Thursday, June 18, 2009

US diplomat backs proposed commission on Armenian issue

A senior US diplomat has indicated the Obama administration's support for Turkey's almost five-year-old proposal to establish a joint commission of historians to resolve the question of whether the killings of Anatolian Armenians during World War I amounted to genocide. Remarks by Philip Gordon, assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian affairs, came on Tuesday at a hearing of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the US House of Representatives. The hearing, chaired by Congressman Robert Wexler, was titled “Strengthening the Transatlantic Alliance: An Overview of the Obama Administration's Policies in Europe.”
Gordon recalled that he had recently paid visits to Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia since he observed that there are both challenges and opportunities in this region.
“You have two parallel but separate tracks going on; a Turkey-Armenia normalization reconciliation process that we do think is quite potentially historic, where the two countries have agreed on a framework for normalizing their relations. That would include opening the border, which has been closed for far too long, which would establish diplomatic relations and would provide commissions in key areas, including history,” Gordon said. He was apparently referring to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's 2005 letter to then-Armenian President Robert Kocharyan, inviting him to establish a joint commission of historians and experts from both Turkey and Armenia to study the events of 1915 using documents from the archives of Turkey, Armenia and any other country believed to have played a part in the issue.
At a joint press conference in Ankara during Obama's landmark visit to Turkey in early April, President Abdullah Gül recalled the proposal and said: “If it has a high interest in this issue, any country -- for example, it may be the US, it may be France -- can join this joint commission of historians, and we are ready to [face] the results.”
Gordon, meanwhile, also said: “And we encourage that process and we support it. We have said that it is an independent process and believe that it should move forward, regardless of whatever else is happening in Europe or anywhere else, because both countries would benefit. That said, it is nonetheless the case that at the same time negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh are going on between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and that is part of the context in which the region moves forward. And we're encouraging that process as well. So, again, our view is that these are separate tracks. They're moving forward at different speeds. But we are engaged vigorously on both, because if both were to succeed, it really would be an historic opportunity for the region, from which all three of those countries would benefit.”
Gordon's remarks found a rapid response from the US-based Armenian diaspora. In a press release delivered later the same day, the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) said, “The establishment of an Armenia-Turkey commission of historians, a measure Turkey has long sought to cast a doubt over the overwhelming historical record of the Armenian genocide, stands in stark contrast to President Obama's statements during his campaign for the White House.”


18 June 2009, Thursday

TODAY'S ZAMAN ANKARA
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=178384&bolum=102

Monday, June 8, 2009

Turkish and Armenian Archives

Claims the Turkish Archives are closed is common. For this is another of the lies told by Armenains to help rally support for their cause.
On the contrary, the Ottoman Imperial Archives is one of the richest in the world and, naturally, the most frequently consulted collection of written sources with regard to the 1915 events. Any research that failed to consult the Turkish State Archives in matters relating to the common histories of Middle and Near East, Balkans, Mediterranean, North Africa, Arabic countries, Caucasus, and beyond, would simply be incomplete. It would be like trying to solve a dispute bwteen two parties by hearing only one of those parties. It would be unfair, incorrect, unscholarly, and unethical.

Turkish State Archives have been brought in line with European Union regulations, which means relevant laws have been amended to enable the same-day-issuance of the research permits. A comprehensive web page (www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr) has been created to include digital copies of classified documents and their translation into contemporary Turkish. Inclusion of English translations of the authentic documents is underway. These initiatives have already resulted in scholars from 80 countries to engage themselves in the archives since 2003. In recent years, everybody from Armenian researchers, to German, Italian and Austrian Historians, to the BBC cameras have had access to research what they liked.
There are approximately 150 million documents that span every period and region of the Ottoman realm in the stacks and vaults of the Ottoman Archives. Each day, new collections in these Ottoman archives are opened to researchers. All these extensive records are well preserved and organized.

Armenians still claim however the archives remain closed...

Prof Dr Stefano Trinchese
Chieti University
Italy
"There is no truth to the claims the Turkish Archives are difficult to access. I went to Istanbul and visited the Turkish Archives. It is true that I faced basic issues initially , but I face similar issues in Italy. In Armenia, I was denied access to the Archives. I wrote a letter but didn’t even get a reply. I tried but never got anywhere."

Prof. Laurenti Barsegian
Genocide Museum Director
Erivan/Armenia
"I have never seen any work by historians, based on the Turkish Archives."

Aras Arafyan
Armenian Historian
England
Has taken copies of thousands of documents both hardcopy and microfilm from the Turkish Archives in Istanbul. (3000 photocopies on the “Armenian Genocide” were taken throughout a 2 year research period.) This fact is documented in the Archive activity logbooks.

Hilmar Keizar
German-American Pro Armenian Historian.
Kaiser has conducted research in more than 60 archives including the Turkish-Ottoman Archives in Istanbul. He has taken photocopies of 5900 documents during his research.

Gegham Manukian
Dashnaktsutyun Party Media Relations
"Why doesn’t Turkey open its archives? We have opened our archives. (???) I have applied many times to no avail and I don’t know of anybody who has accessed the Turkish Archives."


Dr Alexander Safarian
Erivan University
When we refer to archives, we generally mean Historical Archives. I was unable to go to any libraries or Archives in Turkey. I didn’t really want to. I have access to all the documents I need right here in Armenia. I don’t have the will or the want to view Turkish Archives.


TURKEY URGES OPENING OF ARMENIAN ARCHIVE* Turkey, May 21, 2008 (UPI)

-- Turkey has offered $20 million to open an Armenian archive in the United States, claiming documents there will support its version of the 1915 massacre. Yusuf Halacoglu, head of the state-funded Turkish Historical Society, told Hurriyet the archive in Boston includes important documents on the events of 1915. Halacoglu said he had been told the archives cannot be opened because they need proper cataloging. "This would directly open a debate over the genocide claims," he said. "Armenians are aware of this and therefore they are doing their best not to sit at the table." Armenians and most non-Turkish scholars of the period say 1.5 million Armenians were killed by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 and generally label the deaths genocide -- a term the Turkish government disputes. The official Turkish version is that about 300,000 Armenians and 300,000 Turks were killed in an Armenian bid for independence.


The first published catalog of Ottoman archival holdings appeared in 1955 and consisted of ninety pages of archival inventory and commentary. Archivist Attila Çetin followed in 1979 with a more extensive catalog, which is also available in Italian. As the classifying and organizing of the archives continued, the catalog grew. The 1992 edition is 634 pages long. The expanded 1995 compilation provides access to even more documents. Revised editions are to be forthcoming from time to time, as more detailed descriptions become available for the various fonds or individual record groups.
Ottoman archival documentation constitutes an unequaled trove of information about how people lived from the fifteenth through the early twentieth centuries in a territory now comprised of twenty-two nations. İlber Ortaylı, director of the Topkapı Palace Museum at Istanbul, argues that the history of the Ottoman Empire should not be written without Ottoman sources. He is not alone in this. His position is buttressed by a number of specialists in the study of the Ottoman state and society. Albert Hourani, for example, the late British scholar of Middle Eastern affairs, argued that his best advice to history students considering Middle East specialization would be to "learn Ottoman Turkish well and learn also how to use Ottoman documents, since the exploitation of Ottoman archives, located in Istanbul and in smaller cities and towns, is perhaps the most important task of the next generation."

The Archives and the Armenians
There are few comprehensive sources about Armenian life in Anatolia outside of Ottoman archival sources. Diplomatic records, such as those cited by Armenian historian Vahakn Dadrian, as the basis for discussions among genocide scholars are spotty and intertwined with wartime politics. The Ottoman Ministry of the Interior (Dahiliye Nezareti) was the government department directing and supervising the relocation and resettlement of the Armenian population. The collection of the ministry documents covers the period from 1866 to 1922 and consists of 4,598 registers or notebooks. It is classified according to twenty-one subcollections, according to office of origin. Among the available documents in the Ottoman archives are several dozen registers containing the records of the deliberations and actions of the Council of Ministers, which set policies, received reports, and discussed problems that arose regarding the relocations and other wartime events. The minutes of its meetings, deliberations, resolutions, and decisions are bound in 224 volumes covering the years 1885 through 1922. These registers include each and every decree pertaining to the decision to relocate the Ottoman Armenians away from the war zones during World War I. The Records Office of the Sublime Porte (Babıali Evrak Odası) also contains substantial documentation, including the correspondence between the grand vizier and the ministries, as well as the central government and the provinces that can illuminate the events of 1915.
It is ironic, therefore, as politicians seek to deliberate on questions of history, that few historians investigating Armenian issues have actually consulted the Ottoman archives. As Australian historian Jeremy Salt has explained,
The Ottoman archives remain largely unconsulted. When so much is missing from the fundamental source material, no historical narrative can be called complete and no conclusions can be balanced. If the Ottoman sources are properly utilized, the way in which the Armenian question is understood is bound to change.
There is little explanation as to why more historians do not consult the Ottoman archives. They are open to all scholars. Bernard Lewis, Cleveland Dodge Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, who has worked extensively in the Ottoman archives since 1949, has argued that "the Ottoman archives are in the care of a competent and devoted staff who are always willing to place their time and knowledge at the disposal of the visiting scholar, with a personal helpfulness and courtesy that will surprise those with purely Western experience. [These records] are open to all who can read them." The late Stanford Shaw, Professor Emeritus of Turkish and Judeo-Turkish History at the University of California, Los Angeles, also spoke highly of the helpfulness of the archivists. He argued that the sheer amount of new material available removed any excuse for any scholar investigating various nationalist revolts not to spend time examining the new sources.
Even Taner Akçam of University of Minnesota, one of the most vocal proponents of Armenian genocide claims, noted the improvement in the working conditions of the archives. In a recent article, he thanked the staff and especially the deputy director-general of state archives for their help and openness during his last visit. The archivists are now helpful to all researchers, not only those pursuing research which supports the Turkish government's line.

Turkish Military Archives
The archives of the Turkish General Staff Military History and Strategic Studies Directorate in Ankara (Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Genelkurmay Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı Arşivleri) provide a military perspective. Indeed, more than the Ottoman Archives in the Prime Minister's Office, this repository provides a rich trove of information about internal conditions in the empire, operations of the Ottoman army, and the Special Organization (Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa), somewhat equivalent to the Ottoman special forces, for the period 1914-22.

The World War I and War of Independence archives alone number over five and a half million documents spread among Turkish General Staff Division reports and War Ministry files. Division 1 (Operations) contains military operations plans and orders, operations and situation reports, maps and overlays, general staff orders, mobilization instructions and orders, organizational orders, training and exercise instructions, spot combat reports. Division 2 (Intelligence) contains intelligence estimates and reports and orders of battle. Divisions 3 and 4 (Logistics) contain files concerning procurement, animals, munitions, transportation, rations, and accounting. The Ministry of War files contain the General Command's ciphered cables to military units as well as the papers of the infantry, fortress artillery, and other divisions. Vehip Pasha's Third Army (Erzurum), Jemal Pasha's Fourth Army (Damascus), and Ali İhsan Pasha's Sixth Army (Baghdad) are included among the staff files. These also include the Lightning Armies and Caucasian Armies groups.

Armenian Archives
A full study of the Armenians during World War I should consider material from all sides in a conflict. The Armenian community maintains a number of archives. The archives in Watertown, Massachusetts, contain repositories from the Dashnak Party (Dashnaksutiun, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation) and the First Republic of Armenia. The above, together with the archives of the Armenian patriarchate in Jerusalem and the Catholicosate, the seat of the supreme religious leader of the Armenian people, in Echmiadzin, Armenia, remain closed to non-Armenian researchers. Tatul Sonentz-Papazian, Dashnakist archivist, for example, denied İnönü University scholar Göknur Akçadağ access to the Watertown archives in a June 20, 2008 letter.


Dashnaksutiun archives are also not available to those Armenians who do not tow the party line. Historian Ara Sarafian, director of the Gomidas Institute in London, complained that "some Armenian archives in the diaspora are not open to researchers for a variety of reasons. The most important ones are the Jerusalem Patriarchate archives. I have tried to access them twice and [been] turned away. The other archives are the Zoryan Institute archives, composed of the private papers of Armenian survivors, whose families deposited their records with the Zoryan Institute in the 1980s. As far as I know, these materials are still not cataloged and accessible to scholars."

Beyond the closure of Armenian archives to non-Armenian and even to some Armenian scholars, few of these allow the public to access catalogs detailing their holdings.
Many scholars writing on the Armenian question utilize Britain's National Archives (formerly the Public Record Office) in Kew Gardens. While the British government has made available many of their diplomats' reports for study, much material from the British occupation of Istanbul (1919-22) and elsewhere in Anatolia following World War I remains closed to researchers under the Official Secrets Act and are only partially available in the archives of the government of India in Delhi.


British authorities say they remain sealed for national security reasons. Their release should be important to historians as they will include evidence regarding returning Armenian refugees and other related matters. Files of the British Eastern Mediterranean Special Intelligence Bureau also remain closed, perhaps because the British government does not wish to expose those who may have committed espionage on behalf of Britain. These are important because they should enable historians to research British espionage and sabotage, demoralizing propaganda, and attempts to provoke treason and desertion from Ottoman ranks during and immediately after 1914-18.

The documents of the Secret Office of War Propaganda, which under the direction of Lord James Bryce and Arnold Toynbee developed propaganda used against the Central Powers during World War I, also remain sealed. Their opening will allow historians to assess whether British officials in the heat of war created or exaggerated accounts of deliberate atrocities.

National Archives and the “Armenian Genocide”

The Russian National Communist Party Archives Central Committee Secret Archives houses many documents which shed light onto what really happenned in 1915.

Document 141
Dated 23 January 1915. Commander of troops stationed at Kars sent a letter to the Commander of the Russian Caucasus Forces requesting knowledge of:
In the Caucasus, which Armenian Voluntary units and who they are, which regiments they are connected to, and who among these will be located to the properties within Kars. This will allow civil unrest between the citizens and units, murders, robberies, and any type of force will lead to serious disruptions as a lack of discipline and moral amongst them.


Public Record Office in London
FO 371/2485-30439
Dated 6th march 1915 states the Armenians are at the command of the Russians and assisting the French in Adana. The reason for this is to destroy the Ottoman Empire.

Azerbaijan National Archives
The national archives of Azerbaijan detail how the Armenians committed atrocities in the towns of Shamahi, Zengezur, Kuba against Azeri Turks during 1918 – 1919 while under Russian command. What is most important is these documents are written in Russian by Russians.


French Chief of General Staff
Africa Content 64369/11
Dated 2nd October 1916 discloses how the Armenians were being trained by the French Legion in Egypt, Lebanon, and Cyprus so they can fight in Anatolia.

Patrick Devejian
State Minister, France
“Armenians didn’t only escape, but they then joined the French armed forces and fought with the French”

Ottoman Archives
BOA HR SYS 2543/4 Lef 9-10
Dated 2nd February 1919, this document describes Armenians dressed in French Military uniforms killing Turkish Soldiers in Halep.

Russian National Communist Party Archives Central Committee Secret Archives
Document 32
Dated 10 January 1915; The mayor of Iskenderiya sent a letter to the garrison commander. He writes 1200 volunteers had taken up arms, In addition citizens of Iskenderiya numbering 5100 volunteers also had joined. Stating this number can be increased to 10 000 volunteers if needed.
He requests 5100 rifles to be sent from Tiflis for these units.

British Archives and the "Armenian Genocide"

The Public Record Office in London, is home to tens of thousands of documents which refute the Armenian Claims. This is the primary reason why Britain will not accept the falsified claims.
The below are some examples.

FO 371/284-22083
Dated 23rd February 1915, this document is a copy of a report sent to the Russian Foreign Affairs Minister Sazonov (1910 – 1916) by the Russian Embassy. The report blatantly states the Russians had armed the Armenians in Eastern Anatolia so they can rise against the Turks.
FO 371/25167
Dated 4th March 1915, is an example of a telegraph sent from Bulgaria. It states Bulgarian Armenian Committee member Monsieur Varandian, has gathered a force of 20 000 Armenian Volunteers who want to fight against the Turks and await British assistance to assist them to Iskenderun. Varadian also states there is half this number of volunteers ready to take up arms against the Ottomans in the United States.

FO 371/46942
Dated 20 March 1915; This document, written on original Armenian Tashnaksutyun Rebel Federation stationary states there are many Armenian volunteer units at the ready.

FO 371/2146-68443
Dated 7 November 1914 states the Head of the Armenian Delegate Boghus Nubar, who is actually an Ottoman Pasha, states they are ready to fight alongside the Russians the objective being a greater independent Armenia.

FO 371/2146-70404
Dated 12 Nov 1914, is proof of the planned uprising of the Armenians against their ruling Ottoman Government, and mention of the Armenian Betrayal, labelling the Armenians as Traitors.

FO 371/ 2485-126836
Dated 7th September 1915, a report sent to the British Foreign affairs gives news of an Armenian Captain named “Tarko” who is in preparations for a massacre against the Ottoman Turks, and informs how they have planned with the finest detail.

Planned and Systematic Massacre of the Armenians? You be the Judge.




The picture shows Armenians raiding a mosque at Zeyten, Maras. Note Armenians were not exactly innocent lambs as they try to portray themselves.



















DID THE TURKS UNDERTAKE A PLANNED AND SYSTEMATIC MASSACRE OF THE ARMENIANS IN 1915?

One of the Armenians biggest claims is the Ottoman Empire tried to systematically massacre its Armenian population, hence the term "Genocide" is thrown around sparingly by the Armenian Diaspora and those politicians who are under extreme pressure from them.
If a minority within your country spent the last 30 years building up arms, in acts of treason, and deliberatly sided with your enemies during times of war, sent out killing gangs and terrorists to raid your cities and villages; only aim to kill your citizens just becuase they were loyal citizens, taking advantage of your struggle with invading armies, knowing the men of the villages were at the front defending their own country, causing havoc and trouble to affect your military supply lines, destroy your own arsenal of weapons or steal them to use against your own citizens and armies... what would you do?

The beginning of World War I and the Ottoman entry into the war on November 1, 1914 on the side of Germany and Austria - Hungary against the Entente powers was considered as a great opportunity by the Armenian nationalists. Louise Nalbandian relates that "The Armenian revolutionary committees considered that the most opportune time to begin a general uprising to achieve their goals was when the Ottoman Empire was in a state of war", (24) and thus less able to resist an internal attack.
Even before the war began, in August 1914, the Ottoman leaders met with the Dashnaks at Erzurum in the hope of getting them to support the Ottoman war effort when it came. The Dashnaks promised that if the Ottomans entered the war, they would do their duty as loyal countrymen in the Ottoman armies. However they failed to live up to this promise, since even before this meeting took place, a secret Dashnak Congress held at Erzurum in June 1914 had already decided to use the oncoming war to undertake a general attack against the Ottoman state(25). The Russian Armenians joined the Russian army in preparing an attack on the Ottomans as soon as war was declared. The Catholicos of Echmiadzin assured the Russian General Governor of the Caucasus, Vranzof-Dashkof, that "in return for Russia's forcing the Ottomans to make reforms for the Armenians, all the Russian Armenians would support the Russian war effort without conditions.”(26). The Catholicos subsequently was received at Tiflis by the Czar, whom he told that" The liberation of the Armenians in Anatolia would lead to the establishment of an autonomous Armenia separated from Turkish suzerainty and that this Armenia could be made possible with the protection of Russia. "(27).
Of course the Russians really intended to use the Armenians to annex Eastern Anatolia, but the Catholicos was told nothing about that.
As soon as Russia declared war on the Ottoman Empire, the Dashnak Society's official organ Horizon declared:
"The Armenians have taken their place on the side of the Entente states without showing any hesitation whatsoever; they have placed all their forces at the disposition of Russia; and they also are forming volunteer battalions.”(28)
The Dashnak Committee also ordered its cells that had been preparing to revolt within the Ottoman Empire:
"As soon as the Russians have crossed the borders and the Ottoman armies have started to retreat, you should revolt everywhere. The Ottoman armies thus will be placed between two fires: of the Ottoman armies advance against the Russians, on the other hand, their Armenian soldiers should leave their units with their weapons, form bandit forces, and unite with the Russians. "(29) "The Hunchak Committee will use all means to assist the Entente states, devoting all its forces to the struggle to assure victory in Armenia, Cilicia, the Caucasus and Azerbaijan as the ally of the Entente states, and in particular of Russia."(30)
And even the Armenian representative in the Ottoman Parliament for Van, Papazyan, soon turned out to be a leading guerrilla fighter against the Ottomans, publishing a proclamation that:

"The volunteer Armenian regiments in the Caucasus should prepare themselves for battle, serve as advance units for the Russian armies to help them capture the key positions in the districts where the Armenians live, and advance into Anatolia, joining the Armenian units already there. "(31)

As the Russian forces advanced into Ottoman territory in eastern Anatolia, they were led by advanced units composed of volunteer Ottoman and Russian Armenians, who were joined by the Armenians who deserted the Ottoman armies and went to fight on the Russians side. Many of these also formed bandit forces with weapons and ammunition which they had for years been stocking in Armenian and missionary churches and schools, going on to raid Ottoman supply depots both to increase their own arms and to deny them to the Ottoman army as it moved to meet this massive Russian invasion. Within a few months after the war began, these Armenian guerrilla forces, operating in close coordination with the Russians, were savagely attacking Turkish cities, towns and villages in the East; massacring their inhabitants without mercy, while at the same time working to sabotage the Ottoman army's war effort by destroying roads and bridges, raiding caravans, and doing whatever else they could to ease the Russian occupation. The atrocities committed by the Armenian volunteer forces accompanying the Russian army were so severe that the Russian commanders themselves were compelled to withdraw them from the fighting fronts and send them to rear guard duties. The memoirs of all too many Russian officers who served in the East at this time are filled with accounts of the revolting atrocities committed by these Armenian guerrillas, which were savage even by the relatively primitive standards of war then observed in such areas.(32)

These Armenian atrocities didnt only affect Turks and other Muslims. The Armenian guerrillas had never been happy with the failure of the Greeks and Jews to fully support their revolutionary programs. As a result in Trabzon and vicinity they massacred thousands of Greeks, while in the area of Hakkari it was the Jews who were rounded up and massacred by the Armenian guerrillas (33). Basically the aim of these atrocities was to leave only Armenians in the territories being claimed for the new Armenian state; all others therefore were massacred or forced to flee for their lives so as to secure the desired Armenian majority of the population in preparation for the peace settlement.
Leading the first Armenian units who crossed the Ottoman border in the company of the Russian invaders was the former Ottoman Parliamentary representative for Erzurum, Karekin Pastirmaciyan, who now assumed the revolutionary name Atmen Garo. Another former Ottoman parliamentarian, Hamparsum Boyaciyan, led the Armenian guerrilla forces who ravaged Turkish villages behind the lines under the nickname "Murad", specifically ordering that" Turkish children also should be killed as they form a danger to the Armenian nation." Another former Member of Parliament, Papazyan, led the Armenian guerrilla forces that ravaged the areas of Van, Bitlis and Mush.
In March 1915 the Russian forces began to move toward Van. Immediately, on April 11, 1915 the Armenians of Van began a general revolt, massacring all the Turks in the vicinity so as to make possible its quick and easy conquest by the Russians. Little wonder that Czar Nicho1as II sent a telegram of thanks to the Armenian Revolutionary Committee of Van on April 21, 1915, "thanking it for its services to Russia." The Armenian newspaper Gochnak, published in the United States, also proudly reported on May 24, 1915 that "only, 1,500 Turks remain in Van", the rest having been slaughtered.
The Dashnak representative told the Armenian National Congress assembled at Tiflis in February 1915 that "Russia provided 242,000 rebels before the war even began to arm and prepare the Ottoman Armenians to undertake revolts", giving some idea of how the Russian -Armenian alliance had long prepared to undermine the Ottoman war effort (34). Under these circumstances, with the Russians advancing along a wide front in the East, with the Armenian guerrillas spreading death and destruction while at the same time attacking the Ottoman armies from the rear, with the Allies also invading the Empire along a wide front from Galicia to Iraq, the Ottoman decision to deport Armenians from the war areas was a moderate and entirely legitimate measure of self defence.
Even after the revolt and massacres at Van, the Ottoman government made one final fort to secure general Armenian support for the war effort, summoning the Patriarch, some Armenian Members of Parliament, and other delegates to a meeting where they were warned drastic measures would be taken unless Armenians stopped slaughtering Muslims and working to undermine the war effort. When there was no evident lessening of the Armenian attacks, the government finally acted. On April 24, 1915 the Armenian revolutionary committees were closed and 235 of their leaders were arrested for activities against the state. It’s the date of these arrests that in recent years has been annually commemorated by Armenian Nationalist groups throughout the world in commemoration of the "massacre" that they claim took place at this time. (Note that of all the 235 Armenians arrested for treason on April 24 1915 all 235 were admitted to Prisons in Ankara and Istanbul.) No such massacre, however, took place, at this or any other time during e war: In the face of the great dangers which the Empire faced at that time, great care was taken to make certain that the Armenians were treated carefully and compassionately as they ere deported, generally to Syria and Palestine when they came from southern Anatolia, and Iraq if they came from the north. The Ottoman Council of Ministers thus ordered:
"When those of the Armenians resident in the aforementioned towns and villages who have to be moved are transferred to their places of settlement and are on the road, their comfort must be assured and their lives and property protected; after their arrival their food should be paid for out of Refugees' Appropriations until they are definitively settled in their new homes. Property and land should be distributed to them in accordance with their previous financial situation as well as their current needs; and for those among them needing further help, the government should build houses, provide cultivators and artisans with seed, tools, and equipment. "(35)
"This order is entirely intended against the extension of the Armenian Revolutionary Committees; therefore do not execute it in such a manner that might cause the mutual massacre of Muslims and Armenians." "Make arrangements for special officials to accompany the groups of Armenians who are being relocated, and make sure they are provided with food and other needed things, paying the cost out of the allotments set aside for emigrants. "(36)
"The food needed by the emigrants while travelling until they reach their destinations must be provided ... for poor emigrants by credit for the installation of the emigrants. The camps provided for transported persons should be kept under regular supervision; necessary steps for their well being should be taken, and order and security assured. Make certain that indigent emigrants are given enough food and that their health is assured by daily visits by a doctor. .. Sick people, poor people, women and children should be sent by rail and others on mules, in carts or on foot according to their power of endurance. Each convoy should be accompanied by a detachment of guards, and the food supply for each convoy should be guarded until the destination is reached ... In cases where the emigrants are attacked, either in the camps or during the journeys, all efforts should be taken to repel the attacks immediately ..."(37)
Out of some 700,000 Armenians who were transported in this way until early 1917, certainly some lives were lost, as the result both of large scale military and bandit activities then going on in the areas through which they passed, as well as the general insecurity and blood feuds which some tribal forces sought to carry out as the caravans passed through their territories. The Armenians had spent no time in killing Ottoman Subjects who were not in favour of their cause, as such many Kurdish tribes were attacked and killed. The Kurds took this as an opportunity to seek revenge. In addition, the deportations and settlement of the deported Armenians took place at a time when the Empire was suffering from severe shortages of fuel, food, medicine and other supplies; as well as large-scale plague and famine. It should not be forgotten that, at the same time, an entire Ottoman army of 90,000 men was lost in the East as a result of severe shortages or that through the remainder of the war as many as three or four million Ottoman subjects of all religions died as a result of the same conditions that afflicted the deportees. How tragic and unfeeling it is, therefore, for Armenian nationalists to blame the undoubted suffering of the Armenians during the war to something more than the same anarchical conditions which afflicted all the Sultan's subjects. This is the truth behind the false claims distorting historical facts by ill-devised mottoes such as the ''first genocide of the twentieth century" which Armenian propagandists and terror groups try to revive to justify the same tactics of terror today which brought such horrors to the Ottoman Empire during the last century.


(24) NALBANDIAN, Louise, op. cit., p.11 I.
(25) Aspirations et Agissements Revolutionnaires des Comites Armeniens avant et apres la Proclamation de la Constitution Ottomane, Istanbul, 1917, pp.144 -146.
(26) TCHALKOUCHIAN, Gr., Le Livre Rouge, Paris, 1919, p.12.
(27) TCHALKOUCHIAN, Gr., op. cit.
(28) URAS, Esat, op. cit., p. 594.
(29) HOCAOGLU, Mehmed, Tarihte Ermeni Mezalimi ve Ermeniler, Istanbul, 1976, pp. 570-571
(30) Aspirations et Agissements revolutionnaires des Comites Armeniens, pp.151-153.
(31) URAS, Esat, op. cit., pp. 5% - 600.
(32 ) Journal de Guerre du Deuxieme Regiment d'Artillerie de Forteresse Russe d'Erzeroum, 1919.
(33) SCHEMSI, Kara, op. cit., p. 41 and p. 49.
(34) URAS, Esat, op. cit., p. 604.
(35)Council of Ministers Decrees, Prime Ministry's Archives, Istanbul, Volume 198, Decree 1331/163, May 1915.
(36)British Foreign Office Archives, Public Record Office, 37119158/E 5523.

Wednesday, June 3, 2009

U.S.-Turkish Relationship ‘Exceptionally Strong,’ Mullen Says


http://elitestv.com/pub/2009/06/us-turkish-relationship-exceptionally-strong-mullen-says

By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 2, 2009 – The United States and the Republic of Turkey remain steadfast allies and friends in a modern-day relationship that stretches back decades, the U.S. military’s top officer said here yesterday.

The U.S. and Turkish governments worked together during the Cold War to surmount “some big, big challenges,” Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during his keynote remarks at the 28th Annual Conference on U.S.-Turkish Relations dinner held at the Gaylord resort and convention center at National Harbor, Md.

The annual conference provides a forum for U.S. and Turkish government, military, commerce and academia leaders to discuss issues and opportunities in the two nations’ mutual interest.

Turkey fought on the allied side with the United States during World War II and joined the United Nations after the war. The then-Soviet Union’s demands to place military bases in the Turkish Straits prompted U.S. President Harry S. Truman to establish the Truman Doctrine in 1947, which spelled out America’s intent to preserve Turkey’s sovereignty, and that of Greece, which was then experiencing communist-inspired civil strife. Turkey joined NATO in 1952 and its soldiers fought alongside U.N. troops during the Korean War.

The relationship between the United States and Turkey today is “exceptionally strong” and “vitally important,” Mullen said. Turkey has deployed troops to Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom since 2001.

Turkey is a secular Muslim republic of some 70 million citizens. U.S.-Turkish relations soured in March 2003 after Turkey’s parliament declined to allow U.S. forces to pass through southern Turkey into northern Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

However, Mullen said, the United States in recent years has provided more support to Turkey in its fight against Kurdistan Workers’ Party terrorists, known by the acronym PKK. The PKK wants to establish a socialist, Kurdish state, parts of which would include southeastern Turkey and northeastern Iraq; both regions have majority-Kurdish populations.

The increased American support for Turkey in its battle against the PKK, Mullen pointed out, has contributed toward a vast improvement of U.S.-Turkish relations.

Mullen also cited President Barack Obama’s early April visit to Turkey’s capital of Ankara, where he addressed the Turkish parliament.

Obama told Turkish legislators that he supports Turkey’s desire for membership in the European Union and that he appreciates Turkey as a partner in the fight against terrorism. The president also praised Turkey for enacting many societal reforms, including the lifting of prohibitions on Kurdish teachings and broadcasts.

Turkey also has good relations with Pakistan, Mullen said, noting that he has discussed that issue with senior Turkish military leaders, including Gen. Ilker Basbug, the chief of the Turkish General Staff.

The Pakistani military is currently engaged in an offensive against Taliban militants that operate in Pakistan’s northwestern region near its border with Afghanistan.

Basbug, too, hailed U.S.-Turkish relations during remarks he made prior to Mullen’s speech.

“Turkish-United States’ cooperation in various areas has become a ‘must,’” Basbug said, for resolving thorny regional issues. Terrorist-inspired violence, he said, constitutes the key threat that all peace-loving nations must confront together.

Turkey’s strategic location amid Europe and the Middle East, Basbug said, means that the United States could benefit from Turkey’s “soft power” diplomatic credentials to help settle problems in its “immediate neighborhood.”

Wrapping up, Mullen recounted his first experiences with the “open and warm” Turkish people during a military assignment in the early 1970s.

“We need your friendship,” Mullen told the mostly-Turkish audience. “We need your support.”


afisna_2