A Brief History of the Armenian Genocide
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Remains of Talat: a Dialectic Between Republic and Empire
THE REMAINS OF TALAT: A DIALECTIC BETWEEN REPUBLIC AND EMPIRE BY ROBERT W. OLSON Universityof Kentucky There is much of interest in the historiography of the Young Turks regarding their rise to power in 1908 as well as the desperate and dramatic flight from Istanbul in 1918 of some of their leaders such as Talat, Enver and Cemal among others, in a German destroyer with sundered lights.l The death of the dashing Enver Pasa occurred while fighting Soviet forces in Central Asia. Cemal and Talat were tracked down and killed by Armenian assassins. But the burial and reburial of the latter two, especially that of Talat Pasa, has received much less attention. The return of the remains of Talat Pasa from Germany and their reburial in Turkey on 25 February, 1943 and the significance of this event is the topic of this article. "Talat: Remains of...." is the interesting title of a dossier numbered 480 in the Public Record Office of Great Britain under the listing FO 195/2479. The dossier discusses the return of the body of Talat Pasa, a leader of the Committee of Union and Pro- gress (Ittihad ve Terrakki Cemyeti) and the Young Turks during 1908-1918. Talat served as Grand Vezir of the Ottoman Empire from 4 February, 1917 to October, 1918. He fled from Turkey aboard a German destroyer, along with other Young Turk leaders, during the night of November 2-3, 1918 (1-2 Tesrinisani, 1334). 1 FO 195 designates the records of the Ottoman and Turkish Embassy records of the Foreign Office. -
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). -
Social Engineering’
European Journal of Turkish Studies Social Sciences on Contemporary Turkey 7 | 2008 Demographic Engineering - Part I Geographies of Nationalism and Violence: Rethinking Young Turk ‘Social Engineering’ Uğur Ümit Üngör Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejts/2583 DOI: 10.4000/ejts.2583 ISSN: 1773-0546 Publisher EJTS Electronic reference Uğur Ümit Üngör, « Geographies of Nationalism and Violence: Rethinking Young Turk ‘Social Engineering’ », European Journal of Turkish Studies [Online], 7 | 2008, Online since 05 March 2015, connection on 16 February 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ejts/2583 ; DOI : 10.4000/ejts. 2583 © Some rights reserved / Creative Commons license Üngör, Uğur Ümit (2008) 'Geographies of Nationalism and Violence: Rethinking Young Turk ‘Social Engineering’', European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue N° 7 , No. 7 | Demographic Engineering - part I, URL : http://www.ejts.org/document2583.html To quote a passage, use paragraph (§). Geographies of Nationalism and Violence: Rethinking Young Turk ‘Social Engineering’ Uğur Ümit Üngör Abstract. This article addresses population politics in the broader Young Turk era (1913-1950), which included genocide, deportation, and forced assimilation of various minority populations. The article opens with an account of the genesis of the concept ‘social engineering’ and provides a synopsis of the literature in the field of Young Turk population politics. It then focuses on the implementation of these nationalist population politics in the eastern provinces to exemplify these policies in detail. The article aims to clarify that the Armenian genocide cannot be understood in isolation from broader Young Turk population politics and argues that a generation of traumatized Young Turk politicians launched and perpetuated this violent project of societal transformation in order to secure the existence of a Turkish nation-state. -
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. -
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. -
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 -
The Armenians
THE ARMENIANS By C.F. DIXON-JOHNSON “Whosoever does wrong to a Christian or a Jew shall find me his accuser on the day of judgment.” (EL KORAN) Printed and Published by GEO TOULMIN & SONS, LTD. Northgate, Blackburn. 1916 Preface The following pages were first read as a paper before the “Société d’Etudes Ethnographiques.” They have since been amplified and are now being published at the request of a number of friends, who believe that the public should have an opportunity of judging whether or not “the Armenian Question” has another side than that which has been recently so assiduously promulgated throughout the Western World. Though the championship of Greek, Bulgarian and other similar “Christian, civilized methods of fighting,” as contrasted with “Moslem atrocities” in the Balkans and Asia Minor, has been so strenuously undertaken by Lord Bryce and others, the more recent developments in the Near East may perhaps already have opened the eyes of a great many thinking people to the realization that, in sacrificing the traditional friendship of the Turk to all this more or less sectarian clamor, British diplomacy has really done nothing better than to exchange the solid and advantageous reality for a most elusive and unreliable, if not positively dangerous, set of shadows. It seems illogical that the same party which recalled the officials (and among them our present War Minister) appointed by Lord Beaconsfield to assist the Turkish Government in reforming their administration and collecting the revenue in Asia Minor, and which on the advent of the Young Turks refused to lend British Administrators to whom ample and plenary powers were assured, should now, in its eagerness to vilify the Turk, lose sight of their own mistakes which have led in the main to the conditions of which it complains, and should so utterly condemn its own former policy. -
A REASSESSMENT: the YOUNG TURKS, THEIR POLITICS and ANTI-COLONIAL STRUGGLE the Jeunes Turcs Or Young Turks Were a Heterogeneous
DOĞU ERGIL A REASSESSMENT: THE YOUNG TURKS, THEIR POLITICS AND ANTI-COLONIAL STRUGGLE INTRODUCTION The Jeunes Turcs or Young Turks were a heterogeneous body of in tellectuals with conflicting interests and ideologies. However, their common goal was opposition to Hamidian absolutism. Although the Young Turks were the heirs of the New Ottoman political tradition of constitutionalism and freedom —which were believed to be the final words in modernization by both factions— they did not come from the elite bureaucratic circles of the New Ottomans1. The Young Turks were the products of the modern secular, military or civilian professional schools. They «belonged to the newly emerging professional classes: lecturers in the recently founded government colleges, lawyers trained in western law, journalists, minor clerks in the bureaucracy, and junior officers trained in western-style war colleges. Most of them were half-educated and products of the state (high) schools. The well-educated ones had no experience of administration and little idea about running a government. There was not a single ex perienced statesman amongst them»12. The historical evidence at hand suggests that the great majority of the Young Turk cadres was recruited primarily from among the children of the petty-bourgeoisie. Most of the prominent Young Turk statesmen came from such marginal middle-class families. For example, Talat Paşa (Prime Minister) was a small postal clerk in Salonica with only a junior high-school education 1. The best socio-historical account of the -
Machine Age Humanitarianism”: American Humanitarianism in Early-20Th Century Syria and Lebanon
chapter 8 “Machine Age Humanitarianism”: American Humanitarianism in Early-20th Century Syria and Lebanon Idir Ouahes Historians of humanitarianism have increasingly scrutinized its social and political perspectives in the hope of defining a unitary field of study. One trend has sought to emphasize the pre-existing contexts prior to the formalization of humanitarian activity.1 Other accounts, such as Michael Barnett’s, suggest that humanitarianism as a concept should be considered separately from tra- ditional charity since it is a particularly modern, Western phenomenon that emerged from Enlightenment ethics (transcendentalism and universalism).2 In the Middle Eastern context, Ottoman-era massacres have generated the most attention.3 Historians of the Middle East have nevertheless also sought to emphasize the well-established Islamic charitable experience. Islamic awqāf (mortmain perpetuities) have been an intrinsic part of the region’s human- itarian activity.4 These Islamic financial instruments provided for a range of charitable activities, even for the protection of birds as was the case in a Fezzan waqf. 1 Peter Stamatov, The Origins of Global Humanitarianism: Religions, Empires, and Advocacy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013). Stamatov and earlier historian Frank Kling- berg nevertheless recognize the importance of the slavery abolitionists in giving impetus to humanitarianism and forging the domestic welfare state. See Stamatov, The Origins, 155–172; Frank J. Klingberg, “The Evolution of the Humanitarian Spirit in Eighteenth-Century Eng- land,” The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography 66, no. 3 (July 1942): 260–278. David Forsythe notes the parallels between Henry Dunant’s International Committee of the Red Cross, set up in 1859, and London’s Anti-Slavery Society, founded in 1839. -
Armenian Genocide
JULY 2015 ARMENIAN GENOCIDE FOURTEENTH ASSEMBLY, UNITING CHURCH IN AUSTRALIA RESOLUTION 15.23.01 An Overview 15.23.01 The Assembly resolved to: a. acknowledge that the Armenian massacres and forced deportations of 1915-1923 constitute a Geno- cide; b. commend the NSW and SA governments in acknowledging the Armenian Genocide and encourage the Federal and other state governments to do the same; and c. affirm the value of recognising a date on or near the anniversary of the Armenian genocide, as a day of observance and commemoration of the Armenian Genocide and request the National Consultant Christian Unity, Doctrine and Worship to prepare: i. prayer to be provided for all congregations of the UCA for use on the day; and ii. in consultation with others, educational and liturgical resources for congregations to use. Rationale The Oxford Dictionary defines genocide as “the deliberate killing of a very large number of people from a particular ethnic group or nation.” An outline of the Armenians and the Armenian genocide follows. The Legend of the origins of Armenians goes back to Noah. The Legend has it that Hayk, the ancestor of the Armenians is the son of Torgom son of Tiras son of Gomer son of Japheth son of Noah. Hayk had an argu- ment with Belus (Bel) and migrated with his group from Babylon to the North and settled in what became Armenia. The Land they settled in included current day Armenia, Nagorno Karabakh, Nakhichevan, parts of north-western Syria, part of south-western Georgia and the eastern half of Turkey. In 301 C.E., Armenia became the first Christian nation. -
Sabiha Gökçen's 80-Year-Old Secret‖: Kemalist Nation
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO ―Sabiha Gökçen‘s 80-Year-Old Secret‖: Kemalist Nation Formation and the Ottoman Armenians A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Communication by Fatma Ulgen Committee in charge: Professor Robert Horwitz, Chair Professor Ivan Evans Professor Gary Fields Professor Daniel Hallin Professor Hasan Kayalı Copyright Fatma Ulgen, 2010 All rights reserved. The dissertation of Fatma Ulgen is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2010 iii DEDICATION For my mother and father, without whom there would be no life, no love, no light, and for Hrant Dink (15 September 1954 - 19 January 2007 iv EPIGRAPH ―In the summertime, we would go on the roof…Sit there and look at the stars…You could reach the stars there…Over here, you can‘t.‖ Haydanus Peterson, a survivor of the Armenian Genocide, reminiscing about the old country [Moush, Turkey] in Fresno, California 72 years later. Courtesy of the Zoryan Institute Oral History Archive v TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page…………………………………………………………….... -
273 KING ARTHUR of the ROMANS: LUCIUS ARTORIUS CASTUS and the SARMATIANS in BRITAIN J O H N M a T T H E W S the Earliest Docum
KING ARTHUR OF THE ROMANS: LUCIUS ARTORIUS CASTUS AND THE SARMATIANS IN BRITAIN J o h n M a t t h e w s UDK:94(37)Artorius Castus, L. 821.111-34 Izvorni znanstveni rad John Matthews Oxford (FIOS, BCM Hallowquest London U radu se iznose moguće veze između života rimskog vojnika iz 2. st., Lucija Artorija Kasta, i kasnijih, srednjovjekovnih legendi oko polu- mitskog kralja Artura. Autor pretpostavlja da se zahvaljujući natpisu otkrivenom u blizini Splita (Podstrana), može izgraditi čvrsta teza da je Kast bio najstariji povijesni lik za koji se može dokaza- ti da je utjecao na razvitak kasnijih legendi u Bri- taniji. Sačuvane su priče o sarmatskim ratnicima koji su u Britaniju došli kao dio rimskih legija, a kojima je zapovijedao sam Kast; naime sarmatske i keltske priče stapaju se međusobno u razdoblju nakon Kastovog života. The earliest documents that record the deeds of the British hero Arthur show that he was not perceived as a king but as a soldier, bearing the Latin title dux (duke); a charismatic leader who fought ‘alongside the leaders of the British’. Just such a man is a career-officer of the legions named Lucius Artorius Castus, who lived and fought in Britain in the 2nd century AD – almost 300 years earlier than the more usually accepted dates for Arthur. ‘Arthur’ is the generally accepted form today, but in reality this name has a far longer history and a variety of spellings. It can be proven with reasonable certainty that ‘Artorius’ either derives from the British name Arthur or is the Latin original of that name.