DOWNLOAD Genocide in Our Time - NewFoundations

cal predispositions of Young Turk nationalism and onthe Ottoman political calculations which sanctioned thedeportations and massacres. The unusual aspect of hiswork is its mixture of admission of the substantive factsof the genocide with elaborate rationalizations framingthe events. For instance, Djemal reported that theOttoman government deported one and a half millionArmenians and that 600, 000 of them "died. " Djemaldeveloped a thesis arguing that the treatment of theArmenians, despite its summary nature, was bothepisodic and inevitable in the course of developmentsin Ottoman-Armenian relations. Armenians favoredRussian protection and Russia threatened to overrunthe Ottoman Empire.The Apologists053@Kemal, Mustafa Ataturk. A Speech Delivered by GhaziMustapha hiemal, October 1927. Leipzig: H. F. Koehler,Publisher, 1929. LC 26-14306. See pp. 409-418,496-7, 620-630.Mustafa Kemal led the Turkish Nationalist forcesin the War for Independence. In 1923 he founded theRepublic of Turkey. He remained its president untilhis death in 1938. This long speech, delivered to thecongress of the Republican People's Party, reviewedthe Kemalist struggle for Turkish independencein theaftermath of World War I and the ensuing disintegrationof the Ottoman Empire. Beyond the facts and documentsassembled by Kemal for this presentation, thespeech also had the effect of establishing the outlinesof an official history. For Kemal the Armenian genocidewas an accomplished fact that did not needdwelling upon. This form of denial simply dismisseda segment of history. Kemal saw the matter in purelypolitical terms and treated the expulsion of the Armeniansas a necessary step in the reassertion of completeTurkish sovereignty.Edib, Halide (Adivar). Memoirs of Halide Edib. NewYork and London: The Century Co. , 1926. LC 26-14306. See pp. 386-388, 428-430.Halide Edib was a major literary figure in Turkeyin the first part of the century. She was a proponentof westernization and an advocate of women's rights.She also became an ardent supporter of Kemal's reformprogram. Edib shifted the focus of discussion on thematter of the massacres by obliquely alluding to thegenocide as a consequence of "destructive"nationalism.She too repeated the charge of treason by Armenianrevolutionaries and raised the specter of the exterminationof the Turks as a consequence. She avoided thequestion of responsibility by developing what mightbe called a deflection thesis which implied that theGermans, in their desire for economic supremacy,hoped to see the Armenians eliminated. The circle ofdeflection was completed with the suggestion thatArmenians and Turks shared equal guilt since bothsides engaged in behavior characterized by mutualexcesses.5 5Emin, Ahmed. Turkey in the World War. New Haven:Yale University Press, 1930. LC 30-9837. Rev. Seepp. 217-223.Ahmed Emin Yalman was an American-trainedsociologist and journalist who worked as news editorof the Young Turk party organ during World War I.His close acquaintance with the party organization, andhis Western education — he attended Columbia University— made him a particularly perspicacious observer ofthe Armenian genocide. He developed a number oftheses which, in contradistinction to the outrightdenialsor falsifications, are more commonly repeated byequil ibrating rational izers. They include the following:a) the dispute over the exact, or approximate, figurefor the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire,the general purpose being to demonstrate that they were"a scattered" minority, and therefore lacking demographicconcentration in any part of the state; b)because of their aspirations and sympathies the Armeniansconstituted "Enemies Within, " who were involvedin "provocations"; c) that the deportations "actuallyapplied only to the Gregorian"Armenians, (p. 217) andspared Catholics and Protestants, and thus were notnecessarily racially motivated; d) that the Armenianvolunteer divisions in the Russian army were first toengage in massacre and consequently "created anunofticial state of war between the Armenians and theTurks" (p. 219); e) attacks against the Armenians wereonly "Counter-massacres." Despite these arguments,Emin has been regarded "the most candid" of Turkishauthors on the subject because he is the only one tohave admitted the ultimate purpose of the Armeniangenocide.5 6Council on Turkish-American Relations. ?7ie Treatywith Turkey: Why It Should Be Rattjt ed. New York:Council on Turkish-American Relations, 1926. LC 26-13881.A compilation of articles and statements supportingthe American ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne andthe establishment of formal relations between the UnitedStates and Turkey, this work is a virtual encyclopediaof the apologist literature written by Americans in theearly 1920s. Some of the authors had actively raisedfunds to aid Armenian refugees and were one-time96 GENOCIDE