27 Kasım 2008 Perşembe

2007 yılında Amsterdam Üniversitesi ISHSS Fakültesi'ndeki Ermeni Soykırımı iddiaları karşısında fakülte dekanına ilettiğim yazı - 2

Dear Dr. ABC,

I assume that you did read the article titled “Armenie-De Armenisch-Turksche kwestie.” I’m wondering your opinion on this article.

Do you think the massacres by the Turks were part of the decision of the state to systematically murder the Armenians, or they occurred as a result of immediate and reflexive attitudes of each side? Who started the massacres? Should have the Turks said: “Hey Armenians! Come kill us! We are waiting for you. Do you want the Anatolia? We endow it to you! We have started the Westernization process and we will be as polite and civil as a European. We will do nothing to you; or at least we will kill as many of you as you killed from us, because if we kill more than you did it will be considered genocide in the future. So we should, at least, create a balance in the massacres.” It seems this was what Prof. Dr. Houwink ten Cate suggested in our meeting.

When I asked Dr. XYZ if the massacres in question were in fact mutual killings (which obviously started with the atrocities of the Armenians), he refused this argument. How do you think does the article explain this?

Moreover, I asked him what possible actions could be taken by the Ottoman state instead of genocide. He said “deal.” Yes, I think that is always the most important step to stop a conflict. But I also emphasized that there were attempts by the Ottomans to make a deal, as they held a meeting with the leaders of Dashnak[1] at the beginning of the war in order that the organization would stop the massacres and keep their loyalty to the Ottoman. But it did not work. Dashnak thought the war would be the best opportunity to make the greatest rebellions. According to Dr. XYZ, this and another pro-Armenian organization, Hunchak, did not represent all the Armenians and they gained the support of only a small part of the Armenian society. He stressed the difficulty in finding someone to talk representing the whole Armenians. Then how and with whom can you make a deal, especially when you are fighting a war? Later I asked him what the next step could be after that meeting in order to make a deal with the Armenians. I asked “What would you do next if you were the head of the Ottomans?” He really did not give satisfactory answers to my question. Now I am asking to you Dr. ABC. What would you do if you were the head of the Ottomans? Would you have a better option than relocating the Armenians? What would a European leader, or say Churchill, do against these people? You can be sure that if the Ottoman state had not passed the law of relocation (in the support of which there had been pressures from Germany), much more massacres would occur and much more people would die. In my view, it was really stupid to deport the Armenians to the deserts of Syria, but it would not be less stupid to keep them home.

He did not talk much about this article and did not refuse anything there. This is either because he cannot deny the information written in the text, or because he did not take me serious in the meeting. I do not think the latter is true, because he was really very kind to me since we had shaken hands. If there is a third possibility, please let me know.

Finally, Turkish people do not hate the Armenians (For instance, Turks gave the highest vote to the Armenians in the Eurovision song contest last year). Nor do I have any hatred against them. A few months ago, I proposed, during a meeting at the building of the main opposition party in Turkey, that we should erect monuments in some symbolic places to the memory of those Armenians and Turks who died during these tragic events. But look what the hostile Armenians do around the world. Hrant Dink was killed a few months ago, and I do not think it was justifiable to kill him at all. Nor was it justifiable, however, to kill tens of Turkish diplomats, and bomb attack against the academicians who refused the Armenian genocide. Is it these people who suffered genocide? Unfortunately there is no word coined and accepted in the international law in order to criminalize the Armenians’ never-ending atrocities against the Turks.

Soon I will more materialize the things. And I think a friend of Turkey has always the right to know more about his friend.

Kind regards,

KIVANC SAGIR



[1] The Dashnaktsuthiun, the most revolutionary Armenian Party, was formed in Tiflis, Russia in 1890. The objective of Dashnaks was declared as a “people’s war against the Turkish government” and they were now demanding freedom of Turkish Armenia. “Let us unite, Armenians, and carry on fearlessly the sacred task of securing national freedom.” (Nalbandian page 156).

To pursue their objectives, they were:

1. To organize fighting bands and to prepare them for activity.

2. To use every means to arm people.

3. To organize revolutionary committees and establish strong ties among them.

4. To stimulate fighting and to terrorize government officials. (Nalbandian page 168)

Hiç yorum yok: