3, 2020, pp. 46-52. doi: 10.11648/j.tecs.20200503.11 Received : June 28, 2019; Accepted : November 6, 2019; Published : June 20, 2020 Abstract: Kutul Amare was the second greatest victory won by the Turks during the First World War after Çanakkale This article tells you about the war from an objective perspective, how and why the war was finally politically won by the British, who was in charge at the time, how did the war progressed and how certain things changed during the time of this war, the imprisoning of the British soldiers in Yozgat City, This is what exactly makes this war so important and interesting. The (weak/ill-so called by the Europeans at those times) Ottoman forces withdrew and reinforced “Selman-i Pak”, under the command of Colonel 'Bearded Nurettin Bey'. While the reinforcement continued, Mirliva-the Major General- Halil Pasha the Uncle of Enver Pasa, entered the frontline with a corps and changed the course of the battle. General Townshend, with 4500 loss regressed to Kutu'l-Amare.
    [Show full text]
  • The Armenian Genocide
    The Armenian Genocide During World War I, the Ottoman Empire carried out what most international experts and historians have concluded was one of the largest genocides in the world's history, slaughtering huge portions of its minority Armenian population. In all, over 1 million Armenians were put to death. To this day, Turkey denies the genocidal intent of these mass murders. My sense is that Armenians are suffering from what I would call incomplete mourning, and they can't complete that mourning process until their tragedy, their wounds are recognized by the descendants of the people who perpetrated it. People want to know what really happened. We are fed up with all these stories-- denial stories, and propaganda, and so on. Really the new generation want to know what happened 1915. How is it possible for a massacre of such epic proportions to take place? Why did it happen? And why has it remained one of the greatest untold stories of the 20th century? This film is made possible by contributions from John and Judy Bedrosian, the Avenessians Family Foundation, the Lincy Foundation, the Manoogian Simone Foundation, and the following. And others. A complete list is available from PBS. The Armenians. There are between six and seven million alive today, and less than half live in the Republic of Armenia, a small country south of Georgia and north of Iran. The rest live around the world in countries such as the US, Russia, France, Lebanon, and Syria. They're an ancient people who originally came from Anatolia some 2,500 years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • 'A Reign of Terror'
    ‘A Reign of Terror’ CUP Rule in Diyarbekir Province, 1913-1923 Uğur Ü. Üngör University of Amsterdam, Department of History Master’s thesis ‘Holocaust and Genocide Studies’ June 2005 ‘A Reign of Terror’ CUP Rule in Diyarbekir Province, 1913-1923 Uğur Ü. Üngör University of Amsterdam Department of History Master’s thesis ‘Holocaust and Genocide Studies’ Supervisors: Prof. Johannes Houwink ten Cate, Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies Dr. Karel Berkhoff, Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies June 2005 2 Contents Preface 4 Introduction 6 1 ‘Turkey for the Turks’, 1913-1914 10 1.1 Crises in the Ottoman Empire 10 1.2 ‘Nationalization’ of the population 17 1.3 Diyarbekir province before World War I 21 1.4 Social relations between the groups 26 2 Persecution of Christian communities, 1915 33 2.1 Mobilization and war 33 2.2 The ‘reign of terror’ begins 39 2.3 ‘Burn, destroy, kill’ 48 2.4 Center and periphery 63 2.5 Widening and narrowing scopes of persecution 73 3 Deportations of Kurds and settlement of Muslims, 1916-1917 78 3.1 Deportations of Kurds, 1916 81 3.2 Settlement of Muslims, 1917 92 3.3 The aftermath of the war, 1918 95 3.4 The Kemalists take control, 1919-1923 101 4 Conclusion 110 Bibliography 116 Appendix 1: DH.ŞFR 64/39 130 Appendix 2: DH.ŞFR 87/40 132 Appendix 3: DH.ŞFR 86/45 134 Appendix 4: Family tree of Y.A. 136 Maps 138 3 Preface A little less than two decades ago, in my childhood, I became fascinated with violence, whether it was children bullying each other in school, fathers beating up their daughters for sneaking out on a date, or the omnipresent racism that I did not understand at the time.
    [Show full text]
  • New Perspectives on the Eastern Question(S) in Late-Victorian Britain, Or How „The Eastern Question‟ Affected British Politics (1881-1901).1
    Stéphanie Prévost. New perspectives on the Eastern Question(s) New perspectives on the Eastern Question(s) in Late-Victorian Britain, Or How „the Eastern Question‟ Affected British Politics (1881-1901).1 Stéphanie Prévost, LARCA, Université Paris-Diderot Keywords: Eastern Question, Gladstonian Liberalism, social movements, Eastern Question historiography. Mots-clés : Question d‘Orient, libéralisme gladstonien, mouvements sociaux, historiographie. In 1921, in the preface to Edouard Driault‘s second edition of La Question d’Orient depuis ses origines jusqu’à la paix de Sèvres, a work originally published in 1898, French historian Gabriel Monod postulated that ―the Eastern Question was the key issue in European politics‖ (v). In his 1996 concise introductory The Eastern Question, 1774-1923, Alexander L. Macfie similarly stated that ―for more than a century and a half, from the Russo-Turkish War of 1768-74 to the Treaty of Lausanne of 24 July 1923, the Eastern Question, the Question of what should become of the Ottoman Empire, then in decline, played a significant, and even at times a dominant, part in shaping the relations of the Great Powers‖ (1). Undoubtedly, the Eastern Question has always been deeply rooted in the intricacies of European diplomacy, more obviously so from the Crimean War onwards. After an almost three-year conflict (1853-6) first opposing Russia to the Ottoman Empire, then supported by France, Britain, Sardinia, Austria and Hungary, belligerents drafted peace conditions. The preamble to the 30 March, 1856 Treaty of Paris made the preservation of Ottoman territorial integrity and independence a sine qua non condition to any settlement – which was taken up in Article VII of the treaty as a collective guarantee.
    [Show full text]
  • THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE and INTERNATIONAL LAW Alfred De Zayas
    THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE AND INTERNATIONAL LAW Alfred de Zayas Murder has been a sin since Cain killed Abel, long before the first attempts by lawyers to codify penal law, before the Hammurabi and other ancient codes. More fundamentally, murder is a crime by virtue of natural law, which is prior to and superior to positivistic law. Crimes against humanity and civilization were crimes before the British, French and Russian note condemned the Armenian massacres in 1915 1. Genocide was a crime before Raphael Lemkin coined the term in 1944. 2 According to article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, general principles of law are a principal source of law. Not only positivistic law – not only treaties, protocols and charters – but also the immanent principles of law are sources of law before the ICJ and can be invoked. Among such principles are “ ex injuria non oritur jus ” which lays down the rule that out of a violation of law no new law can emerge and no rights can be derived. This is a basic principle of justice – and of common sense. Another general principle of law is “ ubi jus, ibi remedium ”, where there is law, there is also a remedy, in other words, where there has been a violation of law, there must be restitution to the victims. This principle was reaffirmed by the Permanent Court of International Justice in its famous judgement in the Chorzow Factory Case in 1928. Another general principle is that the thief cannot keep the fruits of the crime. Another principle stipulates that the law must be applied in good faith, uniformly, not selectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Genocide: Violence and Victimhood in Eastern Anatolia, 1913-1915
    Rethinking Genocide: Violence and Victimhood in Eastern Anatolia, 1913-1915 by Yektan Turkyilmaz Department of Cultural Anthropology Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Orin Starn, Supervisor ___________________________ Baker, Lee ___________________________ Ewing, Katherine P. ___________________________ Horowitz, Donald L. ___________________________ Kurzman, Charles Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Cultural Anthropology in the Graduate School of Duke University 2011 i v ABSTRACT Rethinking Genocide: Violence and Victimhood in Eastern Anatolia, 1913-1915 by Yektan Turkyilmaz Department of Cultural Anthropology Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Orin Starn, Supervisor ___________________________ Baker, Lee ___________________________ Ewing, Katherine P. ___________________________ Horowitz, Donald L. ___________________________ Kurzman, Charles An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Cultural Anthropology in the Graduate School of Duke University 2011 Copyright by Yektan Turkyilmaz 2011 Abstract This dissertation examines the conflict in Eastern Anatolia in the early 20th century and the memory politics around it. It shows how discourses of victimhood have been engines of grievance that power the politics of fear, hatred and competing, exclusionary
    [Show full text]
  • The Prefiguration of Some Aspects of the Holocaust in the Armenian Genocide (Revisiting the Comparative Perspective)
    The Prefiguration of Some Aspects of the Holocaust in the Armenian Genocide (Revisiting the Comparative Perspective) Vahakn N. Dadrian Zoryan Institute The field of genocide studies has been marked by a comparative tendency, while at the same time scholarship on the Holocaust has tended to focus on its singularity; the Armenian Genocide has often been treated as representing a ‘‘dress rehearsal’’ for the Holocaust. This article examines the parallels and commonalities, as well as the differences, between the two events, with a view to drawing them into a comparative perspective. More specifically, four major factors (vulnerability of the victim group, degradation of victims, war as opportunity, and fear of retaliation on the part of perpetrators) and three subsidiary factors (methods of extermination, disregard of economic factors, and terminological deflection) are examined with respect to both the Holocaust and the Armenian Genocide. Keywords: Holocaust, Armenian Genocide, comparative perspective From its very inception, genocide studies has been marked by a tendency to be infused with some elements of comparativeness, while the case of the Holocaust has benefited from a profusion of works focusing on and detailing elements of singularity. The World War I Armenian Genocide has served, in this respect, a useful purpose, especially because of its significant similarities to and certain commonalities with the Holocaust. This element of a nexus, a connecting link, was not only recognized but harnessed by Raphael Lemkin for a wide and encompassing project that ushered in the era of genocide studies. In ‘‘Totally Unofficial Man,’’ Lemkin wrote, In 1915 ...I began ...to read more history to study whether national, religious, or racial groups as such were being destroyed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Armenian Genocide, 1915
    The Armenian Genocide, 1915 U ur Ümit Üngör ‘Either the Armenians would eliminate the Turks or the Turks would eliminate the Armenians. I didn’t hesitate for one moment when confronted with this dilemma. My Turkish identity won out over my profession. I thought: we must destroy them before they destroy us. If you ask me how I as a doctor could commit murder, my answer is simple: the Armenians had become dangerous microbes in the body of this country. And surely it is a doctor’s duty to kill bacteria?’ 1 Dr Mehmed Reshid (1873-1919), Governor of Diyarbekir during the genocide ‘The Turkish government began deporting the Armenian community in Sivas in convoys. Each neighbourhood was given a certain date for leaving. On the first day I watched in amazement at the crowds waiting to be deported, an endless throng of people stretching from one end of the street to the other. The pushing and shoving of the mules and the creaking of the carts made an ear-deafening noise. Men wearing hats to protect them from the sun walked alongside the carts, followed by women wearing white head scarves. Each had a task: one person was holding the cart, another the reins of the mule and yet another was watching over the family posses- sions. The children walked on either side of their parents as if they were setting off on a pleasant journey. At each end of the caravan rode mounted Turkish policemen, leading and controlling the convoy. The Turkish neighbours watched the spectacle from their windows.
    [Show full text]
  • Imperial Ghosts
    Colonial ideas, modern warfare: how British perceptions affected their campaign against the Ottomans, 1914-1916 by Cameron Winter A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History Guelph, Ontario, Canada © Cameron Winter, April, 2017 ABSTRACT COLONIAL IDEAS, MODERN WARFARE: HOW BRITISH PERCEPTIONS AFFECTED THEIR CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE OTTOMANS, 1914-1916 Cameron Winter Advisor: University of Guelph, 2017 Professor R Worringer This thesis is an investigation of British campaign against the Ottoman Sultanate during the first two years of WWI. Despite Britain’s purported superiority in all things military and technological, the Ottomans dealt the British several stinging reverses at the Dardanelles and in Mesopotamia, culminating in the capture of a British division at Kut. It is the argument of this thesis that these failures on the part of the British were the direct result of Britain’s colonialist attitudes towards Muslims, and that a reading of both the secondary literature and available primary materials demonstrates this thoroughly. By examining memoirs, diaries, cabinet documents and minutes of War Council meetings, it becomes clear that Lord Kitchener, Winston Churchill, Austen Chamberlain, and other British leaders suffered from a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of Islam and of the Ottoman Army, and that this misunderstanding underwrote all of their subsequent failures over the 1914-1916 period. iii Table of Contents Introduction: One Debacle
    [Show full text]