Ermeni Sorunu. İddialar - Gerçekler.. Armenian Issue. Allegations - Facts..: Armenian Issue. allegations

Güray's profileErmeni Sorunu. İddialar ...PhotosBlogListsMore

Tools

Help

Blog

Summary

Listed by:

<< First < Previous Next > Last >>

July 17

Refutation of the Armenian Resolution Article by Article

REFUTATION OF THE ARMENIAN RESOLUTION ARTICLE BY ARTICLE-1

Turkey is concerned that the Armenian genocide resolution which has been submitted to the US House of Representatives several times in the past will pass due to Nancy Pelosi, the new Democratic speaker of the House. However, I don’t think there is any major significance if the law is passed or not. Firstly, similar resolutions have already been passed in state senates. According to ANCA, 47 states have passed such resolutions. Secondly, the bill cannot impose sanctions. The US president is under pressure to say on April 24 that 1.5 million Armenians were murdered. U.S Republican and Democratic presidents have always used terms similar to the word “genocide” when speaking on April 24. I am not saying that Turkey should stop lobbying against the resolution. Of course, Turkey should fight against this unjust and biased legislation and try to prevent the genocide label from being attached to the nation. Otherwise, those Turkish children who read in textbooks that their ancestors were murderers will suffer an inferiority complex and will become asocial in the countries in which they live.

At the other end of the spectrum, the mentioned resolution that was submitted to the US House of Representatives is laden with incorrect historical information and material mistakes. It seems that those who drafted the resolution were not very concerned about the facts. It was prepared with the assumption that the representatives would approve whatever was submitted and calls on the US president to employ sensitivity to foreign politics regarding ethnic cleansing, human rights and the Armenian genocide. The president is also asked to declare April 24 a day to commemorate the “Armenian genocide.” Certainly this call is intended to hamper Turkey-US relations. So while the resolution lacks the authority to impose punitive sanctions, it is very important because it could prevent Turkish-US relations from moving forward in peace and cooperation. The resolution will increase Turkish opposition to America and will strike a blow to Turkish government efforts to mend relations between the two countries.

While the previous genocide resolutions had indicated that the genocide was committed by the Ottoman Empire and not the Republic of Turkey, the current one directly charges Turkey with being responsible for genocide. The third article was removed from the current resolution, which is why the history of the genocide was extended to 1923. The Armenian lobbyists have extended their claims of genocide because they want to hold the Turkish state responsible and punish Turkey for the goods and property that were confiscated. What’s worse is that the image of Turks in America will be damaged, and this could affect business and cultural relations between the two countries. Some intellectuals, writers and strategy experts say the US will not offend Turkey in any way until, at least, the problems in Iran and Iraq are resolved and do not expect the resolution to pass in the Senate. However, we should remember that in recent years the US has been guided by an unproductive and visionless administration. Unfortunately, the administration draws its strategy and road map based on the marginal groups of each country. Since the possibility exists for the US administration to err and become confused, it is very important that the American public and its administrative departments are informed of the half truths in the bill.

Below you will find an assessment of the mistakes in the mentioned bill.
(Article 1) The Armenian genocide was conceived and carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923, resulting in the deportation of nearly 2,000,000 Armenians, of whom 1,500,000 men, women, and children were killed, 500,000 survivors were expelled from their homes, and which succeeded in the elimination of the over 2,500-year presence of Armenians in their historic homeland.
In the article under dispute, it was claimed that genocide was carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923. We know that V. Dadrian and many other leading Armenian historians have claimed the loss of the Armenian life during World War I due to the actions of the Ottoman Empire was 1.5 million. Before we comment on these exaggerated figures, we must emphasize that the Ottoman Empire had exited the stage of history in 1923. This fact indicates that the Armenian lobby is directly targeting the Republic of Turkey and aims to keep Turkey from avoiding punishment for the refusal to acknowledge its heritage. As for the figures, we may state with certainty that the claimed number of Armenian victims is an exaggeration. First of all, many independent researchers have estimated that the Armenian population in 1914 ranged between 1,400,000 and1,700,000. Even such pro-Armenian scholars as Dr. Johannes Lepsius do not accept the figures asserted by the Patriarchate, at 2.2 million Armenian citizens in that area at that time, and instead calculated the Armenian population to be around 1,845,450 (Der Todesgang des Armenischen Volkes, Potsdam 1919, p. 308). There is not a single source that would indicate the population of the Ottoman Armenians was as high as 2 million. (See H. Özdemir and others. Armenians: Exile and Migration, Ankara, 2004, p.49-50.)

The claim that 1.5 million Armenians were killed is also a myth. This myth originated from the report of Leslie Davis, the US consul at Harput. He wrote on July 24, 1915 -- the 44th day after the order for deportation -- that “It is impossible to say how many Armenians have been killed, but it is estimated that the number is not far from a million” (NARA 867.4016/269). Even Dadrian vouches for 1 million survivors and estimates the number of Armenian victims at 1.1 million. During the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, the Armenian leader, Bogos Nubar Pasha, spoke about the deportation of 600-700,000 Armenians. In addition, the Patriarchate calculated in 1919 that the total number of Armenians living in Anatolia was 644,000. A document released by the League of Nations stated the number of Armenians in 1922 who originated from Turkey was 817,873 and states that “the total given does not include the able-bodied Armenians” who still lived in Turkey. (NARA 867.4016/816) Last but not least, in a memorandum sent to English and French embassies by the Patriarchate in 1919, it claimed that “200,000 Armenians were buried alive or were drowned in Van Lake, the Fırat River and the Black Sea between 1914 and 1918.” (Report presented to the Preliminary Peace Conference by the Commission for the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on the Enforcement of Penalties, March 29, 1919). These figures clearly demonstrate that the Armenian historians have exaggerated the figures about the number of Armenian victims during the war.

(Article 2) On May 24, 1915, the Allied Powers, England, France and Russia, jointly issued a statement explicitly charging for the first time ever another government of committing “a crime against humanity.”
In the second statement in the proposed resolution, the Allied statement of May 24, 1915 is mentioned, and it is asserted that the Ottoman Empire carried out genocide, although they had been warned before the deportation. The text of the resolution implies that the Ottoman Empire planned and launched a systematic campaign to annihilate the Armenians. It is true that there was such a statement made by the Allies; what is left out is the fact that the states that issued this statement were then at war with the Ottomans, and as we know now, had signed treaties amongst each other to divide the Ottoman Empire, which would complicate any claim they asserted about the Ottoman Empire. What is also striking is that these countries were overlooking their own “crimes against humanity.” For instance Russia was carrying out pogroms on the Jews in their country, and England had already deported citizens of German origin to concentration camps.

(Article 3) This joint statement stated “the Allied Governments announce publicly to the Sublime Porte that they will hold personally responsible for these crimes all members of the Ottoman Government, as well as those of their agents who are implicated in such massacres.”
As is stated above, these statements were the propaganda of the Allies. As a matter of fact, the Ottoman Empire, in its reply to the statement issued by the Allies, stated that a massacre of the Armenians in the empire was out of the question. There was also a very interesting detail in the statement of the Ottoman Empire: The sources of these slanders were English and Russian consuls in Romania and Bulgaria. In fact, political propaganda offices for the Taşnaksutyun [Armenian armed gangs] were present in the capitals of those countries, and many reports about the massacres appearing in the “Blue Book” also originated from these offices.

(Article 4) The post-World War I Turkish Government indicted the top leaders involved in the “organization and execution” of the Armenian Genocide and in the “massacre and destruction of the Armenians.”

Last year, Turkish-Americans staged demonstrations in front of the United Nations to protest the French bill that banned denying the so-called Armenian genocide.
The third article of the resolution asserts that the Ottoman Empire tried those responsible for massacres and thereby implicitly accepted criminal responsibility during the court-martials. Justin McCarthy, a leading American expert on the Ottoman history, describes those courts as “kangaroo courts” and recalls that they were established by a corrupt administration which was eager for retribution. The British High Commissioner S.A.G. Calthorphe wrote to London on Aug. 1, 1919, that the “trials were proving to be a farce and injurious to our own prestige and to that of the Turkish government” (FO 371/4174/118377). According to Dr. Ferudun Ata, the author of a book titled “Deportation Courts in Occupied İstanbul,” the Ottoman government of the time had established the court-martials to better its conditions in the Paris Peace Conference and also to take revenge against the regime of the “Young Turks.”

The interrogations in the courts-martial were not duly conducted, many witnesses were faked and only testified against the defendants. For example, a certain Artolos, a shoemaker, who testified against Maj. Tevfik during the trials in Yozgat, was brought to İstanbul and was paid to speak against the defendant. According to Dr. Ata, he later appeared before the court in another trial as a Muslim convert. Dr. Ata’s book reveals many false witnesses like this. Those who spoke in favor of the suspects were not brought to court. The chairmen of the courts never charged those false witnesses, although they were sometimes revealed in court. Dr. Ata also found that some false witnesses, before bearing testimony at the court, had been trained and instructed in the “Armenian-Greek Branch” established at the offices of the British High Commissioner. What is most important to note about the decisions of these courts is that the Court of Appeal declared the verdicts null and void. Unfortunately, among such cases was the verdict of Nusret Bey, who had been executed upon his death sentence. Such facts about the nature of the post war courts-martial become more meaningful when we read that the then US high commissioner, Lewis Heck, reported on April 4, 1919 that “many here regard executions as necessary concessions to Entente rather than as punishment justly meted out to criminals,” and that “it is popularly believed that many of them are made from motives of personal vengeance or at the instigation of the Entente authorities, especially the British.” (NARA 867.00/868; M 353, roll 7, fr. 448). Lastly we should remember that England also arrested 144 outstanding politicians of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) for crimes against Armenians and took them to Malta for trial, but later released all of the detainees without charge.

(Article 5) In a series of courts-martial, officials of the Young Turks regime were tried and convicted, as charged, for organizing and executing massacres against the Armenian people.
Besides the findings of Dr. Feridun Ata, historians like Justin McCarthy and Gunter Lewy stated that post war courts-martial were a travesty of justice, the findings of these courts were unreliable, interrogations were not legal, the right of defense for the arrested was denied and the presiding officer, when questioning the defendants, often acted more like a prosecutor than like an impartial judge. As Lewy stated, “The legal procedures of Ottoman military courts, including those operating in 1919-20, suffered from serious shortcomings when compared to Western standards of due process of law.” The court did not listen to any testimony during judgment and the decisions were made by relying solely on false witnesses without considering the answers of the defense.

(Article 6) The chief organizers of the Armenian Genocide, Minister of War Enver, Minister of the Interior Talaat and Minister of the Navy Jemal were all condemned to death for their crimes; however, the verdicts of the courts were not enforced.
The courts-martial operating in the occupied Istanbul tried Enver, Talat and Cemal and convicted them to capital punishment in absentia. Yet, they were not found guilty of “organizing and performing massacres against Armenians,” as stated in the resolution, but they were found guilty of political crimes for dragging the country into a terrible war. The fact that the verdicts of the courts were not enforced has nothing to do with ignorance or being indifferent to the suffering of Armenians, but that the guilty parties had fled the country after the war. Anyhow, the untold verity about these people is that they were assassinated by a secret Armenian organization called “Nemesis” in the countries where they sought refuge. Sadly, the Nemesis organization also killed some statesmen like Sait Halim Pasha, Bahaeddin Takir and Cemal Azmi without judgment although the courts found them innocent.

(Article 7) The Armenian Genocide and these domestic judicial failures are documented with overwhelming evidence in the national archives of Austria, France, Germany, Great Britain, Russia, the United States, the Vatican and many other countries, and this vast body of evidence attests to the same facts, the same events, and the same consequences.
This is also untrue. I have personally dug out the documents preserved at the US National Archives and Research Foundation and found no concrete evidence in the documents that can be qualified for use in court. The documents in the archive contain reports by the consul and the testimony of the missionaries who were biased toward the Muslims and the Turks and reported information that they had not witnessed, but rather heard through secondary sources. It can safely be claimed that an overwhelming amount of these documents and reports are based on hearsay. There are also large amount of documents, or rather statements, from the Patriarchate and Taşnaksutyun political propaganda offices. As a matter of fact, documents and reports from the United States consuls had been examined by the officials “for any mention of forty-five Malta detainees accused of outrages against Armenians and other Christians” and found no information that could “be employed in a court of law.” Thus, one cannot help thinking that this might be the reason why the proposal of the Turkish government to set up an international committee of historians have so far been refused by the Republic of Armenia.

(Article 8) The United States National Archives and Record Administration possesses extensive and thorough documentation on the Armenian Genocide, especially in its holdings under Record Group 59 of the United States Department of State, files 867.00 and 867.40, which are open and widely available to the public and interested institutions.

The documents in the American archives have been classified under various categories. The collection that is mostly used by the Armenians as basis for their claims is from the Records of the Department of State, especially the section classified as “Internal Affairs of Turkey 1910-1929.” Most of these documents were collected with the help of the two Armenian secretaries of Ambassador Henry Morgenthau. Reports from the Armenian political propaganda offices were also included in the mentioned reports. When one studies these documents carefully, and ignores the lines of hearsay cited in the reports, he/she can gather a wealth of information about the implementation of the relocation process. For example, we learn from the reports of J. Jackson, the consul of Aleppo, that the number of Armenians who reached the city of Aleppo was up to 500,000, that these people were settled in the houses and camps in and around the city. The consul also gives lists of arrivals by sex, religion and sect.

(Article 9) Henry Morgenthau, US Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire from 1913 to 1916, organized and led protests with officials from many countries, among them the allies of the Ottoman Empire, against the Armenian Genocide he said occurred.

The use of Morgenthau’s book to support genocide claims is not a scholarly approach. Heath Lowry, a professor of history at Princeton, has documented without a shadow of a doubt that the Armenian secretaries of the ambassador changed the contents of the reports that came from towns and cities in Anatolia. As a matter of fact, there are in the archives the original documents of the reports of the missionaries and a scholarly approach requires the use of this material. An important detail about Ambassador Morgenthau is that he had never been to Anatolia and was pro-Armenian throughout his career. Adm. Bristol, who was his successor, accused him of taking sides and exaggerating the reports about the massacres. Historians specialized in American politics share the opinion that Morgenthau wrote his book in support of the Armenian National Delegation at Paris in 1919, which had been waging a campaign to persuade the Allies to carve out independent Armenian state in the eastern part of Anatolia.

(Article 10) Ambassador Morgenthau explicitly described to the United States Department of State the policy of the government of the Ottoman Empire as ‘a campaign of race extermination,’ and was instructed on July 16, 1915, by United States Secretary of State Robert Lansing that the `Department approves your procedure . . . to stop Armenian persecution.’
Such statements in Morgenthau’s report show how much he had been influenced by his interpreter, Arshag Schmavonian, and his secretary, Hagop Andonian. We must remind the reader that when the ambassador made these remarks, the relocation of Armenians had not started yet or had been implemented in a few strategic towns. It should be kept in mind that the transportation began in many eastern cities after the 1st of July. To name but few, the transportation of Armenians began in Harput on July 4 and in Yozgat on July 18. So, when Morgenthau wrote his report in July, it was very early to call the events “a campaign of race extermination.” This report is an indication of the prejudice of the consul. The quotation in the resolution must be considered in line with the wordings of the reports of the consular since at it is impossible for the US Department of State to have knowledge of the events that took place in the Near East at such an early date.

(Article 11) Senate Concurrent Resolution 12 of Feb. 9, 1916, resolved that ‘the President of the United States be respectfully asked to designate a day on which the citizens of this country may give expression to their sympathy by contributing funds now being raised for the relief of the Armenians,’ who at the time were enduring `starvation, disease, and untold suffering.’
In fact, Robert Lansing in his report dated Nov. 21, 1916 to President Wilson claimed that the Armenian deportation was due to the betrayal of the Armenians. The resolution in question aimed at initiating a relief campaign to increase America’s support to the refugees in the Armenian camps. Thus, it is obvious that resolution of Robert Lansing did not have a purpose like the resolution worded. It should be underlined that Muslim villagers were also suffering from the same conditions. Justin McCarthy in his book (”Death and Exile”) puts the losses of Muslims above 2 million, most of which were caused by epidemics and starvation. Prof. Hikmet Özdemir, in his book “March with Epidemics 1914-1918,” stated the victims to the epidemics among military personal was exactly 401,859.

(Article 12) President Woodrow Wilson concurred and also encouraged the formation of the organization known as Near East Relief, chartered by an Act of Congress, which contributed some $116 million from 1915 to 1930 to aid Armenian Genocide survivors, including 132,000 orphans who became foster children of the American people.
First, the first formation of this organization was in 1916 under the American Committee for Armenian and Syrian Relief. The US Ambassador Morgenthau had an important role in the foundation of the committee, also the most active members of this committee were missionaries and consul generals in particular.
For example the coordinator at Aleppo was Consul General J.J. Jackson. In 1919 all relief organizations in the Near East came under the umbrella of a new organization called Near East Relief. One of the most important details that were not mentioned in the resolution is that these relief organizations helped the Armenians with the help, support and permission of the Ottoman government.

In the beginning of the war the Ottoman Empire rejected aid from foreign organizations to the Armenians on the grounds that it may have “encouraged resistance against relocation orders” and that all needs of refuges were to be met by the state. However when the economic condition of the state worsened all relief organizations were given permission to work and full access to the camps. The presence of relief organizations at camps is self-evident of the fact that the empire had no intention to implement of race extermination to the Armenians as often claimed by the Armenian historians.

(Article 13) Anatolia between 1914 and 1920. During his term in Turkey as high commissioner, Admiral Mark L. Bristol wrote on March 12, 1926, about the Armenian massacres in the East, saying that “the extent of the excesses committed will never be known.”
He also noted this: “I have received reports from Americans who were there at the time to the effect that the Christians cleared out the Moslem population completely so that ‘there was not a living thing, even a dog, a cat or a chicken left in the country.’
“Russians also reported that the Armenians had killed most of the Muslims in the districts of Erzurum.” (NARA 767.90g15). Unfortunately, little scholarly attention has been paid to the atrocities committed by the Armenians.

(Article 14) The resolution followed the April 13, 1920 report to the Senate of the American Military Mission to Armenia led by General James Harbord, that stated “[m]utilation, violation, torture, and death have left their haunting memories in a hundred beautiful Armenian valleys, and the traveler in that region is seldom free from the evidence of this most colossal crime of all the ages.”
Although Gen. Harbord was a pro-Armenian person, he listened to Muslim villagers about the massacres perpetuated by the Armenian bandit Andranik and changed the tone of his report. As a matter of fact, in spite of all Armenian propaganda, Harbord argued that the US must not overtake the mandate of Armenia without the whole of Anatolia -- Rumelia, Istanbul and Caucasia included -- since Armenia alone could not survive without a large amount of money and military presence. This report seems to have played an important role in changing the attitude of the congressmen to the creation of Armenia under the American mandate.

(Article 15) As displayed in the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Adolf Hitler, on ordering his military commanders to attack Poland without provocation in 1939, dismissed objections by saying “[who], after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” and thus set the stage for the Holocaust.
To refer Adolf Hitler in the resolution (Article 15) is very deceptive. Armenian historian Dr. Robert John, American historian Heath Lowry and Turkish historian Türkkaya Ataöv have proved that this quote is false. That quote was not found in any speech delivered by Hitler or filed in the documents of Nuremberg. The court had filed two versions of Hitler’s speech to army commanders in August 22, 1939, from the German military records. These have the numbers of US-29/786 PS and US-30/1014 PS and none of these files have this quote.

(Article 16) Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term “genocide” in 1944, and who was the earliest proponent of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, invoked the Armenian case as a definitive example of genocide in the 20th century.
When Rafael Lemkin defined the crime of genocide he might have used this expression, but that does not prove anything. First of all, Lemkin was not a historian and surely he read only the Armenian version of the story. Since then, many valuable contributions have been made about the details of the relocation of the Armenians, most of which demonstrates that the relocation and settlements were not in line with the definition of the term genocide.

(Article 17) The first resolution on genocide adopted by the United Nations at Lemkin’s urging, the Dec. 11, 1946 United Nations General Assembly Resolution 96(1) and the Untied Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide itself recognized the Armenian Genocide as the type of crime the United Nations intended to prevent and punish by codifying existing standards.
This is another false claim. The UN never recognized “the Armenian Genocide.” On the contrary, a sub-committee, which gathered in 1985, refused to receive the report of Mr. Whitaker in the light of evidence against the genocide convention and that only “took note” of the report.

(Article 18) In 1948, the United Nations War Crimes Commission invoked the Armenian Genocide “precisely . . . one of the types of acts which the modern term ‘crimes against humanity’ is intended to cover” as a precedent for the Nuremberg tribunals.
This article of the resolution is based on wrong conception. First of all, it should be stated that the suspects in the Nuremberg courts were punished for crimes against humanity. In fact, the adverse of it is not possible because the genocide convention was accepted in 1951.

(Article 19) The Commission stated that “[t]he provisions of Article 230 of the Peace Treaty of Sevres were obviously intended to cover, in conformity with the Allied note of 1915 ....offenses that had been committed on Turkish territory against persons of Turkish citizenship, though of Armenian or Greek race. This article constitutes therefore a precedent for Article 6c and 5c of the Nuremberg and Tokyo Charters, and offers an example of one of the categories of ‘crimes against humanity’ as understood by these enactments.”
As explained in the previous article, Nuremberg courts were established by the Allied states to punish the defeated governments for the crimes committed in World War II. The lawsuits of those courts were not “genocide lawsuits.” Therefore, 6c and 5c articles of Tokyo agreement can never be an example for the Armenian thesis.

(Article 20) House Joint Resolution 148, adopted on April 8, 1975, resolved: "[t]hat April 24, 1975, is hereby designated as the 'National Day of Remembrance of Man's Inhumanity to Man,' and the President of the United States is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day as a day of remembrance for all the victims of genocide, especially those of Armenian ancestry."
Unfortunately, as a result of that decision taken under the influence of the Armenian propaganda, US presidents discriminate against the victims of World War I by race and religion, and only speak for Armenian losses on the Remembrance Day. It is not a civilized attitude and I believe that one should not use the victims of the wars for their political causes.

(Article 21) President Ronald Reagan in proclamation number 4838, dated April 22, 1981, stated in part “like the genocide of the Armenians before it, and the genocide of the Cambodians, which followed it -- and like too many other persecutions of too many other people --the lessons of the Holocaust must never be forgotten.”

If the fact that the speechwriter of President Ronald Reagan was Kenneth L. Khachigian is taken into account, one can understand why the president used this terminology as opposed to that of his predecessors.

(Article 22) House Joint Resolution 247, adopted on Sept. 10, 1984, resolved: “[t]hat April 24, 1985, is hereby designated as ‘National Day of Remembrance of Man’s Inhumanity to Man,’ and the President of the United States is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day as a day of remembrance for all the victims of genocide, especially the one and one-half million people of Armenian ancestry.”
Even after such a decision, it is important to note that US presidents have since then not recognized April 24 as “Armenian Genocide Day.” The resolution of the House of Representatives was certainly a political one; few of undersigned persons cared about its truthfulness.

(Article 23) In August 1985, after extensive study and deliberation, the United Nations SubCommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities voted 14-1 to accept a report entitled “Study of the Question of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,” which stated “[t]he Nazi aberration has unfortunately not been the only case of genocide in the 20th century. Among other examples, which can be cited as qualifying, are….the Ottoman massacre of Armenians in 1915-1916.”
This is one of the untrue articles of the resolution. The UN has never accepted the report of Mr. Whitaker and as we have shown below, the Subcommittee did not receive the report in question, but only “took note of.” (File E/CN.4/1986/5-E/CN.4/Feb.2/1985/57; Para.57) and instead of that, it is added to the special report as “noted” (E/CN.4/1986/5 E/CN.4/Feb.2/1985/57 page 99. Para 1). Unfortunately, we have encountered that big lie even in scientific meetings.

(Article 24) This report also explained that “[a]t least 1,000,000, and possibly well over half of the Armenian population, are reliably estimated to have been killed or death marched by independent authorities and eye-witnesses. This is corroborated by reports in United States, German and British archives and of contemporary diplomats in the Ottoman Empire, including those of its ally Germany….”
It is obvious that Mr. Whitaker’s report was prepared with the direction of Armenian historians. As a matter of fact, in the meeting of the subcommittee, US representative Mr. Carey said: “All the existing sources have not been taken into account and the matter has not been elaborated sufficiently in depth. The question of genocide has not been elucidated sufficiently.” Carey added, “He was not in a position to approve any resolution on this issue.” In the same meeting of the committee, French representative Mr. Joinet said, “The debate on Mr. Whitaker’s report is in fact a debate on history.”

(Article 25) The United States Holocaust Memorial Council, an independent federal agency, unanimously resolved on April 30, 1981, that the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum would include the Armenian Genocide in the Museum and has since done so.
This resolution cannot be taken as a proof of the international acceptance of the so-called Armenian genocide, nor does it strengthen the false Armenian thesis.

(Article 26) Reviewing an aberrant 1982 expression (later retracted) by the United States Department of State asserting that the facts of the Armenian Genocide may be ambiguous, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1993, after a review of documents pertaining to the policy record of the United States, noted that the assertion on ambiguity in the United States record about the Armenian Genocide “contradicted longstanding United States policy and was eventually retracted.”
Like other decisions that were taken without consulting the Turkish side, this resolution also is not obligatory.

(Article 27) On June 5, 1996, the House of Representatives adopted an amendment to House Bill 3540 (the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1997) to reduce aid to Turkey by $3 million (an estimate of its payment of lobbying fees in the United States) until the Turkish government acknowledged the Armenian Genocide and took steps to honor the memory of its victims.
Again this decision was taken under the pressure of the effective Armenian lobbying in the House of Representatives. Unfortunately, the politicians are not very interested in reality. In fact, Turkey has a very strict policy concerning US aid, and will not accept any stipulation of this kind in order to benefit from US aid.

(Article 28) President William Jefferson Clinton, on April 24, 1998, stated: “This year, as in the past, we join with Armenian-Americans throughout the nation in commemorating one of the saddest chapters in the history of this century, the deportations and massacres of a million and a half Armenians in the Ottoman Empire in the years 1915-1923.”
As it is seen, President Clinton talked about massacres and deportations but did not define that tragedy as “genocide.” Genocide is a crime against humanity as defined by the UN Convention of 1948. Moreover, “massacre” and “genocide” are very different terms from the perspective of law. No need to say that massacres may occur anywhere and anytime during wars.

(Article 29) President George W. Bush, on April 24, 2004, stated: “On this day, we pause in remembrance of one of the most horrible tragedies of the 20th century, the annihilation of as many as 1.5 million Armenians through forced exile and murder at the end of the Ottoman Empire.”
Again the events that took place in Anatolia between 1915 and 1923 were defined as tragedy in the speech of President Bush. A moment of silence for the victims of war is a duty for all human beings.

(Article 30) Despite the international recognition and affirmation of the Armenian Genocide, the failure of the domestic and international authorities to punish those responsible for the Armenian Genocide is a reason why similar genocides have recurred and may recur in the future, and that a just resolution will help prevent future genocides.
Unfortunately those who are saying this carried out a massacre in Hocalı in Feb. 26, 1992, deported 180,000 Azeris from the Karabag enclave and occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan’s territory. Today there are more than 1 million refugees in the city of Baku from the occupied areas and these people live in deplorable conditions
Anatolia between 1914 and 1920. During his term in Turkey as high commissioner, Admiral Mark L. Bristol wrote on March 12, 1926, about the Armenian massacres in the East, saying that “the extent of the excesses committed will never be known.”
He also noted this: “I have received reports from Americans who were there at the time to the effect that the Christians cleared out the Moslem population completely so that ‘there was not a living thing, even a dog, a cat or a chicken left in the country.’
“Russians also reported that the Armenians had killed most of the Muslims in the districts of Erzurum.” (NARA 767.90g15). Unfortunately, little scholarly attention has been paid to the atrocities committed by the Armenians.

8:23 AM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

July 16

MASSACRES OF THE TURKS BY THE Armenians

ARMENIAN REBELLIONS AND MASSACRES

THE LIST OF MASSACRES BY ARMENIANS OF TURKS IN ANATOLIA AND CAUCASIA, 1906-1922
Volume and Doc. No	Date	Place	Deaths
1/2	1914-2-21	Kars, Ardahan	30.000
1/3	1916-5-8	Pasinler	2.000
1/3	1916-5-8	Tercan	563
1/3	1916-5-8	Van, Tatvan	1.600
1/3	1915-5-9	Bitlis	40.000
1/3	1916-5-8	Bitlis	10.000
1/3	1915-5-9	Bitlis	123
1/4	1915	Van	44
1/4	1916-5-22	Van	1.000
1/4	1916-5-22	Köprüköy / Van	200
1/4	1916-5-22	Van	15.000
1/4	1916-5-22	Van	8
1/4	1916-5-22	Van	8.000
1/4	1916-5-22	Van	80.000
1/4	1916-5-22	Van	15.000
1/5	1916-5-23	Of	5
1/6	1916-5-23	Trabzon	2086
1/6	1916-5-23	Van	300
1/6	1916-5-11	Van	44.233
1/6	1916-5-11	Malazgirt	20.000
1/7	1916-6-11	Bitlis	12
1/8	1916-4-1	Van, Reşadiye	15
1/9	1916-6	Van Abbasağa	14
1/9	1916-6	Edremid, Vastan	15.000
1/10	1915-4	Bitlis	29
1/10	1915-4	Muradiye	10.000
1/11	1915-5	Van	20.000
1/11	1915-2	Haskay	200
1/11	1915-2	Dutak	3
1/12	1915-4	Van	120
1/12	1915	Van	150
1/11	1915-5	Bitlis	16.000
1/11	1916-5	Muş	500
1/12	1916-5-25	Bayezid	14.000
1/13	l 915	Muş	800
1/13	l 915-8	Müküs	126
1/13	l 915-6-7	Müküs Sehan	121
1/13	l 915-7	Muş Akçan	19
1/13	329	Muş	10
1/14	l 915	Bitlis Hizan	113
1/15	l 915	Van	5200
1/16	1916-8-14	Bitlis	311
1/19	1916-6-6	Şatak Serir	45
1/19	1916-6-6	Şatak	1150
1/23	1916-1-15	Terme	9
2/2	1919-1-25	Kars	9
2/3	1919-1-21	Kilis	2
2/4	1919-2-26	Adana, Pozantı	4
2/5	1919-5-18	Osmaniye	1
2/7	1919-6-13	Pasinler	3
2/10	1919-6-3	Iğdır	8
2/11	1919-7-7	Kars, Göle	9
2/12	1919-7-9	Kağızman	6
2/13	1919-7-9	Kurudere	8
2/16	1919-7-8	Mescidli	4
2/16	1919-7-8	Gülyantepe	10
2/22	1919-7-11	Mescidli	20
2/26	1919-7-19	Bulaklı	2
2/31	1919-7-24	Kars, Kağızman	9
2/36	1919-7	Sarıkamış	803
2/37	1919-7	Sarıkamış	695
2/38	1919/8	Muhtelif Köyler	2502
3/1	1919-7-5	Kağızman	4
3/1	1919	Tiknis, Ağadeve	5
3/1	1919-7-19	Pasinler	2
3/1	1919	Nahçıvan	4000
3/6	1919-7	Kurudere	8
3/6	1919-7-4	Akçakale	180
3/6	1919	Sarıkamış	9
3/7	1919-8-15	Erzurum	153
3/7	1919-8-15	Erzurum	426
3/14	1919-9	Allahüekber	3
3/16	1919-9-14	Sarıkamış	2
3/18	1919-11-11	Maraş	2
3/19	1919-11	Adana	4
3/19	1919-11-16	Ulukışla	7
3/22	1919-12-7	Adana	4
3/26	1920-1-22	Antep	1
3/27	1919-9	Ünye	12
3/28	1920-2-28	Pozantı	40
3/29	1920-2-10	Çıldır	100
3/32	1920-3-9	Zaruşat	400
3/33	1920-2-2	Şuregel	1350
3/35	1338-3	Maraş	4
3/36	1920-3-22	Şuregel, Zaruşat	2000
3/37	1920-3-9	Zaruşat	120
3/37	1920-3-16	Kağızman	720
3/39	1920-4-6	Gümrü	500
3/40	1920-4-28	Kars	2
3/41	1920-5-5	Kars	1774
3/46	1920-5-22	Kars	10
3/47	1920-7-2	Kars, Erzurum	408
3/47	1920-7-2	Zengibasar	1500
3/49	1920-7-27	Erzurum	69
3/50	1920-2-1	Zaruşat	2150
3/50	1920-5	Kars, Erzurum	27
3/50	1920-8	Oltu	650
3/50	1920-8	Kars, Erzurum	18
3/51	1920-10-15	Bayburt	1387
3/52	1920-10-20	Göle	100
3/53	1920-10-17	Pasinler	9287
3/54	1920-10-18	Tortum	3700
3/55	1920-10-19	Erzurum	8439
4/2	1920-10-26	Kars civarı	10693
4/3	1920-10-?8	Aşkale	889
4/4	1919-1-6	Zaruşat	86
4/5	1920-12-1	Kosor	69
4/6	1920-12-3	Göle	508
4/7	1920-12-4	Kosor	122
4/9	1920-12-4	Kars, Zeytun	28
4/10	1920-12-4	Sarıkamış	1975
4/12	1920-12-6	Göle	194
4/14	1920-12-7	Kars, Digor	14620
4/16	1920-12-14	Sarıkamış	5337
4/17	1920	Göle	600
4/17	1920	Kars	3945
4/18	1920	Haramivartan	138
4/19	1920	Nahçıvan	64408
4/20	1920-11-29	Zarcışat	1026
4/21	1921-2	Zenibasar	18
4/23	1920	Nahçıvan	5307
4/24	1920-2	Kars civarı	561
4/26	1920-12	Erivan	192
4/27	1921	Karakilise	6000
4/29	1921-11-21	Pasinler	53
4/29	1921-11-21	Erzurum	1215
4/30	1918	Hınıs	870
4/31	1918	Tercan	580
4/32	1921	Nahçıvan	12
4/33	1921	Bayburt	580
4/34	1921	Arpaçay	148

6:43 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

MASSACRES OF THE TURKS BY THE Armenians

THE LIST OF UNDETERMINED NUMBER OF INCIDENTS
Volume and Doc. No	Date	Place	Deaths
1/2	1906-2-11	Revan	The people of 25 villages
1/3	1915-5-9	Bitlis	The people of 1 village
1/3	1915-5-9	Bitlis	No. of people not known
1/4	1916-5-22	Van	No. of people not known
1/6	1916-5-23	Van	No. of people not known
1/6	1915-5-11	Trabzon	No. of people not known
1/7	1916-6-11	Bitlis	No. of people not known
1/7	1916-6-11	Van	No. of people not known
1/7	1916-6-11	Başkala	No. of people not known
1/10	1915-6-11	Van	180 Families
1/11	1915-6	Bitlis	100 Families
1/11	1915-5	Van	No. of people not known
1/11	1915-6-10	Maçka	No. of people not known
1/13	1914-12-17	Eleşkird	No. of people not known
1/13	1916-5-23	Hınıs	No. of people not known
1/13	1915-12	Muş	No. of people not known
1/13	1915-1	Muş	The people of 2 villages
1/13	1915	Elaziz	No. of people not known
1/13	1915-8	Gevaş	No. of people not known
1/13	1915-2	Şatak	9 villages
1/14	1915	Hizan	No. of people not known
1/18	1916-6-3	Diyarbakır	55
1/20	1916-5	Tercan	30 villages
2/2	1919-1-25	Ardahan	No. of people not known
2/15	1919-7-8	Gülantab	2 villages
2/20	1919-7-16	Büyük Vedi	No. of people not known
2/32	1919-7-25	Gümrü	No. of people not known
2/35	1919-7-12	Kars	1 Families
3/1	1919-7	Artvin	Several
3/1	1919-7	Bayezid	A series of people
3/4	1919-8	Nahçıvan	The people of 3 villages
3/6	1919	Sarıkamış	In large no.
3/6	1919	Sarıkamış	1 village
3/6	1919	Sarıkamış	No. of people not known
3/6	1919-8-15	Erzurum	30 Families
3/8	1919-7-12	Kars	2 Families
3/9	1919-8-12	Kars	No. of people not known
3/9	1919-8-12	Kars	All Males
3/9	1919-8-12	Kars	All people
3/9	1922-8-18	Kars	All Males
3/12	1919-8-31	Sarıkamış	All people
3/12	1919-8-31	Kağızman	No. of people not known
3/13	1919-8-18	Kağızman	No. of people not known
3/14	1919-9	Karaurgan	No. of people not known
3/16	1919-9-14	Sarıkamış	No. of people not known
3/31	1920-3-3	Kozan	In large no.
3/33	1920	Şuragel	No. of people not known
3/37	1920-3-9	Zaruşad	No. of people not known
3/37	1920-3-16	Kağızman	No. of people not known
3/47	1920-5-24	Kars Civarı	No. of people not known
3/49	1920-7-27	Oltu-Göle	All males
3/50	1920-5-24	Kars civarı	All people
4/8	1920-12-3	Kars	No. of people not known
4/23	1919	Kars civarı	a few Tents
4/23	1919-3	Kars civarı	85 Families
4/23	1919-3	Sarıkamış	The people of 1 village
4/23	1919-2	Iğdır	Hundreds
4/23	1920	Kars civarı	No. of people not known
4/26	1920-11	Erivan-Kars	No. of people not known
4/30	1918	Tekman	No. of people not known

6:42 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

APRIL 24, 1915

APRIL 24, 1915

The Ottoman government, against numerous rebellions that began after 1890 and promptly following Armenian massacres which resulted in the murder of tens of thousands of Turks, contented with informing most important persons of Armenian congregation and Armenian deputies that "Government will take the necessary precautions if Armenians continue to stab in the back and assassinate the Turks". However, it became a necessity to secure behind the borders because the army was in war at various fronts, the events did not stop but increased and assaults towards defenseless Turkish women and children increased.

With this aim, on April 24, 1915 the Armenian Committees were closed and 2345 of their directors were arrested due to the crime of carrying out activities against the government. April 24, which is commemorated annually as the "Anniversary of Armenian Massacre" by the Armenians abroad is this date when the 2345 revolutionary committee members were arrested and it has no relation with deportation.

However, the Armenian revolutionary committee members who propagandize even the unfounded events by exaggeration, promptly made a move to propagandize these mentioned arrests. As a matter of fact, Ecmiyazin Catholicos Kevork sent the telegraph below to the President of USA:

"Dear President, according to the last news we got from Turkish Armenia, the massacre began there and an organized terror endangered the presence of the Armenian people. At this critical moment, I am addressing to the noble feelings of your Excellency and great American Nation and in the name of humanity and Christianity belief requesting you to promptly interfere by means of your great Republic's diplomatic representatives and protect my people in Turkey who are left to violence of the Turkish fanaticism.

Kevork, Archbishop and Catholicos of all Armenians."

Pursuant to the telegraph of Archbishop Kevork, Russia's Washington Ambassador got in contact with USA and thus, April 24, which is the day when Armenian committee members dealing with illegal works were arrested was propagandized to world's public opinion as "the day on which Turks massacred Armenians".

6:38 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

RECOLATION (1)

RELOCATION

THE DEFINITION AND PURPOSE OF RELOCATION (TEHCIR)

The Arabic originated word “tehcir” means “emigration / immigration”, it definitely not means “deportation” or “exile”. Hence the law commonly known as the “Tehcir Law” is the same as “Temporary Law On The Military Measures To Be Taken For Those Who Resist The Governmental Acts And Supplementation’s.” The word used to explain the implementation in line with this law is “tenkil” in the Ottoman language and means “transport- not the equivalent of “deportation”, “exile” or “proscription” in Latin originated languages.

The immigration, which was started with the orders of Talaat Pasha, and approved by the Government and the Parliament as a measure against the Armenian riots and massacres, which had arisen in a number of places in the Country - pre - dominantly in Van province, was only implemented only in the regions in which such riots and massacres affected the security of the fronts directly. The first area was Erzurum, Van and Bitlis Vicinities which formed the rear part of the Caucasian - Iran Front; and the second was Mersin - Iskenderun Region which formed the rear part of the Sina Front. In both of these regions, Armenians had collaborated with the enemy and involved in activities to facilitate the enemy’s invasion.

Later, the scope of the immigration was widened in order to include the Armenians in the other provinces, who rioted, collaborated with the enemy and screened the activities of Armenian Gangs. Although the Catholic and Protestant Armenians were excluded from immigration at the beginning, later those whose harmful activities were observed, were also relocated.

Since 1915, numerous papers, reports, books, etc. were written and published about the immigration implementation. The Armenians, by using false documents have succeeded to deceit the World for a long time. The rumor about Armenian holocaust (!) which expressed at first as three hundred thousand and later increased to three million has no basis at all. In fact, although English and French authorities have extensively studied the Ottoman archives during their occupation in Istanbul have failed to find even a single document hinting about such holocaust.

Had the Ottoman State intended to make genocide on Armenians; could not they realize such an act at the places where the Armenians live? Why would it be necessary “to immigrate” them for such an intention? Why did they undertake the significant fiscal and material costs of their security, safety, health and food of the immigrating Armenians? During this immigration and re-settlement process which lasted approximately 1,5 year from May 1915 until October 1916, why would the central and local administrations take measures to ensure the lives and properties of Armenians in spite of the difficult war circumstances? In addition, would it be necessary to accept great administrative, military and financial burden —as if opening a new front- to protect and secure these people?

The answers to these questions shall be sufficient to understand the real intention of the Ottoman State. Also there is no logical explanation that why the Ottoman State suddenly changed its policy towards a community which had always been called as “millet-i sadika” (loyal people) due to their being really faithful to the Government. Hence the party whose attitude had changed was not the Ottoman Government, but the Armenians who were deceived by the independence promises of Russia and the Entente States.

In conclusion, it can be said that the Armenian Immigration which was a necessary measure to ensure the State Security and Safety is among one of the most
successful transportation and re-settlement processes; and has no intention whatsoever to annihilate Armenians.

RELOCATION

REASONS BEHIND RELOCATION

The decision regarding migration was taken under compulsion, in order to prevent the harmful acts of Armenians, who stabbed the Ottoman State that was their own state, in order to establish an independent Armenia. Documents confirm how the Russians and the Entente States deceived and provoked Armenians. (1)

The Armenians who were deceived by such promises as to be given the lands they obtained during the War and that their independence to be recognized; established a number of revolutionary societies (2). Armenians, who started their terrorist activities before the immigration process, continued these activities even during the immigration. They collaborated with the enemy both in the border areas and in the inner regions, and applied genocidal activities to the Moslem people (3).

Ottoman Government decided to compile the documents expressing the cruelties of the Armenians in a book and requested the documents and photographs of Armenian massacres (4). Those documents and photographs collected in a book and published under the title of Ermeni Komitelerinin Faaliyetleri ve Ihtilal Hareketleri/ Mesrutiyetin Ilanindan Once ve Sonra (5).

Armenian cruelties continued after the First Wold War as well. In fact, one of the most striking examples of such activities is the one committed in Nahcivan by an Armenian band of 1.200 people under the command of an Armenian named Hanov (6). Furthermore, it is understood from the telegraphs dispatched on 3 and 7 March 1920 respectively by Mümtaz Bey who was then the acting Governor of “Mamuretül Aziz” Province, that the Armenians protected by the French Forces in the region were then under the delmion of establishing an independent Armenia from Clicia to Adana provinces (7).

Upon such developments, Enver Pasha, acting Head Commander, in order to find a solution to this problem, sent the following note to Talat Pasha on May 2, 1915.

“Armenians domiciled around Lake Van, and in Van Provincial Governorate are always ready for an uprising. I think that the Armenians should be moved from these places, and centers of revolt be dissipated. According to the information given by the 3^rd Army Command, the Russians caused the Moslems within their own boundaries to immigrate over our boundaries in miserable conditions. Both as a retaliation to this act, and to ensure the aim I mentioned above, either the said Armenians should be transported into the Russian land together with their families; or they should be distributed in the various regions in Anatolia also with their families. I kindly request from you the selection of the most suitable alternative and act accordingly. However, I personally prefer that the revolting people and their families be sent beyond our borders; and Moslem people their families be re-settled in their place” (8).

With this letter, which may be accepted as the first sign of the intention of immigration process, Enver Pasha requested of dispersion of Armenians in order to avoid their uprising act. According to the said letter, it is clear that the implementations would be made only in locations where the Armenians revolted; and it was carried out accordingly.

Talat Pasha, not wishing to waste time due to the urgency and importance of the matter, initiated the re-settlement implementation without waiting for the resolution of the Parliament hence did not hesitate to undertake such a heavy responsibility by himself (9). Talat Pasha, who took first considered to start immigration of the Armenians domiciled in Van, Bitlis and Erzurum regions out of the War area. He informed Tahsin Bey, Cevdet Bey and Mustafa Abdulhalik Bey, Governors of Erzurum, Van, and Bitlis Provinces respectively on the matter by cryptic communiqués dd. May 9, 1995. Talat Pasha in his above — mentioned cryptic message communicated that the Armenians concentrated in certain regions to start revolts and uprising were decreed to immigrate towards the south, and that every possible assistance should be given to the Governors in order for this decree to be implemented. Talaat Pasha noted that a communiqué concerning the issue was sent to the Supreme Military Command to the Commanders of the 3^rd and 4^th Armies. He informed that it would be advantageous if the implementation was undertaken in areas to cover the southern part of Erzurum along with Van, the critical sub-provinces in Bitlis, and especially the vicinities of Mus, Sasun, and Talori; and requested from the Governors to immediately initiate the implementation in cooperation with the army commanders.

Furthermore, Talat Pasha issuing a cryptic communiqué to the 4^th Army Command dated 23 May 1915, listed the location requested to be evacuated as follows:

1. The provinces of Erzurum, Van ad Bitlis;

2. The subdivision of Maras excluding the city of Maras;

3. Villages and towns within the boundaries of the sub provinces of; Iskenderun, Beylan (Belen), Cisr-i Sugur and Antioch excluding the central sub province of the Province of Aleppo;

4. The sub-divisions of Adana, Mersin, Kozan and Cebel-i Bereket excluding the cities of Adana, Sis (Kozan) and Mersin;

Accordingly; Armenians evacuated from Erzurum, Van and Bitlis were decreed to be transferred to the southern part of Mousul along with the sub-division of Zor and sub-division of Urfa excluding the central city: and the Armenians evacuated from the vicinities of Adana, Aleppo and Maras to be transferred to the eastern part of the Province of Syria along with the eastern and southeastern part of the Province of Aleppo. To supervise and manage the immigration process, State Inspectors, Ali Seydi Bey and Hamid Bey were appointed to the Adana region, and to the regions of Aleppo and Maras, respectively.

It was stipulated that the Armenians arriving at the new locations of resettlement were to be settled either in the houses that they would build in the existing villages or towns; or in the villages that they would re-establish in the locations identified by the government; and that the Armenian villages were to be at least of 25 km away from the Baghdad Railway.

The protection of lives and properties of Armenians following the process of immigration, and provision of their needs such as food, drink and rest were left to the regional authorities along the transfer route. It was decreed that the immigrating Armenians to be allowed to carry along all of their belongings and arrangements about their established properties were to be prepared and submitted to the authorities concerned (11).

In order for the immigrating Armenians not to re-constitute dens of conspiracy, the Supreme Military Command communicated a letter dated 26 May 1915 to the Ministry of Interior, considering the following aspects:

1. The population of the Armenians in the locations they newly immigrated to should not be in excess of 10% of the population of the existing tribes and Moslems.

2. The villages the Armenians to be re-established should not be bigger than fifty houses each.

3. The Armenian immigrant families should not change houses either for the purposes of travel or transfer (12).

A short while after the Ministry of Interior’s measures were came in force, Russian, French and English governments issued a joint declaration stating that in the Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia, which they referred as “Armenia”, Armenians had been killed with in a month. In addition, they declared that the Ottoman Government is responsible for these events (13).

Upon the spread of the issue in international arena in this manner, Talaat Pasha, sent a communiqué dated 26 May 1915 to the Prime Ministry in order to provide a legal basis for the implementation of the immigration (14). In this communiqué, having stated that the invaders promoted discrimination among the Armenians, who were Ottoman citizens, and assisted them, in order to realize their invasory desires; that the uprising Armenians took variety of means to hinder the progress of the operation of the Turkish Army fighting against the enemy; that they abstracted the transport of food items, weapons and ammunition to the soldiers, that they collaborated with the enemy; that a group of them joined the enemy rank, and organized armed attacks against the military units and innocent civilians; that they massacred and pillaged in cities and towns; and that they provided food to the enemy navy and disclosed critical military zones to the enemy, Talaat Pasha noted that a radical measure needed to be taken for the security of the state and on this account, the Armenians rioting in war zones needed to be immigrated to other regions.

This communiqué of the Ministry of Interior was submitted immediately to the Parliament along with another communiqué written by the Prime Ministry. Talat Pasha’s statement having been reiterated in the Prime Ministry’s communiqué, it was expressed that the initiation of the immigration implementation was rightly made for the security of the state and that it was necessary to implement this policy methodically and systematically. (15) And the Parliament decreed to ratify the implementation on the some date.

In the Parliamentary decree, it was noted that it absolutely necessary to block through effective methods such harmful activities for having a negative impact on the existence and the security of the state, and that the measures by the Ministry of Interior on this account were rightfully and duly taken. Furthermore, a communiqué was issued regarding the determination of the immovable properties owned by the immigrating Armenians by a commission to be appointed, and the creation of job opportunities suitable for the conditions of the Armenians in their new locations, and the assistance to be given on the account of Immigrant’s Compensation. It was requested that an order to be written to those concerned in order to ensure the implementation of immigration securely (16).

The following communiqué dated 30 Mays 1915 sent by the Prime Ministry to the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of War and the Ministry of Finance, the regulations of implementation of the immigration were stated: (17)

a) The Armenians shall be transported to the regions allocated in a comfortable manner, ensuring the security of their lives and property.

b) Their food and drink expenses shall be covered by the Immigrant’s Compensation until they settle in their new houses.

c) Real estate and land shall be provided for them in accordance with their former financial status.

d) The government shall build houses for those in need, and provide seeds, and agricultural equipment for the farmers and agricultural experts.

e) The movables they left behind shall be delivered, and after the determination of their immovable properties settled, these shall be distributed among the Moslem immigrants to be setting in their place. Income generating from places that are not within the expertise of these immigrants such as olive, mulberry and orange groves, vineyards, shops, inns, factories and warehouse shall be either auctioned or rented and their compensations shall be recorded in deposit by savings fund to be paid to their owners.

f) Special commissions shall implement all these issues and an order shall be issued in this regard.

RELOCATION

THE TELEGRAM ATTRIBUTED TO TALAT PASHA

One of the most significant Armenian allegations regarding the immigration implementations is the telegrams, which —also allegedly- contained Talaat Pasha’s orders for killing the Armenians. However, Talaat Pasha himself has expressed in number of occasions that the measures taken with regard to Armenians have no object of massacring them in any way. In fact; in a cryptic telegraph —communiqué wired on August 29, 1915 to the Governors of Hüdaverdigar, Ankara, Konya, Izmit, Adana, Maras, Urfa, Halep, Zor, Sivas, Kütahya, Karesi, Nigde, Mamuretülaziz, Diyarbekir, Karahisar-i Sahib, Erzurum and Kayseri Provinces and sub-Provinces; the purpose of the immigration was explained as the follows (1).

“The purpose of the Government regarding the moving of Armenians from their original settlements is to prevent their anti-governmental actions; and to discourage their ambitions of establishing an Armenian State. Their massacre is completely out of question; on the contrary the safety of the groups during immigration should be ensured; and while measures for their catering should be taken, the “Immigrants Allocation” should be used to meet the cost. Armenians who are allowed to stay in their original settlements should not be re-located afterwards. As it was stated before the immigration of the dependents of military forces; protestant and catholic Armenians; and artisans (in accordance with the need) are definitely prohibited by the Government severe legal measures. Against the gendarmes and government officials who attack the immigrating groups or those who lead such attacks severe legal measures should be taken and such individuals should immediately Court-Martialled. Relevant provincial and sub-provincial authorities shall be held responsible for such events.

In another cryptic note sent to Ankara on May 27 1915 it was said that; “The measures taken by the Government regarding the Armenians are based on the necessity to ensure and protect the welfare and order of the Country. Exclusion of the Catholic and Protestant Armenians —who are at present observed as impartial at the present- from immigration, is the indication that the Government has no intention to massacre them” (2).

However, the communiqué which was issued by the Government for deporting the terrorist Armenians and their Gang leaders has been understood incorrectly in some places. Hence, several Armenian Bands, which were caught, were sent to places in which they continued their actions more freely. Upon such occurrence’s Talaat Pasha issued another communiqué on June 1, 1915, stressing that such Armenians should be transported to the places where they would not be able to continue their harmful actions, and also there deportations should be limited to the terrorists and rebels only (3).

Furthermore, in still another cryptic note dated June 13, 1915 dispatched to Mamuretüllaziz province, it was stated that the Armenians, besides those who were handed to the Court Marshall should be kept at suitable locations within the province under a previous order, hence not necessarily sent to Mousul province (4).

In a cryptic note dated June 14, 1915 which was sent to Erzurum, Diyarbekir, Mamuretülaziz and Bitlis provinces, after stressing that the Armenians should be protected during the immigration process; it was mentioned that it was natural to take measures against those who would try to flee or rebel against the gendarmes; however in no case Moslem peoples should be involved in such corrective acts; and also no opportunities should be set to start conflicts between the Moslems and Armenians.

Coming to the telegraph which is the core of the alleged claims of Armenian massacre (5).

An Armenian named Aram Andonian referred to it in his book, titled : “Memoirs of Naim Bey / Official Turkish Documents Regarding the Deportation and Massacre of the Armenians” published in London in 1920. This book was published under the titles: “Official Documents Regarding the Massacre of the Armenians”; and “The Gross Offence, the Last Armenian Massacre and Talat Pasha; the Originals of the Signed Official Telegraphs” in Paris and Boston respectively.

The telegraphs in the book, which were attributed to Talat Pasha, are false documents, which were originated to create a “massacre criminal”. As a result of the examination and research which was carried out by Messrs. Sinasi Orel and Süreyya Yuca on the subject documents a number of positive evidences, which prove the falsity of them were found. Among these evidences are: “that the person named Naim Bey — from whom the documents have been said that obtained- had never been employed in the “Celleppo Re-Settlement Department, that neither the said documents were authentic, nor the type of the papers were the same of those used in the official communication of that time; that the original counterparts were not among the Ministry of Interior documents in the Prime Ministry’s Archives; that the deed numbers on the documents could not fond in the registration logs of the relevant department; that there were some mistakes on the dates according to Mohammedan and Gregorian Calendars; that there were inconsistencies between the signatures; and there were some big grammatical and spelling mistakes in them.”

Furthermore, although it was mentioned that; “the original copies of the documents which were used in the book were kept at the Armenian Office in Manchester” since then they have persistently been concealed from the examination of the World opinion, and since their “authenticity was based on the report of the Aleppo Armenian Unit during the Ottoman times; is an important indication of the falsehood of the alleged claims of Armenian massacre.

RELOCATION

THE RELOCATION LAW

“Temporary Law on the Measures Implemented by the Military against those Opposing the Government Implementations at Wartime” also known as “Immigration Law-Tehcir Law” was resolved on 27 May 1915. (1) The Law was published in the Official Gazette of the time, Takvim-i Vekayi, on 1 June 1915 and came into force. (2)

Article 1 of the before mentioned temporary law authorizes, the commanders of the Army, Army-corps and Divisions to take military measures against those opposing government orders, country’s defense, and the protection of peace; and against those organizing armed attacks and resistance, and kill rebels during aggression and uprising in wartime. The second article authorizes the same commanders to transfer and resettle on a single basis or in mass, the people living in villages and towns who are found to be engaged in espionage or treason.

The properties owned by the Armenians subjected to immigration were protected under an order (3) dated 10 June 1915. “Commission on Abandoned Properties” comprising of a president and two members, one administrative and one financial, was established. These commissions are to determine Armenian properties in the villages and towns that are evacuated, and to keep detailed record books. One of the books is to be kept in the regional churches, one to be submitted to the regional administration, and one shall be kept by the commission. Non-durable goods and animal stock shall be auctioned and the money shall be kept. In location where a commission is not appointed, the provisions of the communiqué shall be enforced by the officers in the regions. Both the commission and the regional administrators shall be responsible for the protection of these properties until the Armenians return.

As it can be understood from the law dated 27 May 1915 and order dated 10 June 1915, the immigration implementation initiated by Talat Pasha and approved by the Parliament covers “the regions that threaten the security of the front directly”. The first of these regions includes the vicinities of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis, which constitute the background of Caucasian and Iranian fronts. The second region is provinces of Mersin-Iskenderun, which constitute the background of the Sinae front. Because, in these regions, Armenians were collaborating with the enemy and were engaged in activities facilitating the landing of the enemy forces.

However, the law regarding “the measures implemented by the military against those opposing the government implementations at wartime” is an authorizing law intended to protect the state and its legal order. One of the most important characteristics of this law is that “not a name of any ethnic group or community was mentioned nor even suggested in the text of the law”. The Ottoman citizens of Moslem, Greek and Armenian origin covered under this law were subjected to immigrate from their own place and resettle elsewhere. To regard this law as being directed against one particular ethnic group is an indication of a lack of information, or else, intentional behavior... (4)

RELOCATION

RELOCATION TAKES START

In accordance with the Law on Transport and Resettlement dated 27 May 1915, and communiqué determining the forms of implementation of this law, the Armenian convoys were gathered in certain centers along the crossroads such as Konya, Diyarbekir, Cizre, Birecik and Aleppo, to be distributed to the new settlement areas.

The immigration routes were chosen among the closest possible roads, so as immigrants not to come across any difficulties. Furthermore, the concern to ensure security and protection for the convoys played on important role in the choice of routes. Therefore, ones transferred from Kayseri and Samsun took the route via Malatya; just as the ones from Sivas, Mamuretülaziz, Erzurum and its environs took the route to Mousul via Diyarbekir-Cizre road (1). However, cases where that the roads were too crowded, or upon a possibility of disorder in sub-divisions, these routes were changed (2). The ones en route from Urfa via Re’sülayn and Nusaybin were transferred via Siverek in order to protect them from the attacks of Arabian and other tribes (3).

The convoys en route from Western Anatolia along Kütahya-Karahisar — Konya — Karaman- Tarsus were transferred via Kars-i Maras — Pazarcik to Zor. (4) Locations with railroad and river — transportation facilities were preferred in choosing all these routes. The idea that travel by train or the river travel were the safest ways then, played an important role in this choice. Therefore, almost all the immigrants from Western Anatolia were transported by train (5). Convoys transferred via Cizre road were also carried by train or river boats called “Sahtur”. (6) In places where train or river transports were not available, the convoys were gathered at certain centers, and took the train from these centers.

The state used all its resources available, to implement an orderly immigration process, and to prevent the convoys from any possible harm, in spite of circumstances that prevailed due to war. However, there arose difficulties at times to find vehicles transporting immigrants due to the need to dispatch military and food items to the front continuously. Therefore, railway stations were congested. It being harvest season the vehicles were scarce, which caused delays in transportation at times, (7) as well as difficulties in the movement of the convoys. In spite of all these difficult circumstances and adverse conditions, the government succeeded, in an orderly fashion, to transport the immigrating Armenians to their new locations of resettlement.

In fact, US Consul in Mersin, Edward Natan, in his report dated 30 August 1915, submitted to the Ambassador Morganthau, stated that the railway route from Tarsus to Adana was full of Armenians; and that they traveled from Adana onwards with a ticket; and despite some difficulties due to crowds of people, the government organized this process in the most orderly fashion; and that the Government did not allow any act of violence or disorder, provided sufficient number of tickets to the immigrants and assisted those who were in need. (9).

RELOCATION

REGIONS THE ARMENIANS WERE MOVED TO AND FROM

The regions Armenians evacuated and resettled in were stated in the cryptic message dated 23 May 1915 by Talat Pasha sent to the 4^th Army Command. In his aforementioned cryptic message, having provided the information regarding the Armenians to be transported to other provinces, Talat Pasha communicated that it would be suitable for the Armenians evacuated from the provinces of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis to be resettled in the Southern part of the province of Mousul, and in the sub-division of Zor and in the sub-division of Urfa excluding the Central City; and also those evacuated from the vicinities of Adana, Aleppo and Maras, to be resettled in the Eastern part of the province of Syria along with the Eastern and Southeastern part of the province of Aleppo.

However, due to the fact that Armenian rebellions and massacres went on; and order dated 5 July 1915 was sent to the provinces of Adana, Erzurum, Bitlis, Aleppo, Diyarbekir, Syria, Sivas, Trabzon, Mamuretülaziz and Mousul, to the Office of the President of” Commission on Abandoned Properties in Adana”,. And to the Governors of the Subdivisions of Zor, Maras, Canik, Kayseri and Izmit; and it was stated that the regions allocated for the resettlement of Armenians were broadened upon need.

Accordingly, the following shows how the region where Armenians were transported and resettled, was determined ensuring that the Armenian population should not exceed 10% of the Moslem population:

1. The eastern and southern regions of the province of Mousul including the villages and towns in the subdivision of Kerkük 80 km from Iranian border;

2. East and south of the sub-division of Zor including the settlements in Habur and Euphrates River valley, 25 km within the Diyarbekir boder;

3. Villages and towns in the east, south and south-west of the province of Aleppo, excluding the northern part; towns and villages 25 km away from the railway route including the sub-divisions of Havran and Kerek in the province of Syria.(*)

6:37 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

RELOCATION (2)

RELOCATION

ARMENIAN POPULATION SUBJECTED TO RELOCATION

The numbers of the Armenians, subjected to relocation was controlled from their departure until their arrival, between June 9, 1915 and February 8, 1916. The figures below are taken from pertinent Ottoman documents (1)

.	Transferred	Remained
Adana (2)	14.000	15-16.000
Ankara (Central)(3)	21.236	733
Aydin(4)	250	-
Birecik(5)	1.200	-
Diyarbakir(6)	20.000	-
Dörtyol(7)	9.000	-
Erzurum(8)	5.500	-
Eskisehir(9)	7.000	-
Giresun(10)	328	-
Görele	250	-
Aleppo(11)	26.064	-
Haymana(12)	60	-
Izmir(13)	256	-
Izmit(14)	58.000	-
Kal’acik(15)	257	-
Karahisari sahib(16)	5.769	2nd 222
Kayseri(17)	45.036	4.911
Keskin	1.169	-
Kirsehir(18)	747	-
Konya(19)	1.900	-
Kütahya(20)	1.400	-
Mamuretülaziz(21)	51.000	4.000
Maras(22)	-	8.845
Nallihan	479	-
Ordu	36	-
Persembe	390	-
Sivas(23)	136.084	6.055
Sungurlu	576	.
Sürmene	290	.
Tirebolu	45	.
Trabzon(24)	3.400	.
Ulubey	30	.
Yozgat(25)	10.916	.
TOTAL	422.758	32.766
.	.	.

On the other hand, in the telegraph sent by the Director of Immigrants and Tribe Placement, Sükrü Bey on October 18^th 1915, notified that “the number of the Armenians transported to Aleppo was about 100.000, among these, 25.000 were settled in Rakka and Zor, 3000 were settled in the south of Aleppo and the remaining would be settled in Kerek and Havran surroundings (26).

Meanwhile, it is understood from the records that an Armenian population of 120.000 people gathered in Diyarbekir as of September 18^th 1915 and an Armenian population of 136.084 people gathered in Cizre as of September 28^th 1915 to be sent to Musul and Zor region (27). In a coded telegraph sent by Sükrü Bey from Nizip on November 3, 1915, it is expressed that transportation continued in a regular manner (28).

Among the population included as the displaced population in the list given herein above, but indicated not to have been transported yet, the ones in Adana have been transported to the new settlement regions later (29). Hence, the transported population and the population reaching the settlement region seem to be almost equal. The total of the immigrated population is 438.758 and the population safely arrived to new settlements is 382.148. (30)

RELOCATION

ARMENIAN CASUALTIES DURING RELOCATION

The number of Armenians who were made to migrate through various means was strictly controlled, both at departure, and at the arrival of a convoy to its new destination. According to figures taken from pertinent documents of the Ottoman Archives: A total of 438.758 people were relocated and 382.148 of these safely reached their new destinations. As can be seen, the number of casualties had occurred as follows: 500 people on the road between Erzurum and Erzincan; 2000 in Meskene, between Urfa and Aleppo and 2000 others on the outskirts of Mardin were massacred in attacks launched by bandits or nomadic Arabs. Another 5000 people were killed in attacks on convoys passing through Dersim. It was understood from these documents that many people had also fallen victim to hunger while on the road. Apart from these, some 25-30 thousand people had lost their lives when struck by fatal diseases such as typhoid and dysentery. In all, an estimated 40 thousand casualties had been registered during relocation.

The remaining 10-16 thousand people were made at stay in provinces they had reached, when the implementation of relocation was brought to an end. For instance, on April 26, 1916, orders were given to provide the return to and the settlement in the province of Konya of those Armenians setting out form the province to new destinations. On the other hand, many other Armenians are believed to have fled to either Russia or to Western countries, including the Unites States.

As a matter of fact, according to the pertinent documents, 50.000 of the Armenian soldiers serving in the Ottoman Army joined the Russian forces, and some other 50.000 Armenian soldiers went to America to be trained in the US Army to fight against the Turkish Army. In fact, the letter of an Armenian called Murad Muradyan- who was an advocate in Elazig later immigrated to America — shows such information. In the concerned letter, Muradyan mentions that some Armenians were escaped to Russia and America and later 50.000 of those trained soldiers went to Caucassia. As it can be understood from all the concerned documents, many of Armenian subjects of the Ottoman State were scattered through various countries especially to U.S.A. and Russia, before and during the war. For example, Artin Hotomyan who was a tradesman in America sent a letter to the Chieftain of Security on January 19, 1915 and stated that thousands of Armenians migrated to U.S.A. and they were facing with hunger and hardships.

All the documents clarify that there had not been a genocide occurred during relocation.

RELOCATION

ATTACKS ON ARMENIAN CONVOYS AND MEASURES TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT

Some Armenians have died as the result of the attacks made to some companies during the movement of Armenians towards their new settlement regions, especially by the Arabic tribes between Aleppo - Zor and Armenian committee member Urban. As understood from a coded telegraph dated January 8^th 1916, the attacks on the roads between Aleppo and Meskene resulted in the death of many Armenians, (1) and that approximately 2.000 of the Armenians moving from Diyarbekir to Zor and from Saruc to Halep through Menbic road were robbed by the Urban tribes (2).

Again in Diyarbakir region, it has been notified that the gangs and the bandits killed almost 2.000 people including Armenians and Non - Muslims. Upon this event, it has been notified severely that such events should be immediately stopped and peace should be absolutely provided on the route of the companies, otherwise that province would be held responsible for the actions of the bandits. (3)

A coded telegraph sent to Diyarbekir, Mamuretülaziz and Bitlis provinces on June 14^th 1915 informing that another company of 500 people were killed as the result of the Kurd attacks between Erzurum — Erzincan road. Upon this event, the use of any kind of instruments against the attacks of the villagers and the tribes and severe punishment of the ones attempting murder and usurpation had been ordered. (4)

The Ottoman government has shown extra ordinary efforts for providing food and the security of the companies while fighting against the enemy. It has shown great sensitivity about the murders and robberies, to which Armenians have been subjected to and tried to provide the safe performance of this transportation. With the instructions written to the administrations in the provinces, to which the transportation was made, the ones attacking the Armenian companies have been punished. The government, following up the precautions taken about this issue, has asked how many were punished harmed to the Armenian convoys, in the coded telegram it sent to Erzurum, Adana, Ankara, Halep, Hüdavendigar, Diyarbekir, Sivas, Trabzon, Konya, Mamoretülaziz provinces and Urfa, Izmit, Zor, Karesi, Kayseri, Kütahya, Maras, Karahisar administrators on September 5 1915. (5)

On the other hand, Investigation Commissions have been established for determining the officers, who showed reluctance or unlawful actions during the transportation of the Armenian companies. A commission consisting of Muhtar Bey, Ankara Province civil service investigator, and Kaymakam Muhiddin Bey, Izmir Gendarme Regional Investigator under the chairmanship of Asim Bey, first chief of Interrogation Court has been sent to Adana, Halep, Suriye, Urfa, Zor and Maras regions (6) and a commission to which Ismail Hakki Bey, member of State Council has also participated, under the chairmanship of Hulusi Bey, chairman of Court of Appeal has been sent to Hüdavendigar, Ankara, Izmit, Karasi, Kütahya, Eskisehir, Kayseri, Karahisar-i sahib and Nigde regions. (7)

A third commission consisting of Nihad, Public Prosecutor of Istanbul Court of First Instance and Ali Naki Bey, a Gendarme Major under the chairmanship of Mazhar Bey, former governor of Bitlis has been appointed in Sivas, Trabzon, Erzurum, Mamuretülaziz, Diyarbekir, Bitlis and Canik regions. In a coded confidential telegraph sent to Mazhar Bey, who was the chairman of this commission and was in Sivas at that time, the commission has been requested to carry out the necessary investigations at the locations they visited and then to report the results of such investigations continuously to the center. (8)

In accordance with the instructions given to the commissions, gendarme, police officers or directors would be sent to the Court Martial in accordance with the result of the investigation to be carried out about them. A list of the ones sent to the Court Martial would be given to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The results of the investigations to be carried out about the governors and district governors would be first submitted to the Ministry of Internal affairs and the transactions would be carried out in accordance with the order given. If there occurred any misuse among the Court Martial chairmen or members and military officers, those people would be notified to the related army commanderships.

In the light of the reports given by the investigation commissions, many officers misusing their duties (stealing money and goods from the companies, causing the companies be subject to violation because of not performing their protection duties as required, acting in violation of the transportation order) have been discharged. Some of them have been judged at the Court Martial and have been sentenced to heavy punishments. (9)

RELOCATION

ARMENIANS NOT SUBJECTED TO RELOCATION

The relocation decision has not been applied to all Armenians. At the beginning, a part of the Armenians living in the regions (In Urfa, Germis and Birecik, Erzurum, Aydin, Trabzon, Edirne, Canik, Cannakkale, Adapazari, Halep, Bolu, Kastamonu, Tekirdag, Konya and Karahisar-i sahib) have been kept out of the scope of migration. (1) But, thereafter, when it has been certain that these people were also involved in various severity events, majority of them been subjected to migration. (2) The ill and the blind were not subjected to relocation and the Catholic and the Protestant ones, the soldiers and their families, the officers, merchants, some workers and masters were not subject to migration, either. Likewise, in the telegraphs sent to the provinces, it is requested not to move the ill, the blind, the disabled and the old and to settle them in the city centers. (3)

With the telegraphs sent to the related provinces on August 2, 1915 and August 15^th 1915, it has been ordered not to subject the Armenians from the Catholic and Protestant sects to migration and to settle them in the cities they were currently in and to notify the number of their population. (5) The ones that have been subjected to migration by mistake have been settled in the cities they were currently in. (6). But among the ones that were kept out of the scope of migration, the ones that were observed to have harmful actions have been sent to new settlement regions regardless of their being Catholic or Protestant. (7)

In the coded telegraph sent to the provinces on August 15 1915, the Armenians providing service as officers and health personnel in the Ottoman army and their families have not been subjected to migration and left at their locations. (8) Besides this, the Armenians working in the branches of Ottoman Bank, in the Turkish Tobacco Monopoly and in some consulates have not been subjected to relocation, either, as long as they remained loyal to the government and their good behavior continued.

Furthermore, orphans and widowed women have not been subjected to migration and have been taken under protection in the villages and orphanages. (10) The children, who became orphans during the transportation have been sent to Sivas and settled in the orphanages there. (11) A general order was issued on April 30, 1916 about the Armenian families needing protection. With this order, the families with no guardians, whose male members either were transported or were in military service, were settled in the villages and towns, where there were no Armenians and their catering were met from the Immigrants’ Allowance. The children up to 12 were given to Muslim families at locations, where the orphanages were not sufficient and their education and development have been provided. 30 kurush was paid to the poor Muslim families to meet the expenses of the children from the Immigrants’ Allowance. Young and widowed women were permitted to marry Muslim men with their own will. (12)

RELOCATION

MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS AND EXPENSES OF RELOCATED ARMENIANS

The Government has written notices to all provinces before beginning the Armenian relocation and requested them to take precautions to meeting all needs of the companies that would pass through their regions and to stock food. (1)

Various orders have been given to Immigrant and Tribe Settling Directorate for food — beverage provision. (2) Sükrü Bey, the Immigrant and Tribe Settling Director was individually in charge for the determination and provision of the needs. (3) It is understood from the documents that a total of 2.250.000 kurus has been allocated to meet the needs of the companies and of this amount, 400.000 kurus has been allocated to Konya, 150.000 to Izmit province subdivision, 200.000 to Eskisehir province subdivision, 300.000 to Adana province, 300.000 to Halep province, 100.000 to Syria province, 300.000 to Ankara province, (4) 500.000 to Mousul province. (5)

Furthermore, the provinces could aid the immigrants from their own budgets and sometimes new money allocations were sent from the center in accordance with the condition of needs. (6) Meanwhile, a certain amount of money sent from America to be given to Armenian immigrants has been distributed to the Armenians under the knowledge of the government, by the American missioners and consuls. (7) Besides this, it has been understood that some Armenians living in America have secretly sent the money they collected among themselves to the Armenians subjected to immigration. (8)

The Ottoman Government, while spending such great amounts of money for relocation on one hand, either delayed or completely canceled the debts owed either to the state or individuals of the Armenians subjected to migration. Likewise in a coded telegraph sent by Talat Pasha to Maras Governor on June 1, 1915, he requested not to take back the debts of Armenians and in another order sent to all provinces on August 4^th 1915, the tax debts of the displaced Armenians were postponed (9).

On the other hand, health officers have been assigned to the migrating companies for providing therapy in case of illness. (10) Furthermore, the legal proceedings about the criminal suspects, who were among the ones subjected to migration, were delayed. (11)

RELOCATION

PROPERTIES OF THE ARMENIANS SUBJECTED TO RELOCATION

With an order issued on June 10, 1915, the properties of the Armenians subjected to displacement have been taken under protection. In accordance with the order, it has been decided to sell the properties by auction that may decay and the animals or the production houses that must be operated, by the commissions that were established and by auction and to send the money to their owners.

It is understood that the Ottoman Government showed great care in the implementation of this order. In order to prevent any misuse, a great care has been shown. Through the Commission on Abandoned Property, the money coming through the auction in the names of their owners was paid to the owners of such property. (1) When there was some gossip was made during these sales, the government has sent a coded telegraph to the governors, provinces and Commissions on Left Properties on August 3^rd 1915 and forbidden the purchase of those properties by the state officers because this could lead to some misuses. (2) But, thereafter, this decision has been canceled in some province on the condition of paying the real value with cash. (3)

The government has taken all precautions in order to prevent any kind of unlawful actions. Likewise, in a coded telegraph sent to the Chairmanship of Commission on Abandoned Property of Sivas on August 11^th 1915, it has been requested to take the precautions that would prevent profiteering and misuses. (4) Again on the same date, with an order sent to all provinces, the precautions to be taken and the applications to be performed about this issue were indicated in the form of articles (5)

In accordance with this order: “no suspected person would be permitted to enter the evacuated regions; in case some people have purchased properties against cheap prices, the sales would be canceled and the real value of the property would be determined so that illegal interests would be prevented; the displaced Armenians would be permitted to take any goods they want with themselves; among the goods that can not be carry away like, the ones that would decay would be sold, but the goods that would not decay would be protected in the name of their owners; care would be paid not to lose touch with the owner of the immovable assets that would be hired, transferred and pledged and if there was any applications carried out in violation of these provisions starting from the date of commencement of the migration, they would be canceled; that no disputes would be allowed about such goods; the Armenians subjected to migration would be permitted to sell their properties to anybody except the foreigners” (6)

The provisions in these orders were applied with great care and the art and commerce enterprises that remained from the Armenians were transferred in high prices to settlement companies, which were established, their real value. (7) The Commission on Abandoned Property has sent the money from sold properties to their owners. (8)

6:34 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

RELOCATION (3)

RELOCATION

THE RETURN OF RELOCATED ARMENIANS

The migration was sometimes stopped during relocation both due to the weather conditions and congestion. Starting from November 25, 1915, with the orders sent to the provinces, the migration has been provisionally interrupted due to winter. (1) On February 21^st 1916, an order was sent to all provinces to stop the Armenian relocation. However, it has been indicated that this would not cover the harmful people, the ones related with the committees would be immediately collected and sent to Zor province subdivision. (2)

Upon the administrative and military necessity, a general order was sent stating that as of March 15^th 1916, the Armenian migration was stopped and no relocation would be made for any reasons thereafter. (3)

After the completion of relocation, since the Armenians were mostly settled mostly in Syria province, the Armenian Patriarchy in Istanbul was closed on August 10^th 1916 and moved to Jerusalem. Sis and Akdamar Cathogicospacies were united and moved to Jerusalem. (4) The chairmanship of the newly established patriarchy has been given to Sis Cathogicospos Sahak Efendi. (5)

Following the end of the 1^st World War, Ottoman Government has issued a decree for the return of the Armenians subjected to relocation to their former locations. In the letter sent by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Mustafa Pasha to the Prime Ministry on January 1919, it is indicated that orders have been given to the related places for the transportation of the Armenians, who wanted to return, to their former locations and that the necessary precautions have been taken. (6) The decree of return prepared by the government, dated December 31^st 1918 is as follows:

1- Only the ones, who want to return, will be migrated, except those people, no one else will be touched.

2- The precautions necessary will be taken for assuring a good journey, and for preventing housing and catering shortage in the returning locations; the migration and returning transactions will be started after contact is established with the administrators of the regions they will return to and after the necessary precautions are taken.

3- The abandoned houses and lands will be returned to the owners.

4- The houses of the ones, where formerly immigrants have been placed, will be evacuated.

5- A few families may be settled in the same location temporally in order to provide sufficient housing.

6- Buildings such as churches, schools and the income generating locations will be returned to the society they belong to.

7- If requested, the orphans will be returned to their guardians, who will be carefully determined, or to their societies, after their identifications are carefully determined.

8- The ones, who have converted their religions, will be able to return to their former religion if they want to.

9- Among the Armenian women, who have married to Muslims and converted their religions will be free to return to their former religion. In this case their marriage act will be automatically canceled. The problems relating to the ones, who do not want to return to their former religion and not wish to divorce from their husbands will be dissolved by the courts.

10- The Armenian properties, which are not in anyone’s ownership, will be returned to their first owners and the return of those which have become the property of treasury will be decided with the approval of the property officers. Further explanatory minutes will be prepared about this issue.

11- The property sold to the Muslim immigrants will be delivered to their first owners gradually as their owners return. Article 4 will be definitely applied.

12- If the Muslim immigrants have made repairs and additions in the houses and stores that will be returned to their former owners, or if they have planted the lands and olive groves, the rights of both sides will be observed.

13- The immigration and expenses of the Armenians in need will be met from the Military College Allowance.

14- The amount of transportation made until the current time and the amount of transportation made and the target location of such transportation will be notified on the fifteenth and last days of each month.

15- The Armenians, who have left the Ottoman borders and who want to return, will not be accepted until a new order is issued.

The provisions of the decree explained herein above were valid for the Greek immigrants as well as the Armenians.

RELOCATION

REPERCUSSIONS ABROAD REGARDING RELOCATION

Although the foreign observers, who were at the locations of relocation, wrote that the Ottoman Government’s performance was perfect and done with care in spite of war conditions, the western press preferred to mislead the events. Likewise, although Edward Natan, the consul of America in Mersin, reported that relocation has been carried out regularly, (1) the Ambassador of U.S.A. in Istanbul, Morgantau, has related the events in a completely opposite way to his country and the American press has used these events against Turks. According to the claims issued in the newspapers, Morgantau bribed the Ottoman Government and purchased some Armenians to send them to America; furthermore he has saved some English, Russian and French citizens in Istanbul. A Turkish citizen in U.S.A. reported all these lies and false information used by the press on September 14^th 1915 (2).

In the frame of the reports of English consuls in Iran, claims such as killing of 1.000.000 Armenians was discussed in the English Parliament and the parliament decided to protest the Turkish Government. Furthermore, the “Blue Book” published about the Armenian events in England included news claiming that over a third of 1.800.000 Armenians claimed to exist in the Ottoman country were murdered. (3)

Against those ill — willed publications, some objective Western press members have reported that the events were falsely communicated on purpose. In an article issued in a Stockholm newspaper which uses the headline “Massacre in the Ottoman Province, Where the Armenians live”, the absurdity of such claims and the reasons for creating such false news were explained. (4)

The Ottoman Government has declared the English claims to be false on January 4^th 1917 with the signature of the Undersecretary of Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (5) In the denial letter, it has been expressed that the Armenian population living in the Ottoman country has never reached 1.000.000, that this amount has decreased due to the migrations that took place before the war and the claims were denied. In the same document, it was pointed out that the Germans were held responsible for the murders of Armenians in an article of a certain issue of the “Times”.

RELOCATION

INVESTIGATIONS CONDUCTED BY FOREIGNERS ABOUT AND THEIR OUTCOME

Just after the First World War, following the invasion of Istanbul and other regions by the entente states’ armies, hundreds of political and military leaders and Ottoman intellectuals were sent to and imprisoned in Malta Island by the English, with the claim that they were “war criminals”. Comprehensive investigations have been carried out on the Ottoman archives for finding evidences of crime about the people imprisoned in Malta. As the result of these investigations, no evidence could be submitted to the court neither against the Istanbul government of that time nor about the people imprisoned in Malta in order to prove the accusations on them. The English Court has made desperate investigations in their own archives and in the archives of USA government in Washington, but again no results could be reached.

In the same way, in the message found in the USA archive reports, sent by R.C. Craigie, the English Ambassador in Washington to Lord Curzon on July 13^th 1921, the following is expressed:

“I am sorry to notify you that there is nothing that can be used as evidence against the Turks imprisoned in Malta. There is nothing that will provide sufficient evidence. These reports do not seem to include even the evidences that may be helpful in supporting the information that is currently held by the Majesty’s Government about the Turks in any way.” (1)

On July 29^th 1921, the Legal Consultants of the King in London decided that the accusations directed to the people in the list of the English Foreign Affairs had a semi — political characteristic and therefore the transactions to be carried out about them should be held separate from those of the Turks, who have been arrested as war criminals.

Furthermore, the expressions “Until now, no deposition has been obtained from any witness proving the accusations made about the arrested are true. In fact, it is not definite if a witness will be found or not; since in a country that is far and difficult to reach like Armenia and especially after such long time, it is even unnecessary to express how difficult it is to find a witness” (2) belongs to the Legal Consultants of His Majesty’s Government.

Consequently, the people, who were under arrest in Malta, were set free in 1922 without any accusation directed to them and without any cases held.

During that time, some documents accusing the Ottoman Government of a so — called genocide and trying to evidence this issue was published by the English press. These documents were claimed to have been found in the Ottoman State Offices in Syria by the English Invasion Forces under the direction of General Allenby. However, the interrogations carried out thereafter by the English Foreign Affairs Ministry showed that these were not documents obtained by the English army, but false documents written by the Nationalist Armenian Delegation in Paris to the allied delegations.

RELOCATION

THE STANCE TAKEN BY SCHOLARS TO ALLEGATIONS OF GENOCIDE

The scientists, who perceive the history within the scientific principles, have reached the original copies and documents relating to the issue since 1925 until today, have listened to living witnesses and have made individual observations at the locations of the events. These are the scientists, who knew that the Ottoman archives were open to the researchers since 1925 and who themselves reached the documents. Therefore, only those who are as knowledgeable on this issue as they can comment on or can object to their views. For this reason, the report submitted by 69 American scientists to the members of the Assembly of Representatives in relation with the issue has great importance. (1)

“To the attention of the Members of USA Assembly of Representatives

The Turkish, Ottoman researches and the American Academicians specialized in Middle East, whose signatures are put hereunder, have agreed that the language used in decree number 192 by USA Assembly of Representatives is misleading and / or wrong in many points.

“Although we fully support the concept of “National Day of Commemorating Inhuman Behaviors”, we find the following part, in this text, unacceptable:

…. 1.5 million Armenian — originated people, who have been the victims of the genocide made in Turkey between 1915 and 1923 …”

Our disagreement focuses on the use of he words “Turkey” and “genocide” and may be summarized as follows:

From the 14^th century until 1922, the area, which is called Turkey, more correctly as the “Republic of Turkey” today, was a part of the Ottoman Empire, which was a multi — religion and multi — national state. Just as it is wrong to accept the Habsburg Empire to be equivalent to the Republic of Austria of today, it is also wrong to accept the Ottoman Empire to be equivalent of to the Republic of Turkey. The Ottoman Empire, which exited from the history stage in 1922 with the Turkish Revolution gave birth to the establishment of current Republic of Turkey in 1923, was a state, which kept the lands of more than 25 states, over Southeastern Europe, Northern Africa and Middle East. The Republic of Turkey was only one of them can not be held responsible for any events that happened in the Ottoman period. But the ones, who have written the decree, wanted to give the responsibility of the “genocide” between 1915 and 1923 to Turkey by using the name “Turkey”.

As for the genocide accusation, no one, who has signed this paper, have the purpose of underrating the dimensions of the pains that the Armenians have suffered. Likewise, we have the opinion that the pains of the Muslim public in the mentioned region can not be assessed in any other way. The evidences put forward until now point out that an internal war between the communities (between the Muslim and Christian groups) has become more complex with the hunger, epidemics and the massacres and pains in and around Anatolia during the first World War. In fact, during those years, a continuous war has been suffered in the region that is not so different from the tragedy going on in Lebanon in the last decade. The losses of both the Muslim and the Christian nations are big numbers. However, there are many documents and findings that the historians must reach in order to determine the reasons of the events that resulted in the death of the Eastern Anatolian public, which includes many Christians as well as Muslims.

History is created by the statesmen and the politicians and it is written by the scientists. For the operation of this process, the scientists must be given the chance to reach the written records of the former statesmen and politicians. Until now, a big part of the archives related with this issue in the Soviet Union, Syria, Bulgaria and Turkey have been kept closed to the historians. Until these archives are reached, the history of the Ottoman Empire between 1915 — 1923 in the scope of the decree of the Assembly of Representatives numbered 192 can not be completely known.

We believe that USA Congress should encourage the full opening of the history archives relating to the issue and should not make any accusations until the historical events are fully brought into light. The accusations such as the ones in the decree number 192 of the Assembly of Representatives would unavoidably result in unfair decisions about Turkey and maybe damaging the improvement, which the historians started to record in understanding these tragic events.

As shown by the comments herein above, the history of the Ottoman — Armenians is an issue that is frequently debated among the historians and many of the historians do not share the expressions in the decree number 192. In case the congress adopts this decree, it will have tried to decide which part of the historical problem is true through laws. Such a decision basing on assumptions that are historically doubtful gives harm to the honest historical research and damages the reliability of the American legislation process.

May 19 1985

Prof. Dr. Rifaat Abou — El — Haj History, California State University	Prof. Roderic Davison History, George Washington University
Ass. Prof. Sarah Moment Atis Turkish Language and Literature, Wisconsin University	Distinguished Prof. Walter Denny Art History and Near East Researches, Massachussets University
Ass. Prof. Darl Barbir History, Siena Institution (New York)	Dr. Alan Duben Anthropologist, Researcher, New York
Ilhan BASGÖZ Ural — Altay Studies Division, Turkish Researches Program Director, Indiana University	Ass. Prof. Ellen Ervin Turkish Researches, New York University
Prof. Daniel G. Hates Anthropology, New York City University	Prof. Caesar Farah Islam and Middle East History, Minnesota University
Prof. Ülkü Bates Art History, New York City University	Prf. Carter Findley History, Ohio State University
Prof. Gustav Bayerle Ural — Altay Studies, Indiana University	Prof. Michael Finefrock History, Charleston Institution
Prof. Andreas G. E. Bodroglifetti Turkish and Iran Languages, California University	Ass. Prof. William Hickman Turkish, California Berkeley University
Ass. Prof. Kathleen Burril Turkish Researches, Columbia University	Ass. Prof. Frederick Latimer History, Utah University
Prof. Alan Fisher History, Michigan University	Prof. John Hymes History, Glenville State Institution
Prof. Timothy Childs Teacher, Johns Hopkins University	Dr. Health W. Lowry Turkish Research Institution Inc. Washington D.C.
Prof. Shafiga Daulet Political Science, Connecticut University	Prof. Halil Inalcik Ottoman History, American Art & Science Academy Member, Chicago University
Ass. Prof. Ralph Jaeckel Turkish, California University	Ass. Prof. Ezel Kural Shaw History, California University
Ass. Prof. Ronald Jennings History & Asian Researches, Illinois University	Prof. John Masson Simth, JR History, California Berkeley University
Ass. Prof. Cornell Fleischer History, Washington University	Dr. Svat Soucek Turkologist, New York
Prof. Peter Golden History, Rutgers University	Dr. Philip Soddard Middle East Institute Director, Washington D.C.
Prof. Tom Goodrich History, Indiana University	Prof. Frank Tachau Political Science, Chicago, Illinois University
Dr. Andrew Could Ottoman History, Arizona, Flagstaff	Robert Staab Middle East Center Vice Director, Utah University
Prof. William Griswold History, Colorado State University	Prof. Rhoads Murphey Middle East Languages, Cultures and History, Columbia University
Prof. Tibor Halasi — Kuv Turkish Researches, Columbia Professor	Ass. Prof. June Starr Anthropology, Suny Stony Brook
Distinguished Prof. J.C. Hurewitz Former Director of Middle East Institute, Columbia University	Prof. James Stewart Robinson Turkish researches, Michigan University
Prof. Avgdorlevy History, Brandens University	Prof. Thomas Naff History, Middle East Researches Institute Director, Pennsylvania University
Prof. Bernard Lew’is Middle East History, Princeton University	Ass. Prof. John Woods Middle East History, Chicago University
Ass. Prof. Justin Mc Carthy History, Louisville University	Prof. Pierre Oberling History, New York CityUniversity
Prof. Jon Mandaville Middle East History, Portland State University	Ass. Prof. Madeline Zilfi History, Maryland University
Prof. Michael Meeker Anthropology, California University	Prof. Metin Tamkoc International Law, Texas Tech. University
Ass. Prof. James Kelly Turkish, Utah University	Prof. Stanford Shaw History, California University
Ass. Ass. Prof. Kerim Bey Southeastern University	Dr. Elaine Simth Turkish History, Retired Foreign Affairs Officer
Prof. Metin Kunt Ottoman History, New York	Ass. Prof. David Thomas History, Rhode Island Institute
Ass. Prof. William Ochsenwald History, Virginia Polytechnic Institute	Ass. Prof. Grace M. Simth History, California Berkeley university
Ass. Prof. Robert Olson History, Kentucky University	Ass. Prof. Margaret L.Venzke History, Dickinson Institute (Pennsylvania)
Ass. Prof. William Peachy Jewish and Near East Languages & Literatures, Ohio State University	E. Prof. Donald Webster Turkish History
Ass. Prof. Donald Quataert History, Houston University	Prof. Walter Weiker Political Science, Rutgers University
Prof. Howard Reed History, Connecticut University	Prof. Warren S .Walker English, Turkish Oral Stories Archive Director, Texas Tech. University
Prof. Dank Wart Rustow Political Science, New York City University

Invitations have been made by Turkey at different times in order to discuss the correctness of the documents put forward by the Armenians and the Armenian pretensions supported by the Western European Countries and Russia. These calls have been both directed at to the Armenian scientists and to the people, who have undertaken the Armenian propaganda. However, an important part of these people did not participate the meeting without showing any reasons. The last example of this condition has been set in the 11^th Turkish History Congress that gathered in 1990.

For the first time, an “Armenian Section” had been programmed in the 11^th Turkish history Congress and the foreign historians who have been “Armenian struggle Supporters” have been invited to the discussions in this section, but each of them using various excuses avoided participating in these scientific discussions.

The list of the foreign scientists invited to the 11^th Turkish History Congress, held in Ankara between September 5^th — 9^th 1990, in relation with the Armenian problem, is given hereunder:

Prof. Dr. Heath LOWRY (participated)

Garin ZEDLIAN (did not answer)

Prof. Dr. Bernard LEWIS (could not participate)

Prof. Dr. Justin McCARTHY (participated)

Prof. Dr. Stanford SHAW (participated)

Prof. Dr. Anthony BRYER (Did not answer)

Dr. Andrew MANGO (participated)

Prof. Dr. Salahi R. SONYEL (participated)

Prof. Dr. M. MARMURA (did not answer)

Prof. Dr. Allan CUNNINGHAM (did not answer)

Prof. Dr. Robert ANCIAUX (participated)

Prof. Dr. Aryeh SHMUELEVITZ (participated)

Prof. Dr. Jak YAKAR (participated)

Prof. Dr. Hans G. MAJER (could not participate)

Prof. Dr. Wolf Dietrich HUTTEROTH (did not answer)

Prof. Dr. Klaus KREISER (could not participate)

Prof. Dr. Jean — Paul ROUX (did not answer)

Prof. Dr. Paul DUMONT (participated)

Prof. Dr. Robert MANTRAN (could not participate)

Prof. Dr. Richard HOVANNISIAN (did not answer)

Dr. Gerard LIBARDIAN (did not answer)

Dr. Levon MARASHLIAN (participated)

Prof. Dr. Vahakn DADRIAN (did not answer)

Christopher WALKER (could not participate)

Anahid Ter MIMASSIAN (could not participate)

Tessa HOFFMAN (did not answer)

RELOCATION

ARMENIAN ALLEGATIONS AND UN TREATY ON GENOCIDE

The concept “genocide” is defined with the “UN Agreement on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide Crime” dated 1948. In accordance with article 2 of the agreement;

“Genocide covers one of the following actions; with the intention of killing a national, ethnic, racial or religious group completely or partially: killing the members of the group, giving heavy damages to the physical or mental integrity of the members of the group, keeping the group in living conditions that will result in the loss complete partial physical existence of the group, taking precautions that will prevent births among the group, transfering of the children in the group to another group by force. In genocide, planned actions that have become a state policy are involved.”

When the issue is assessed in terms of the genocide agreement, it is impossible not to mention some events in the history. For committing an offence of inhumanity as genocide, that nation must have a tendency for such a crime in its history. Tendency for crime is a characteristic for the societies just as it is for human beings. When the Turkish history is examined, one can not find any trace of no genocide or assimilation.

When we look at the geography, on which it has spread, we see that the Ottomans held a part of Europe together with the Balkans up to the borders of Vienna, all Northern Africa on Mediterranean coast, all of the Middle East and the Arab Peninsula under its management for many years. This period is at least 200 — 400 years. Which nation in this geography can be said to be extinct? In the period, during which religious rules were executed in Anatolia, beliefs such as the oldest Christianity sect Syriacism and Yezidi belief worshipping flame and peacock were able to survive lived and in 1800s, although violated of the religious laws, churches have been opened in Anatolia. Even while one of the two brothers was Sokullu Mehmet Pasha, the Ottoman Grand Vizier, the other was assigned as Patriarch to the Makarje Serbian Church and has resurrected the Serbian nation. In the same period, when we look a other regions of the world, we see the genocides of the sects struggle period in Europe, the communities, whose languages were changed in the far east (Indians — Pestun), Africa, and Southern America whose language and religion have been completely changed.

Nazis have killed millions of people during the 2^nd World War. Between 1939 — 1945, 5-6 million Jews, more than 3 million Soviet war prisoners, more than one million Polish and more than one million Yugoslavians, approximately 200.000 gypsies and 70.000 disabled were killed. This is the genocide.

In addition to these, although the United Nations has a preventive agreement, there have been many genocide events in the modern era. For example, in accordance with the confessions of 2 retired French generals published in Le Monde, the French have killed minimum one million Algerians between 1954 — 1962, the Indonesian army has killed one million communists and their families between 1965 — 1966, the Red Kmers in Cambodia killed 1.7 million Cambodians between 1975 — 1979, in 1994 500.000 Tutsies have been killed by the Hutus in Ruanda, and finally thousands of Muslims have been subject to the Serbian severity in Bosnia — Herzegovina after 1991.

The genocide crime has been committed in these events in its real meaning. Contrary to the Armenian pretensions, the implementation performed in Eastern Anatolia in 1915 is the migration from one place to another region within Ottoman land and it has no relation with the genocide. Turkish management is accustomed to living with the nations of different cultures and races in the regions it dominated. There is “justice” in the Turkish tradition, there is “keeping the cultures alive”; but there is no “massacre” or “genocide”. This matter is clearly indicated in the book of Justin McCarthy named “Death and Exile”. In this book, the story of the Balkans and the Caucasian people taking refuge in the Ottoman management to escape death are related.

One should the ones accusing the Ottoman management with genocide: Where did the Jews and the Muslims escape from Spain and Portugal in 1469 where did Tökeli Imre and his men escape from Hungary in 1680, where did Rakoczi Ferench and his men go in 1711, where did Layos Kosuth and a Hun group of 2000 people go in 1849, where did Prince Chartorski go with his 135000 soldiers in 1841 and 1856, where did the Russian commander Vrangel and even Trouchki escape in order to take refuge from death?

The history gives the answer all these questions as the “Ottoman”. Don’t the ones announcing the relocation implementation in 1915 as the so called “Armenian genocide” know that Poland and Germany origin Jews found shelter in Turkey since 1930s? While only 20 — 25 years had passed over the so — called Armenian genocide, why did the ones looking for a country to adopt chose Turkey as their rescuer? The answers to these questions are hidden in the just, humane, tolerant, uniting character of the Turkish State tradition, which has always been respectful towards traditions and beliefs.

Furthermore, the genocides and assimilations made in the Balkans 550 years after the Ottoman Empire Fatih, who gave the people living on the land he ruled, the chance of preserving their values alive and transferring them to the new generations, must be remembered. The Balkan nations, whose languages, religions, churches, schools were taken under guarantee with this order, have torn the Bosnians, Albania — rooted Muslims, Macedonians and Bulgaria Turks out of their own land in the verge of the 21^st century. Today, the ones accusing Turkey of genocide have ignored the massacres that continued for moths and tapped their ears to the screams of the raped women of any age. Recently, not only the Balkan nations found shelter in Turkey; but also the Iraqis running away from Saddam Hüseyin, the Iraqi state president, who tried to commit genocide using the “mustard gas” he provided from the western chemical weapon producers, found shelter in Turkey. The Turkish people has always shared their bread at any time in history in spite of their limited opportunities and have opened their arms to the oppressed nations. The Turkish people, the Ottoman and the Republic of Turkey have a very clean register that can be an example for other nations and states.

RELOCATION

CONCLUSION

Many things have been said and written about relocation since the date of its application. The Armenians have managed to deceive the world public opinion for a long period by hiding behind the false documents. The Armenian massacre stories, which began with 300.000s and came to 3.000.000s have no basis. Likewise during the invasion of Istanbul, both the English and the French have sufficiently investigated the Ottoman archive and since they have not been able to submit any documents in relation with the Armenian genocide, they must not have found any such document.

On the other hand, they should have photographs in their archives taken by the journalists who came to Anatolia at that time to observe the relocation implementation. If a genocide had been committed with the order of the state, these photographs would have been presented to the world public opinion a long time ago. Furthermore, if the party claiming the reality of a genocide had concrete documents, would the for establishing a “commission of jurists” be left without a response? Why did not this official suggestion of the Ottoman State left unanswered? Was the reason the fear that the roles of some western countries would become apparent in the organization and agitation of the Armenian bands or the fear that sources, from which the Armenians obtained their guns to kill thousands of innocent civil people, be disclosed?

When the word genocide is mentioned the Nazi mass murder that resulted in the loss of millions of Jews and other ethnical groups, comes to mind. When the word genocide is heard, the murder at least a million Algerians by the French between 1954 — 1962 is remembered. When the word genocide is heard, the murdering of 1 million communists and their families by the Indonesian army between 1965 — 1966 is remembered. When the word genocide is mentioned, the massacre of almost 2 millions of Cambodians by the Red Kmers in Cambodia between 1975-1979 is remembered. When the word genocide is mentioned, the murdering of 500.000 Tutsies by the Hutus in Ruanda in 1994 is comes to mind. And finally when the word genocide is heard, the severe massacre of thousands of Muslims in Bosnia — Herzegovina and Kosova after 1991 by the Serbians is remembered. The genocide crime has been committed during these events in its real meaning.

If the Ottoman State had any intention of subjecting the Armenians to “genocide”, wouldn’t it commit it where the Armenians lived? What was the need for such expense made during the relocation and so many commercial and military precautions that needed to be taken?

The purpose of the relocation which the world’s most successful resettlement program has never been eliminating Armenians but was born out of a compulsory need of providing state security.

6:29 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

Armenian TERRORISM (1)

TERRORISM

ARMENIAN TERROR

Following the Lausanne Treaty, the 'Armenian Issue' ceased to exist. However, the Armenians of Diaspora, clinging firmly to their allegations, unleashed a series of terrorist attacks on Turkish diplomatic missions abroad as of 1970. All these attacks were masterminded by ASALA for short, the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia. Under a mask of independence, ASALA carried out ruthless and dastardly attacks. Psychologically and logistically supported by the Hinchaks, ASALA engaged in acts of terror against Turkish diplomats, representation offices and other organizations. These armed assaults rapidly escalated in a short period of time. Armenians who had assured bases for their activities in both Europe and the East, Syria and Lebanon in particular, continued their acts of terror in collaboration with Greeks and Greek Cypriots. As a result of the world wide repercussion of these armed attacks on Turkish diplomats, Armenian terror organizations changed tactics in the 1980's and began this time to collaborate with the separatist terror organizaion PKK, and later abandoned the scene to this organization.

Having proclaimed the period between April 21 and 28, 1980 as the 'Red Week', the PKK started organizing meetings to commemorate April 24 as the so-called 'Armenian Genocide Day'. At a joint press conference held in the Lebanese City of Sidon, the two terror organizations made public a joint declaration. When this initiative aroused reaction, the PKK and ASALA decided to maintain secret ties in their illegal activities. In fact, these two organizations assumed responsibility for the bomb attacks perpetrated on November 9 of the same year on the Turkish Consulate General in Strasbourg and on November 19^th on the Tukish Airlines offices in Rome. Honorary membership of the Association of Armenian Writers was conferred upon separatist terrorist leader Abdullah Ocalan for his 'contributions to the idea of a Greater Armenia'.

TERRORISM

ARMENIA AND TERRORISM

The Armenians and the Turks have enjoyed peace and harmony for ten centuries and the Armenians consisted of high socio-economic status than the Turks. After the defeat of the Ottomans in Ottoman-Russian Wars (1877-1878), first Hagia Stefanos Treaty was signed on 3^rd March 1878 and the treaty of Berlin (13^th July 1878) followed it. Both treaties have clearly changed the attitudes of the Armenian subjects towards the empire and Russia and some other European countries have started to provoke them. The Armenians have organized themselves for an independent Armenian State.

Russia, in line with their national Caucasian policy since the Tsars, was wishing to weaken the ties of Caucasian Azerbaijan with Turkey by establishing a strong Armenian state located between these countries. Keeping this goal in mind, Russia’s Bolshevik leader Lenin has given the authority to the Armenian origin Caucasian Commissar Stepan SALIMYAN to establish an Armenian State, which would be dependent on Russia. Lenin appointed Salimyan on December 18^th, 1917 with the decree of December 30^th, 1917.

On April 27^th, 1920 under the influence of the Bolshevik rule in Azerbaijan and Southern Caucasia, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia, the autonomous province of Nahcivan and the autonomous Karabag region had been established. Thus, Armenia has come to own a state with its borders outlined. Their nationalistic and occupational sentiments thoroughly aroused and provocated, the Armenians, following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, have declared their independence on August 23rd, 1990 and have commenced attacking their neighbors with the utopic idea of forming a greater Armenia.

In 1915, Armenians who betrayed the Turks during the World War I were relocated. Armenians have claimed that 1,5 million Armenians had been killed during the relocation and have been claiming that this was a genocide. Armenia always had the utopic dream of forming a greater Armenia. Under this pretext Armenians have demanded land, compensation and acceptance of genocide from Turkey. In order to accomplish their aim, they have attacked our representatives and representations abroad and our domestic establishments between the years 1937 and 1986 by organized terrorist ctivities and they requested the fulfillment of their demands.

Lately, Armenians have understood that they would be unable to fulfill their demands with terrorist activities. So they have resorted after 1986 to put pressure on Turkey on the political platform and to give various types of support to the PKK terror organization, whose aim is to ruin our country and thus to fulfill their land demand.

It has been realized that Armenia has given militant and logistic support to the PKK terror organization in settlements close to our country’s borders, has helped to form camp sites within its boundaries and that there are top officers in the PKK terror organization who are Armenian origin.

Armenian Terrorism

The Armenian attacks, targeting our representatives, our missions and establishments abroad, began as an “Individual Armenian Terror” by the assassinations of our Los Angeles Consul General Mehmet BAYDAR and Consul Bahadir DEMİR in the city of Santa Barbara on January 27th, 1973 by old Armenian named Gurgen (Karekin) Yanikan. Since 1975 this has been followed by “Organized Armenian Terror” and it became more violent after demonstrating a rapid increase within a short time span.

Each being different than the other, 110 attacks have taken place in 38 cities of 21 countries. Out of these 110 attacks, 39 were armed, 70 with bombings and was an occupation. In these attacks, 42 diplomatic Turkish citizens and 4 foreigners have lost their lives, 15 Turks and 66 foreign nationals have been wounded. When we analyze the attacks by years, we observe that the Armenian terror has shown a major increase since 1979.

The Armenian terror organizations have finalized their active terror actions after 1986 and have carried the Armenian matter to international platforms. They continue their activities by providing logistical and militant support to the PKK terrorist organization in southeastern Anatolia.

TERRORISM

PKK-ARMENIAN RELATIONS

Changing their tactics after the ‘80s as they encountered adverse reactions from the world. Now, it was time for PKK to carry on the mission. Their first terrorist act started at Eruh and Semdimli in 1984 while the ASALA-Armenian terror receded to the background. Some of the tangible proofs of the ties between Armenians and PKK are the following:

The terrorist organisation PKK announced the period from 21 to 28 April 1980 as the “Red Week” and started to organise meetings on April 24 as the anniversary of the alleged genocide against Armenians.

The PKK and ASALA terror organisations held a joint press conference on 8 April 1980 at the City of Sidon in Lebanon where they issued a declaration. Since this drew a considerable reaction, they decided that their relations should be maintained on a clandestine basis. The responsibility of the attacks launched against the Turkish Consulate General in Strasbourg on 9 November 1980 and the Turkish Airline office in Rome on 19 November 1980 were undertaken jointly by the ASALA and PKK.

Abdullah Öcalan, leader of the separatist terror organisation, was elected to the honorary membership of the Armenian Authors’ Association for “his contributions to the idea of Greater Armenia”.

A Kurdistan Committee was formed within the Armenian Popular Movement like in many European countries.

On 4 June 1993, a meeting was held at the headquarters of PKK terrorist organisation at West Beyrouth with the participation of representatives from the Armenian Hinchak Party, ASALA and PKK.

Another striking example of the Armenian-PKK ties are the following resolutions adopted in meetings held at two separate churches from 6 to 9 September 1993 with the participation of Lebanese Armenian Orthodox Archbishop, officials of the Armenian Party and about 150 youth leaders:

A somewhat sedate attitude should be reserved toward Turkey for the time being.

The Armenian community is on the way to growth and better economic strength.

The propaganda activities have started to make the genocide claims better understood in the rest of the world.

The newly founded Armenian State with a constantly growing territory will definitely avenge the ancestors of its citizens.

The Western powers and particularly the United States side with and favour the Armenians in the combat for Nagorno Karabakh. This opportunity should be well exploited as more and more Armenian young men join the ranks in this fight.

The perpetual terrorist attacks in Turkey (meaning the PKK’s actions) will continue and eventually collapse the country’s economy, leading to an uprising by the entire population.

Turkey will be abolish and a Kurdish State will be formed.

Armenians will hold good relations with the Kurds and support their fight.

Territories presently held by the Turks will the Armenian’s tomorrow.

PUBLICATION ORGANS OF TERRORIST ORGANISATION PKK IN ARMENIA

The newspapers Reya Taze and Bota Redaksiyon are published in Armenia in Cyrillic alphabet under the control of terrorist organisation PKK with the help of PKK members coming from Turkey and Europe and carries out propaganda for the PKK.

PKK-ASALA RELATIONS

The Armenian terrorism at international first started basis in 1973 and began to gain impetus after the 1974 Cyprus Peace Operation with attacks or terrorist nature against Turks and Turkish representations abroad with sabotages and outright assaults.

Upon resurrection of the Kurdish terrorist movement that began to show itself in a variety of legal political entities from ‘70s onward, the Armenian terror organisation ASALA ceded its place in 1984 to the PKK that killed without distinction of Turk or Kurd in a bloodthirsty manner under the guidance of Abdullah Öcalan.

Yet in prior to that date, of the co-operation between terrorist organisations ASALA and PKK was known manifesting in the training of ASALA militants at PKK’s trannie camps, the joint operations and declamations by them both and training support provided at the PKK camps by Armenian experts, not to mention the organic ties between the terrorist organisation PKK and Armenian Tashnak Sutyun Party.

The common goal of the co-operation between the terrorist organisations PKK and ASALA is to establish States in Turkey’s Southeastern and Eastern under the Marxist-Leninist ideology. Since, however, an overview of the areas on which both organisations had schemes, it may be deduced that one of these organisations acts as the other’s mercenaries.

An examination of the discovered documents revealed that the militants of ASALA and PKK terrorist organisations underwent training at the Bekaa and Zeli camps.

1987 AGREEMENT BETWEEN PKK AND ARMENIANS

An agreement was concluded between the separatist terror organisation PKK and Armenians in 1987. Following are the highlights of this agreement:

1. Armenians will be involved in training activities within the PKK terror organisation.

2. Five thousand American Dollars per annum will be paid to the PKK terror organisation per capita by the Armenian side.

3. The Armenians will participate in the small-scale operations.

As the Armenian component began to acquire a significantly elevated position within the organisation as a result of this agreement, the following resolutions were adopted in a meeting held on 18 April 1990 with a person named Hermes Samurai, reported to be the official responsible for the PKK-ASALA relations:

1. The PKK and ASALA terrorist organisations will be under a joint command from that date on.

2. The Armenians will undertake intelligence work on the Turkish security forces.

3. Territories gained through the expected revolution will be equally shared between the parties.

4. Seventy-five percent of training camp expenses will be borne by the Armenians.

5. Operations will be conducted at the metropolitan cities in Turkey.

The terrorist organisation PKK that moved its bases into Northern Iraq after because of very heavy blows dealt in the transborder operations and lost all possibilities of sheltering there is known to have entered into arrangements for shifting some of its cadres to Iran and Armenia where it started an active subversive operation toward Turkey.

It has also been learned that a group of European representatives of the terrorist organisation PKK paid a visit to Armenia where they concluded an agreement with the Armenian leaders for the unhindered ingress to and egress from Kars region by their militants, that Armenia offered sheltering, monetary and equipment support to the Kurdish settlements in that country following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the formal proclamation of the Armenian Republic. Similarly, a group of militants of the terrorist organisation PKK left Urmiah for Armenia on three vehicles on 19 and 20 May 1992 for fighting against Azerite Turks together with the Armenians.

TERRORISM

COMMON FEATURES OF ARMENIAN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS

The survey of the aims and strategies of the Armenian minority organizations from a historical perspective during the phase of New Armenian Terrorism (1973-85) shows that they had all assumed the character, aims and functions of terrorist organization. Their activities were directed towards the objectives of inciting and perpetrating revolts, revolutions and acts of terrorism.

It has already been noted above that the Dashnaks who had become organized in the 1890's, had adopted a program based on terrorist strategies, such as forming gangs, demoralizing the target Ottoman population, killing the Turks and undermining their sovereignty, arming the Armenian minority groups in preparation for uprisings, revolts and terrorism, forming revolutionary committees and murder squads, and destroying governmental institutions. After seizing power and establishing an Armenian Republic (1918 - 1920) within a year of the Russian Revolution, in the region where Soviet Armenia is situated today, the Dashnaks engaged in diplomatic activities and tried to assert themselves as a legitimate power; nevertheless, the fundamental terroristic philosophy never disappeared and resurfaced years later in 1972 with the formation of an subsidiary group named the Justice Commandos for Armenian Genocide. The operations of this group are well-known to everyone, not least to the non-involved Armenians on whom they exert constant pressure.

Similarly, the Marxist Hunchak organization has shown that it too endorses terrorism by the protection and support it gives to ASALA, the principal terrorist organization of the period 1973 1985. It is noteworthy that the Hunchaks provided the inspiration and intellectual impetus for the creation of this group.

For terrorist organizations, the Armenian cause, or the Armenian issue no matter what interpretations may be placed upon it has been identified with terrorism whilst the ideals or aspirations of the Armenian people have been reduced to hostility against the Turks and Turkey, to be pursued through vindictive acts and bloodshed.

The Armenian terrorist organizations are, as a rule, formed by a small number of activists, who control the central administration. The operations agreed upon by the central administration are carried out by a number of teams; each entrusted with specific duties. When required for propagandist purposes, these teams are made public under a variety of names, which serves the purpose of creating an impression of large numbers and widespread activity.

Terrorist organizations need not be situated in one specific physical or geographical location. They could be dispersed in several countries, or scattered over the same country. Although this situation on the surface gives an impression of amore democratic and open structure, yet, in reality, such organizations observe a strict discipline imposed by a central organization.

Another characteristic of the terrorist organization is their tendency to split into a number of smaller groups both because of their differing functions and also as a result of rivalries between their members and their leaders. One outcome of this phenomenon is that each group that breaks away forms its own affiliate organization. Hence, there is an apparent mushrooming which once again produces the impression of proliferation.

Secrecy forms one of the basic tenets of these organizations. However, at times, particularly through the instrumentality of the subsidiary team, disclosures are made in order to publicize the activities performed as an occasion for propaganda. This policy also serves the aim of concealing the main centre from detection, which can thus continue its activities in security. For the same reasons, the teams make announcements both before and after committing crimes and take responsibility for them.

In all Armenian terrorist activities, terrorism goes hand in hand with psychological coercion. In fact, the former is a phase in the process of applying the latter. Terrorism can be used as a means of propaganda, as well as an instrument of oppression, intimidation and retribution. The second use of terrorism is reserved for those who oppose the activist organizations or disobey its commands. The majority of non-involved Armenians are subjected to such pressures.

These organizations possess an immense store of expertise and experience in the fields of public relations, communications and the media. Moreover, they have close contacts with the institutions and the people who disseminate information and influence public opinion. Such expertise and contacts provide the organizations with opportunities for survival and gradual expansion.

The terrorist organizations enjoy the open or secret support of one or more states. These may use them either as an instrument to further their own interests, or as a means of covering up their secret organizations or propaganda units.

Hostility against Turkey and the Turks provides the terrorist organizations with a motive for their existence and survival, as well as serving to rationalize their claims and demands. However, in countries, which have close relations with Turkey, the hostile reactions apparently provoked by these organizations tend to be short-lived. Indeed, in such cases, particularly when terrorism takes as its target not only Turkey but also the country where it operates and its citizens, it has to be assumed that the activists are aiming at intimidating their opponents, rather than carrying out hostile operations against the host country.

In retrospect, Armenian terrorism appears to have three main objectives: 1) to compel the Armenians to join the ranks of the activists by exerting pressure on them, thus securing their support, 2) to influence world public opinion by convincing it of the might and scope of Armenian terrorism, and 3) to prepare the ground for hostility against Turkey in case of future conflicts of interests and political confrontations on the international scene. The nineteenth century myth of an enslaved and impoverished minority deprived of its rights, and the twentieth century theme of a nation subjected to massacres and genocide have both been used in order to have access to sources of power in international relations. These sources will probably be enlisted in the service of nations who are Turkey's rivals or even by international institutions for specific ends. What, in fact, is not known among the aims of the terrorist organizations is the to which the opportunities, that arise by instigating international conflicts, will ultimately be put. This is no other than the attainment of the goal or ideal, which they expect to be realized through its own momentum in the course of a historical process outside their immediate sphere of influence.

NEW ERA OF TERRORISM (1973 - 1985)

In the era of New Armenian Terrorism, Dashnak and Hunchak organizations function as the main centres which encourage, promote and train terrorist groups so that they can develop and expand over new areas and increase the scope of their targets. Their leadership extends to the formation of new terrorist groups and teams, providing man-power, intellectual and moral support for the newly founded organizations, and the preparation of the ground for their activities through the establishment of contacts and relations. Apart from these, ASALA, short for the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armen ia constitutes another major terrorist organization. It has succeeded in having its name mentioned more than that of any other group, and as such has become almost synonymous with Armenian terrorism. Together with the traditional organization and their offshoots, ASALA, too, is the initiator of the new era of terrorism. As has been noted above, despite its seemingly independet status, ASALA is affiliated to the Hunchaks, deriving its moral and intellectual strength from them, as well as making use of their established contacts and relations.

Seen from this angle, it may indeed be claimed that terrorism as we see it in our day is a continuation of the earlier tradition of terroristic activities, which was revived under the favourable circumstances of the sixties, and, making use of the opportunities that were created anew, once again embarked upon its mission of hostility against the Turks, engaging in criminal acts of the greatest inhumanity and cruelty.

One of the attempts at rationalizing terrorism is provided by Michael M. Gunter in his study on "Armenian National Liberation", where he claims that the peoples of many different countries in our day support the struggles of the terrorists and believe in the validity of the reasons for which they take action. Similarly, Gerard J. Libaridjian, the editor of the Armenian Review and director of the Zorian Institute for Contemporary Armenian Studies situated in Cambridge, Massachusetts, explains the reasons that lie behind Armenian terrorism as follows: "The reluctance of Turkey and the major world powers to recognize the exasperation of the Armenians, even after sixty years spent in attempts at establishing peace, has resulted in bringing about a new era of terrorism." Agop Agopian, the ASALA leader, on the other hand, argues that Armenian terrorist activities emerged "after it became evident that the policies pursued by the traditional parties had failed:"

In the light of these statements it becomes clear that those who share such views, present the situation as if it were one that entails a choice between peaceful or violent methods of pursuing the Armenian cause; they ignore the phenomenon of Armenian terrorism as a continuing historical process. Moreover, they fail to explain from what source they derive the right to launch such violent attacks against Turkey and to instigate revolutions, revolts and warfare with the aim of destroying its unity, nor do they tell us who invests them with this right or authorizes the exercise of such acts. The terrorists claim a right to perform acts of violence - the right to cherish animosity, seek revenge and commit assassinations - and to exercise this right freely. They pretend not to be aware of the fact that the Armenian activist organizations were engaged in terroristic operations right from the start. For the new era of terrorism is clearly a revival of the older and traditional phase of terrorism, reactivated as a result of preparations made in the sixties through propaganda campaigns and demonstrations, as a means of manipulating the aspirations of certain countries and peoples over Turkey and taking advantage of the attitudes of rivals exploiting her political and economic difficulties. One need not doubt, however, that the era of New Armenian Terrorism will come to the same end as the former. Yet, in the meantime, the Armenian people themselves are undergoing the humiliation and anguish of being branded as terrorists in the eyes of the world and observe with anxiety the course taken by the events. This is an aspect of the situation which the terrorist organizations do not wish to see, or perhaps, one which their mentors refuse to see. In this way, regardless of the harm caused, propaganda and psychological coercion campaigns continue to be waged on a large scale.

HINCHAK

The Hinchak (Sound of the Bell) Committee was established in Switzerland in 1886 by Avedis Nazarbelg and his wife Maro, Caucasian Armenians of Russian citizenship, and a group of Caucasian students. They also started the publication of a newspaper titled Hinchak to propagate the ideas of the Committee, of which the leaders and members were Armenians from Russia. It selected the Eastern Anatolia as its field of operation and, after a while, its headquarters was moved from Switzerland to London.

The Hinchak Commitee’s programme was socialist, Marxist and Centralist It adopted the principles of Karl Marx. Though it qualified itself as social democrat, its political programme is reminiscent of the communist manifesto. The Committee opened in 1890 a branch office in Istanbul with subdivisions at various provinces of the Ottoman Empire. The main political goal of the Committee was to save the Armenians in Turkey from the Turks, those in Iran from the Iranians, the Russian Armenians from Russia and to do away with all the capitalists in these countries.

Its PROGRAMME:

The working and producing classes constitute the great majority of the humanity. The emancipation of these classes from the exploitation of a rich and sovereign minority will be achieved through the seizure of all production factors, soil, factories, mines and transports. The independence of the producing classes means the salvation of the entire humanity and a general and economic welfare.

The achievement of this goal and its physical implementation require the organisation as dictated by its own desiderata of working classes in all civilised countries and the accomplishment of the communist revolution everywhere using the general political capabilities at their disposal. Thus will be eliminated all other social classes and the producer classes will create a socialist order. In this new structuring, the people will make their own laws and display its might.

(…)

The Armenians today are under the subjugation of the classes run by monarchic rulers. Their administrative, fiscal and tax systems are self-destructing for themselves. Around these monarchies, all ancient economic and administrative structures wither away while the capitalist management systems are used in the production.

The introduction of a socialist order embracing the Armenian social democrats and all Armenians at large is admitted to be a distant goal under the prevailing conditions and, therefore, all tendencies and toils require a nearer target. It is this nearer target that created the Armenian Revolutionary Hinchak Party, which aims at the following:

a) To foment the revolution.

b) To annihilate the sovereign classes of the absolutist administrations.

c) To save the Armenians from slavery.

d) To strengthen the Armenians for entering into the political realm.

e) To eliminate the hurdles preventing the economic and cultural advancement of the Armenians.

f) To prepare an environment where the working classes will be able to freely express their opinions.

g) To improve the unbearable working conditions.

h) To provide the workers with knowledge on their own class for enabling them to organise into a special political entity of their own.

i) To facilitate the work by the people to attain the distant goals.

In line with these goals, the nearer targets of the Hinchak Committee are to destroy the monarchic administrations and to replace them by democratic and oligarchic regimes, for which the following conditions were set:

a) A constituent assembly should be elected, for a true popular representation, by direct votes of all citizens. This assembly should have the power of examining all political, economic and other issues and legislation of the country in question and resolving on them.

b) Provinces should be given a large autonomy.

c) Full independence should be provided for the people.

d) The people should be able to elect the government, security, justice and education officials in public service.

e) Every citizen, irrespective of nationality, should have the right to be elected to provincial and autonomous administration positions.

f) All citizens irrespective of nationality and religion differences should be equal before the law.

g) Full freedom of press, expression, assembly and election should be recognised to all citizens.

h) Homes of all citizens and citizens themselves should enjoy freedom from molestation.

i) The churches should be dissociated from the State and maintain their existence solely through the help of persons of their own congregation.

j) Military service should be performed by all citizens as militia members during the peace time.

k) A secular and compulsory education system should be implemented and the State should assist the poor in this field.

Since the improvement of the people’s economic lot is involved, the following conditions must be fulfilled by securing the political rights listed above and based on them:

a) The existing taxation system should be replaced by one based on the payment power.

b) The indirect taxes should be abandoned altogether.

c) Peasants should be absolved of all of their debts.

d) Farm machinery should be provided with the help of Government and of the people, their proper use should be taught and they should be given to the people themselves.

e) Agrarian partnerships should be established among the people for the purpose of ensuring the sale of farm products and purchase of such amenities as seeds, fertilisers and the like.

f) Vehicles should be provided for all kinds of transportation and contacts.

g) The Government should prevent the exploitation of working classes and adopt laws for this purpose.

Regions where the Armenians hold the majority are also the largest areas of our country. The Armenian cause acquired the status of a right by the 61^st article of the Berlin Treaty and under the pressure of other international conditions and was recognised by the European Powers.

The political, economic and financial débâcle of the Ottoman Empire together with the internal uprisings appear to have been contributing factors that prepared its doom with also the assistance of the European Powers. It is therefore necessary that the following should be achieved tp comply with the requirement of a historical necessity as the Ottoman territories in European continent were seized by other States:

a) The Armenian rebels will concentrate their efforts for defending the Armenian cause and achieving the short-term goals.

b) The area where the revolution will be launched will therefore be that in which the Armenians live.

c) Since the future of Armenians need to be separated from the Ottoman Empire’s destiny, the first condition of the short-term goal will be the Armenian independence.

For attaining the short-term goal, the Armenians decided that the peace and order should be interrupted and altered by a revolution and a war should be started against the Turkish Government and the revolution’s tools were indicated as follows by the Armenians:

a) A propaganda campaign will be initiated among the people and particularly the workers through the press, books and speeches, to broadcast the revolutionary ideas of the Hinchak party, to create revolutionary organisations and to foment mutinies.

b) The terror will be used as a weapon to punish the Turkish secret police members, informers and traitors and the terror will be used as a shield for the defence of revolutionary organisations and a guard against the rascals that persecute the people.

d) An armed force will be kept in readiness and spearheading legions will be formed to defend the Government and the people against the soldiers and tribal groups and the legions will be used as the advance units in an uprising.

e) Suitable occasions will be created for instigating an uprising.

f) A general revolution organisation, consisting of several regular units commanded by a single central headquarter and marching in unison toward the common goal, within the context of which has been prepared a regulation for defining the responsibilities and powers of these units and the organisation and activities of the Hinchak Committee.

g) Efforts will be made to secure the alliance of other minorities having the same destiny as the Armenians and to have them to join the Armenians our common enemy the Turkish Government. The greatest objective of the Hinchak Committee will be to establish a federation similar to the Swiss one after throwing off the Ottoman yoke.

The Hinchak Committee operating under this political programme carried out an intense Marxist propaganda especially among the working classes. Both the youth and religious leaders, adventurers and unemployed went out of their way to foment unease and to foment a revolution while the Committee’s leaders concentrated their efforts on creating an Armenian proletariat. These efforts, however, did not go beyond a socialist propaganda under the then prevailing conditions in Turkey. Persons coming from Russia and other countries with a flair for such work often took part in these activities.

The Armenian actions led in this country to many bloody incidents of which the relics will not easily be forgotten. Renowned militants like Shimavon of Tbilisi came from Geneva, S. Danielian arrived from Iran, Rupen Hanazat of Russia showed up from Trabzon and H. Megavorian appeared from Batoum to organise the subdivisions of the Hinchak Committee. Other revolutionary organisations formed in Istanbul prior to 1980 eventually joined this new setup.

It therefore becomes evident that the fate of Armenians in Turkey was left to the discretion of Russian Armenians. Pressure was being exerted on those refusing to join the Committee and to grant monetary aid and many of them were being murdered. Thus, the organisation rapidly started to spread to the other Anatolian provinces.

ACTIVITIES

The charter and programme of the Hinchak Society was printed in Istanbul in 1909, submitted to the Ministry of Interior pursuant to the Law on Associations and received the approval letter n^o 90 of 8 February 1909. The charter consists of five parts.

The ledger of resolutions seized by the security forces show that the following resolutions were adopted in q910, 1911, 1912 and 1913:during operations:

a) Efforts will be spent to secure weapons, ammunition and explosives.

b) Weapons training will be given by Marufian, Yavruian and Candan.

c) Propaganda work will be accelerated.

d) Relations will be established with the Tashnak Connittee.

e) Similar relations will be maintained with the Union and Progress Party.

f) Support will be given to the Orsfan, Cang, Gochnak, Jurachak, Penchak, Badami, Tejoheng, Maro and Paros bands in Van.

The Hinchak Committee held its third congress in Turkey on 24 July 1914. The congress, held with 28 delegates from 51 branch offices, was chaired by Cangulian with Tancutian as the secretary and the following decision was adopted:

"Taking into account the great responsibility necessitated by our goals and the dangers involved, and in an attempt to prove that we are a civilised people, care will be exercised for always avoiding adventures and actions not thoroughly planned in advance, and we will bear in mind the fact that a balanced attitude and proper means are the most suitable tools for reaching our final objectives. "

On the basis of this decision, the Hinchak leaders started to leave Turkey after 1896 and disagreements soon arose among them, with the result that the party broke into two factions. One faction was called the true Hinchaks (Nazarbeg’s followers) and the other came to be known as the reformed (Veragasmial) one. The latter group was led by an Armenian named Arpiar Arpiarian.

It seems that both factions acted in obedience to the beliefs and opinions of their leaders rather than under valid principles and programmes. The disagreement among them often led to street fights, some of them were beaten and many were killed.

The Armenian people, realising that the Hinchaks were Marxists, gradually withdrew themselves from it. The divergence came to a head in 1902 when militants from both sides began murdering each other on streets in England, Russia, Egypt, Bulgaria, Caucasus and Iran. Though some small bands continued bearing the name of Hinchak, they lost their previous strength after the Van resurrection. Another factor contributing to the disappearance of the Hinchak Committee was the fact that several Hinchak leaders had seen the true intentions of the Russians and left the organisation.

Reference: SAKARYA, Ret. Maj. Gen. İhsan, Armenian Issue with Decuments,Military History Publications of the Department of Military History and Strategic Studies, Turkish General Staff Printing Plant, Ankara 1984, 2^nd ed., pp. 76-87.

6:24 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

Armenian TERRORISM (2)

TERRORISM

THE TASHNAK TERRORIST ORGANIZATION

The “Armenian Revolutionary Federation” or "Tashnak Organization" is also known as the "TashnakParty." In fact, after the communist took over of the Armenian Republic, the Tashnak organization continued its existence as a party in exile, mainly in Lebanon, Iran, France, Greece and the United States. This organization has remained active up to the present day and has performed a significant role in planning and promoting the new era of Armenian terrorism, as well as forming teams and groups for carrying out terrorist operations. A move was made, later in its career, to have its name changed from the Armenian Revolutionary Federation to the Armenian National Committee. The intention behind this was to achieve greater effectiveness in its propagandist activities by the removal of a name that could offend Western sensibility.

1. The Structure of the Organization

a. “Bureau”: This is the most important organ of the organization and takes the decisions that determine its administrative policies. In appearance the bureau represents collective leadership. It consists of eight members, one each from California, France and Iran and five from Lebanon. The members elect a chairman. The bureau, which was based in Lebanon until the outbreak of the Civil War, was moved from there to the United States and then to Greece and France. The regulations of the bureau and its decisions are kept secret .It is known that a person named Hrair Marukian, Persian by birth and domiciled in France, was its chairman until 1985.

b. "The Central Committee": It is the highest-level executive organ. It establishes the link between the bureau and the local groups and organizations. It is instituted in places where there is a sizeable Armenian population. Lebanon and France have one central committee each, whilst the United States has two, one on the eastern and' the other one on western coasts. Under the pyramid shaped structure the local organizations and their organs take place. These are known by the names of a variety of Armenian associations and clubs, such as the Federation of Armenian Youth, the Youth Organization, the Armenian Boy and Girl Scouts Club, organizations for sport and cultural activities.

c. There are also various offices operating under the central committees, such as those in charge of propagandist activities and publicity, as well as legal, financial, military and educational matters. These offices offer purely technical service or advice. As an example of an office rendering a specific service, we can mention the Committee for Supervising Armenian Immigration.

2. Aims

The Tashnak terrorist organization defines the meaning of the Armenian cause or “the Hay Taht” as the establishment of an independent and non-communist Armenia within the boundaries designated by the abrogated Sévres Treaty and the enforcement of the payment of compensation by Turkey in return for the crimes said to have been committed against the Armenians. Tashnak publications give expression to this objective in the words, "We will continue to insist on the implementation of the Sévres Treaty, as being one of the milestones in the pursuit of our cause."

In another publication, the aims of the Tashnaks are summarised as the recognition of the right of the Armenians to live in their own lands and to govern themselves. More commonly, the aims of the Tashnaks are presented as centring around three specific demands: a) the recognition of the Armenian claim that genocide was committed, b) the payment of a compensation by Turkey, c) resettlement in the Armenian homelands.

3. Strategies and Policies

Although the Tashnaks have publicly declared that their strategies are directed towards the realization of their aims through “peaceful means”, neither the events of the past nor their activities in the new era of Armenian terrorism have proved this to be true. This ‘party’ which has all the characteristics of a terrorist organization, can assume, when needed, a peaceful guise and mislead the public by using propagandist tactics perfected through long years of experience. In fact, as has been said above, it was the Tashnaks who were responsible for the establishment of the Justice Commandos for Armenian Genocide whose name was later changed to the Armenian Revolutionary Army. It is, indeed, the Tashnaks who decided upon and planned the assassinations and bomb assaults carried out by this group. These activities suffice to show that the Tashnak organization never abandoned the terroristic tendencies it possessed at its inception. Nonetheless, there is a significant difference between the strategies employed by the Tashnaks and those by ASALA. ASALA makes no distinction between the Turks and other nationalities, all of who can figure indiscriminately as their targets, whereas the Tashnak organization and its affiliates take Turkish citizens or official representatives of Turkey as the sole targets of their deadly operations.

After the killing of the Turkish Consul General in Los Angeles in 1972, the Justice Commandos announced that their targets were “only Turkish diplomats and Turkish institutions.” The same declaration of intention was made in connection with the assault carried out by the Armenian Revolutionary Army against the Turkish Embassy in Lisbon in 1983.

The difference that exists between the strategies of the Tashnaks and ASALA may be explained by observing the historical development of the two organizations. As we have seen, the Tashnaks took a pro-Western stance in the nineteenth and the first two decades of the twentieth century and aimed at influencing public opinion in the West, whereas the Hunchaks turned towards Russia for protection and support. It is significant that, during the years 1973-1985, terrorism made use of both camps.

The strategy adopted by the Tashnaks finds its clearest expression in the announcement made in the wake of the Lisbon attack. According to this, “a national liberation movement has to go through two phases in order to attain its end: firstly, the phase of internal propaganda, when bases of support are secured; secondly, the phase of external publicity directed towards gaining the sympathy of the world and attracting attention for the cause: hence the necessity for organizing activities that serve as demonstrations...”

For the Tashnaks, Armenian terrorism was but a form of demonstration conducted as part of their strategy. In other words, the assaults, bombings and raids that were carried out and the people who were injured, killed or trampled to death in the course of these incidents, were all considered to be the necessary elements of a scenario that made up the 'demonstration'.

The Tashnak historian Varandjian described the characteristics of the Tashnak terrorist organization in the words: “Perhaps no other revolutionary party, not even the Russian Narodovoletz (Narodnaya Volya) or the Charbonari of the Italians, adepts though they were at terrorism and undaunted by anything that came in their way, could breed terrorists as reckless and impassioned as the Tashnaks. Hundreds of men carrying guns, daggers and bombs are up in arms.” It is sobering to reflect that during the period we have studied the mission of these "reckless and impassioned" terrorists was to attack Turkish institutions and the Turks.

4. The Congresses of Vienna and Munich

On December 27, 1981 the following resolutions were taken in the twenty-second Tashnak Congress held in Vienna:

a) The Party's goal is to secure the establishment of a united and independent Armenia.

b) Pressure should be exerted on other Armenian organizations by the political committees to induce them to join the ranks of the Tashnaks.

c) Complete agreement with the West must be secured.

d) Close relations have to be established with the Soviet Union, and Armenian immigration must be stopped.

In the Munich Congress held at the end of 1984 with the participation of representatives for fifteen countries, the following resolutions were passed:

a) New campaigns must be launched to publicise the Armenian cause.

b) An attempt must be made to resolve the 'Armenian question' through legal and other peaceful measures, for example, a campaign must be conducted to bring the issue of genocide before the United States Congress and the United Nations Committee for Human Rights so as to secure its recognition.

In the declaration made at the end of the Congress, the delegates made the following announcement: “We are to continue our struggle for the recognition of the legal rights of the Armenian people and of the genocide committed by the Turks; as well as the payment of a compensation for the human, cultural and economic losses endured by our nation and the restitution of the Armenian national home which has belonged to us for thousands of years.”

The resolutions taken at both the Congresses are of interest in facilitating the identification of the themes that were to be used as means of, propaganda by the Tashnak terrorist organization.

5. Support and Connections

The Tashnak terrorist organization derived its support largely from the United States and Europe. It operated on the basic principle of avoiding, as far as possible, contact with the other terrorist organizations. Instead it had links with various organizations in the states mentioned, its primary source of support being the Church and the Union of Churches, as well as the Armenian lobbies and research centres.

6. Political Developments

Up to the 1970's the "liberation and independence of Soviet Armenia" formed the basis of the policies determined and implemented by the Tashnak terrorist organization. For this reason, the Tashnaks gave priority to hostilities against the U.S.S.R. and engaged in a merciless struggle against those who supported and controlled Soviet Armenia. During Christmas worship, the Archbishop of the Holy Cross Armenian Church in New York was assassinated by a Tashnak suicide-killer. The reason given was the Archbishop's approval of the situation in Soviet Armenia.

After the 1970's, the break-up, due to death and other factors, of the ruling party in the Armenian Republic and the comparisons being drawn between the Third World liberation movements and the Tashnak terrorist movements led to significant changes in the Tashnak policies. Their hostility was now directed against Turkey and the Turks. "Fascist Turkey" had become the real enemy; Turkey's ally, the United States, was also counted among their enemies. The "Justice Commandos for Armenian Genocide" (JCAG), a terrorist group established in 1972 and organized by the Tashnaks, were put into action as a result of the policy changes mentioned above. The Aztag Shapatoriag, the propaganda organ of the Tashnaks and especially of the JCAG, issued a warning of 'terror' when they announced that "terrorism is the last hope and the only path to follow in the liberation struggles of today."

Despite all the propaganda efforts by the Tashnak terrorist organization, the Lisbon operation was seen as a complete failure. The attempts to represent the attack on the Turkish Embassy in Lisbon, as a turning point in terror did not win general acceptance. Following this, they were obliged to change the name of the JCAG to "Armenian Revolutionary Army"; even so, this did not produce the desired results. In particular, the arrest and conviction in 1984 of Sasunian, one of the Tashnak murderers, proved a great setback to Tashnak policies. The Tashnaks lost the support of American-born Armenians. According to the Armenian Reporter, the Tashnak Party had been taken over by Lebanese Armenians from abroad, and was powerless in the face of a large majority who did not support terrorism. The weakening of the- terrorist wing of the party led to increasing clashes of opinion at the highest level of the Executive Council and Central Committees. The highest officials in the party were split into two groups. Powerful members of the Executive Council, representatives of the Lebanese Central Committee and leading members of the party administration, were murdered in Beirut or disappeared without trace. By the end of 1985, it was impossible to speak of a united Tashnak Party. Two important external factors helped to create this situation within the Tashnak terrorist organization. The first was the revelation that the Tashnak leaders had had connections with secret service organizations in certain countries and that these were trying to establish control over the Armenian churches. The second was the struggle between ASALA and the Tashnaks. ASALA described the Tashnak leaders ad "parasites who were sucking the blood of Armenians dry." As a matter of fact, these developments within the Tashnak terrorist organization were not new. Whenever such conflicts and divisions arose in the past, the Tashnaka always re-emerged sometime later. In the World Armenian Congresses, the Tashnaks have always been, and will continue to be, a force to reckon with. As for the policy cahnges, they may be construed as being to temporary conflicts in leaderships.

7. The Media

Within the Armenian terrorist organizations, the Tashnak terrorist organization was experimenting in the field of propaganda and was giving support to that extent. They had acquired the means of constantly informing world opinion of their goals, their activities and their policy through the press and broadcasting media; for example, through various serials and feature films, through radio programmes, which they had purchased, thorough private radios, television and video films. Quite a few countries showed interest and provided the Tashnaks with special support in this area. Among the most important Tashnak publications were Hairenik and Asbarez, both published in Armenian in the United States, together with the Armenian Weekly, which was published in English.

The Tashnaks also organized twenty-two world conferences in places such as Paris, Bucharest, Erevan and Munich, although the number of participants was limited. This was a tremendous propaganda and publicity effort on their part.

TERRORISM

THE ASALA TERRORIST ORGANIZATION

During the new phase of Armenian terrorism from 1973 to 1985, the terrorist organization most frequently mentioned was ASALA (The Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia). No information has yet been published on its establishment, structure and activities. With regard to ASALA, various Armenian sources and publications provide information about certain individuals, and the results of terrorist activity, mostly obtained from publications issued by the organization or terrorist group. This is information, which the terrorist group wishes to publish or does not object to having published. With regard to the founding of ASALA, some publications link it with the events in Lebanon; they take the view that it was established under the inspiration of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, within which it had been active. Others claim that it was founded by a small group of Armenians, who, within a short time, carried out the most sensational and effective acts of terrorism of the period. All this is very far from providing a complete explanation of how ASALA was founded. Until the conditions under which ASALA first appeared as an organization are better known and the gap it filled is more satisfactorily elucidated, present doubts will continue for a long time to come.

It is generally known that the first Armenian terrorist activities of the new period were in accordance with the policies and targets of the Dashnak terrorist organization. Throughout the course of history as well as in the period under discussion, the Dashnaks were completely pro-Western. They adopted a policy of limited terrorist activity, which was directed basically against Turkish targets, and, as revealed by various sources of evidence, they obtained help and support from the Western states; in fact, they collaborated with them. Basically, their principles and historical development did not allow them to adopt a different approach. In this situation, one sphere of activity still remained. Namely that relating to the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc, which appealed to the younger Marxist Revolutionary generations and, particularly, to the "New Armenian Resistance Organizations", in France. In fact, this area had long since been filled by the Hunchaks. Since 1960, they, with their various points of view, had also been preparing for a new period of terror. However, the Hunchaks were not in evidence, and a terrorist organization, wishing to be regarded as completely new, appeared on the scene in the guise of ASALA. When the factors leading to the new period of Armenian terrorism are taken into consideration and their aims and policies, especially as a Hunchak terrorist organization, are examined, the conclusion can be reached that ASALA is a terrorist offshoot of the Hunchaks. It was above all the conditions and new developments in Lebanon that lay behind the emergence of this group as a new terrorist organization, which because known for the various acts of terrorism for which it claimed responsibility. In fact, no significant change has taken place. The two Armenian terrorist organizations once again occupy the centre of the stage against the backdrop of history. The first is more in evidence, operating through its terrorist offshoots, whilst the second operates under cover, in the guise of a terrorist group to which it has given manpower and expertise, as well as moral support. This group in turn carries out terrorist activities through subsidiary groups and teams.

1. Foundation and Organizational Structure

ASALA was founded in 1975. The leader of this terror organization is known to have been Agop Agopian, one of the two most active members of the six or seven founding members. The second was Agop Tarakdjian, who was personally involved in terrorism and other criminal activity and who ensured the continued existence of the organization in the absence of Agop Agopian. The second of these two men died in 1981, whilst the first continued as leader throughout the whole of this period, apart from the time spent under treatment for wound received. He was well known as a mucahid and a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization.

The organization was structured in accordance with the general practice of the Armenian terrorist groups. The Lebanon Central Committee was the supreme executive body. In 1980 this committee took on a very important form in the Lebanon and assumed the nature of a "bureau". Subordinate to the Central Committee were bodies such as the Political Committee, the Finance Committee, the Propaganda and Information Committee, the Intelligence Committee and the Military Committee. Subordinate to the Military Committee were a number of operational teams.

2. Aims and Objectives

ASALA revealed to the world its aims and objectives in a "political programme" published in the end of 1981. According to this, the aim of ASALA was “the foundation of a united Armenia under the leadership of a democratic, socialist, revolutionary government”. The identity of the government in question is quite clear from the definition. All aid was welcome from the USSR and other socialist countries, while at the same time Soviet Armenia was accepted as a base in "the long struggle of the Armenian people".

In this political programme their enemies were divided into two groups. The first of these was the Dashnak Armenian terrorist group, and all the "regional reactionaries" who opposed, or at least failed to support ASALA. The second was "Turkish imperialism, aided and abetted by international imperialism".

ASALA believed that “the only way of liberating Armenian territory was through the use of violence”, and issued public announcements to this effect. According to their programme, ASALA was to support all those who rejected the domination of the ruling classes and who were willing to work towards the foundation and strengthening of coalitions within the international revolutionary movement. Violence and terror formed an essential element in this programme.

In order to realise ASALA's aims and objectives it was not essential that terrorist activities should be directed solely against Turks and the friends of Turkey, or against people in positions of power or authority. "Terror is a phenomenon" and the important point is its scope and dimension. The actual targets may be of secondary importance. Greatest stress it to be laid on murders and massacres that will arouse violent public reaction. Whether the targets are men, women or children, Turks or non-Turks, is of little significance. Nevertheless, first importance was to be given to attacks on Turkey and the Turks. The importance of the attacks and massacres carried out in the airports of Paris and Istanbul, in the Istanbul Covered Market and the airport of Orly, lay entirely in the nature and violence of the reaction these were aimed at arousing.

3. Strategy, Attitudes and Behaviour

The essential aim of ASALA was to make the Lebanon the centre for all progressive Armenian movements throughout the world and the point from which all operations would be directed. In short, all progressive Armenian groups were to unite in the Lebanon and for the basis for an "ASALA Popular Movement". In this way, all progressive Armenians could enter into an official organization in which their individual strengths could be united.

An attempt was made in the summer of 1981 to put this section of ASALA strategy into effect by calling all progressive Armenians to a meeting in the Lebanon. By "progressive" was meant "Marxist-Leninist".

The second stage of this strategy began with the terrorist activities and open war undertaken by the organization thus founded with the help of certain socialist states. Armenian terror formed an integral part of the struggle for independence in the Middle East, uniting with other movements directed against the integrity of Turkish territory. This led inevitably to the union of ASALA and PKK.

ASALA was clearly a terrorist organization in attitude and behaviour. In all ranks of the administration terror and the implementation of terror was regarded as an essential feature of the organization. The leaders murdered one another, liquidated those of whom they disapproved or had them done away with. Apart from this, each terrorist team was presented to world opinion as if it were a separate Armenian organization and all types of propaganda were carried on by this means. Responsibility for the crimes committed were assumed by various organizations whose names had never before been heard of. A list is to be found in an appendix at the end of this Introduction showing how in 1981 and 1982 the murders, crimes, bombings and raids were carried out by a single organization but attributed to groups with a variety of different names. By examining this list the reader will find a number of operations claimed to have been carried out by a great many different Armenian groups but which actually all bear the mark of a single team and a single organization. All these so-called independent groups remained subordinate to and directed by ASALA itself.

4. Political developments

The first stage in the political development of ASALA, which is generally agreed to have been founded in 1975, was highly effective, and the organization was strengthened by new forces recruited during the Armenian Congress in Paris in 1979. It gained further strength in 1981. In 1983 it split into two factions.

The first operation carried out by ASALA was the assassination by Agop Tarakdjian, one of the founders of the organization, of Oktay Cerit, First Secretary in the Turkish Embassy in Beirut, on 16 February 1976. The period up to 1979 was marked by ASALA's involvement in the conflicts between the various Palestinian groups, in the course of which Agopian, one of the leaders, was wounded. Links with the Armenian terrorists in France were established during the Armenian Congress meeting in Paris in 1979, which saw the organization strengthened by the addition of new elements and fresh blood. The most famous of the new members were Alex Yenikomshian and Monte Melkian. In 1981 a number of terrorist attacks carried out by ASALA on innocent groups or individuals having severely shaken its standing in world public opinion. Following the Israeli occupation of the Lebanon the ASALA leaders were forced to leave the Lebanon along with the Palestinians. A split in the organization took place in 1983.

• The Agop Agopian Group - This was centred in Greece and the Middle East. Its terror was directed indiscriminately against Turks and non-Turks, as well as against innocent women and children. It was this group that was responsible for the attack at Orly.

• In Western Europe the movement operated under the name of the "Asala Revolutionary Movement". This followed a more moderate course of action and directed its terror solely against Turks. The leaders of this group were Monte Melkonian and Ara Toranian. Toranian was the leader of a group centred in Paris known as the "Armenian National Movement" which described the Orly attack as a purely Fascist operation.

Melkonian, who had been born in Iran, declared his intention of setting the Armenian struggle on a sound political footing. According to this the movement had two aims; to rouse the Armenians to action, and to make common cause with other groups in their struggle against Turkey. In this second stage, Melkonian was involved in establishing alliances with other groups while Agopian continued with his own type of activity.

5. Support and Alliances

ASALA received support from three main sources:

1.The Soviet Union, the Eastern block and other socialist countries.

2.Countries such as Greece and Syria whose geopolitical expectations depended on the destabilisation of Turkey from within and without.

3.Various communist parties, indirectly from the Hunchak Armenian terrorist organization and its sympathisers, and also from the Armenian church, in spite of its difference in outlook.

In ASALA's links with other groups first priority was given to relations with non-Armenian terror groups which threatened Turkey directly or indirectly, and whose activities ran parallel to the strategy implemented by ASALA itself. In the period between 1976 and 1980 these consisted of groups such as the Palestine Liberation Organization, activist members of the various communist parties and the secret services belonging to certain states. In 1980 ASALA widened the scope of its activities following the agreement reached with PICK at a meeting in Sidon in the Lebanon, thus establishing unity of outlook and action between ASALA and PKK. As a matter of fact, these two organizations had already displayed a marked affinity in aims, structure and beliefs. From 1983 onwards ASALA relations began to develop along the lines of the strategy laid down by Monte Melkonian. First priority was given to terrorist activity within Turkey, and links were established with any group capable of furthering this strategy by either direct or indirect means. These groups were headed by PKK, the Turkish CommunistParty and other communist organizations.

6. Publications and information media

ASALA's most important, official organ is Haiastan

Other important publications include the periodicals Hai-Baikar, Armenia and Kaytzer, published in London.

ASALA's first radio broadcasts began in 1981 in Beyrut with a daily one-hour programme "The Voice of the Armenians in the Lebanon". Apart from these, facilities are provided by the public radio corporations and mass communication media belonging to countries with which it has established contacts.

ASALA — MR

Monta Melkonian (Meykonyan) who left ASALA and passed to France in September 1983 has disclosed that he has founded the ASALA — The Military Apparatus Of People’ s Movement, ASALA — Revolutionary Movement (ASALA — MR). The recovering of the relations with the French Government, which deteriorated has been their most important goal. While it was being thought that these would do their actions in Turkey, they have taken the North American and Western European wings totally under their own control and attracted the militants in these regions to their line. Melkonian, was killed in 1993 in Nagorno Karabakh while he was fighting against Azerbaijanis.

TERRORISM

JCAG

Has been founded in Beirut in 1975 by Taşnak Party and by Armenian Revolutionary Federation, which is its extension in the USA as a competitor to ASALA and Hınçak Party. The organisation is operating as the Military Apparatus of the Taşnak Party, and it has made its name known for the first time by the world public opinion by the event of the murdering of Daniş Tunalıgil, The Ambassador of Turkish Republic in Vienna on October 22, 1995. The purpose of the organisation has been disclosed to be the foundation of the independent Great Armenian State.

ARMENIAN TERRORISM

ARA

Ara was founded in France and it became famous with the assassination of Dursun Aksoy, the Administrative Attaché of Brussels Embassy of The Republic of Turkey. ARA was carried this action out together with ASALA and JCAG. ARA is a racist organization, is totally against the methods and ideas of ASALA. The organization is supported by all Armenian Terror Organisations except the Tashnak Party, which ideologically and practically supports Armenian Genocide Justice Commandos (JCAG) and ASALA.

6:21 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.

Armenian TERROSIM (3)

TERRORISM

THE DREAM OF “A GREATER ARMENIA”

The “ Great Armenia “ has been put forward b the Armenian President Levon Ter — Petrosyan. The past and the ideas of Ter — Petrosyan, who was born in Aleppo, is based on the principles of the Armenian Communist Party, which was the only political party at the time of USSR / CCCP period. (1)

Ter — Petrosyan is the chief organiser who has flamed the Nagorno Karabakh matter and the demonstrations that were intensified from 1987 onwards in Armenia. The “ Nagorno Karabakh Committee “ which was founded by him in February 1988, for the connecting of Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia after it is separated from Azerbaijan, has changed its name as “ Armenian National Movement “ in November 1989.

After he won the elections, and within the process of becoming a party, Ter — Petrosyan, who collected the majority of the votes, and who was elected as the President Armenian Supreme Soviet on August 1990, has declared the independence of Armenia on August 4, 1990. Armenia has signed the Alma — Ata (Almatı) Declaration on December 21, 1991 and then became a member of AGİK (AGİT) and United Nations.

In the same period, Armenia has violated the international agreements, its own commitments, Helsinki and AGİT principles and actually invaded the Nagorno Karabakh, which is an autonomous region connected to the Republic of Azerbaijan. Armenia has applied a clear genocide against the Azerbaijani people here, apart from invading. (2)

Ter — Petrosyan, in his first speech in the 1990 elections, has made the call for the recognition of so-called genocide of 1915 to the international organisations. (3)

Ter — Petrosyan visited US President Bill Clinton on August 8, 1994 in The White House. The members of the Armenian Church, Priest Rafael Andonyan, Chief Bishop Mesrob Aşçıyan, Chief Bishop Hayag Barsamyan and Chief Bishop Vahe Hovsepyan were present among those who participated the meeting along with the Taşnak Party leaders. Here the weighted subjects that were discussed, were the difficulties shown to Armenia by Turkey and Azerbaijan, and the recognition of the so — called Armenian genocide. (4)

The Clinton visit of Ter — Petrosyan was attracting attention. Because, such kind of a meeting; was made for the first time within the last 10 years; by an US President. Apart from this, the discussing of the so — called genocide in between a President of USA and Armenian leaders has been evaluated as a new situation.

TERRORISM

THE PARIS CONGRESS OF 1979

The "First International Congress of Armenian Groups" was held in Paris on 3-6 September 1979. ASALA was very strongly represented at this congress and played a very influential role. The congress exerted a very considerable influence on the progressive Armenian groups in France, particularly in persuading them to become involved in terrorist activity. The main aim of this congress was to gather the Armenians of the world around a single idea and a single flag, and to make territorial demands on the basis of a careful evaluation of the political environment.

The most important proposals put forward at this congress were the following:

a. An end should be put to party and sectarian squabbles and a "Central Committee" established.

b. Measures should be taken to prevent the assimilation of Armenians in the Diaspora.

c. Military theoreticians and tacticians should be employed in their operations.

The decisions taken were as follows:

a. Extra impetus should be given to the Pan-Armenian movement. In the diaspora the concept of Armenianism should be politicised and importance given to the organization of an international "Armenian Front".

b. An investigation should be made into the possibility of help for the Armenian cause by Armenians living in the USSR and measures should be taken to facilitate such assistance.

c. Territorial claims should be made directly to Turkey.

d. The Armenian Church should be given a national character.

e. Work should be begun on the foundation of an Armenin bank.

f. Central Bureaus should be established and publication and communication facilities developed.

The Paris Congress resulted in an increase in violence and terror. ASALA was strengthened by the introduction of fresh blood. Military training was increased in a number of centres.

TERRORISM

THE LAUSANNE CONGRESS OF 1983

The Lausanne Congress had been preceded by a number of very important developments. Terrorist activities had attained very serious dimensions, and world public opinion was becoming aroused in condemnation of Armenian terrorism. Some of these terrorist activities, which were now taking the form of massacres, were beginning to constitute a matter of deep concern and anxiety, not only for impartial observers but even for friends and allies of the Armenians and, above all, for the Armenians themselves. The Lausanne Congress met against this background with the aim of uniting Armenian political views and of directing all action towards a common goal. ASALA did not participate in this congress and those in favour of violence found themselves in a minority. The Congress ended with splits and factions appearing in both ASALA and the Dashnak groups and with vain attempts by the terrorist teams and groups to form new organizations. Most of them were expelled from the organization, arrested and condemned.

The following were the most important of the proposals put forward and the topics discussed:

a. A constitutional council should be established to decide upon basic politics, to determine and formulate views with regard to territorial claims, and to establish such claims on a sound basis.

b. A national liberation movement should be established on the basis of nationalism and democracy.

c. These congresses should be similar to the International Jewish Congresses and display a strongly democratic, parliamentarian character.

The following decisions were taken:

a. Measures should be taken to ensure that the congresses should possess a democratic, parliamentarian character, and that a "Constitution" should be drawn up.

b. The Constitution should be drawn up by a constitutional council, which should also be responsible for the preparation of a text presenting a synthesis of the various political views held.

c. The work of the council should be published and distributed to the international public.

This congress ended in disagreement and great confusion. The moderates proved dominant but were unable to achieve any notable proved dominant but were unable to achieve any notable results. The conflict continued after the close of the congress, and the factions and splits referred to above began to make their appearance.

TERRORISM

THE SÉVRES CONGRESS OF 1986

This congress met at Sévres on 7-13 July 1985 under the title "The Third International Congress of Armenian Groups". Its aim was the discussion and acceptance of the "Armenian Constitution". This was to lead to work on the establishment of a "Union" representing Armenians throughout the world.

The Armenian terrorist groups did not participate in this congress. The question of Dashnak representation gave rise to protracted disputes. ASALA was not represented at this congress and was exposed to violent criticism.

The following proposals were put forward:

a. The slogan "One Armenianism, one goal, one struggle and one voice" was proposed and accepted.

b. It was proposed that the Congress of Sevres was to be accepted as valid and the Congress of Lausanne as invalid.

c. The proposal that no support should be given to ASALA was accepted.

d. It was proposed and accepted that the struggle against Turkey should be continued.

e. It was proposed and accepted that support should be given to the struggle being conducted by Greece and the Greek Cypriots against Turkish expansionist policy.

f. It was proposed that the Congress should bear a character similar to that of the "Palestine National Congress in Exile", and this was accepted on the basis of observation of the required developments.

The congress decisions are as fallow:

a. The Congress accepted the text of an "Armenian Constitution".

b. The Congress accepted the application of a many-sided strategy for the achievement of their aims.

aa. It was decided that collaboration should be established between progressive and revolutionary movements in Turkey and the Armenian nationalist movement, as well as between the Armenians and the various other peoples engaged in the struggle against Turkish oppression and exploitation, and that recognition should be given to the inevitably close links between the struggle of the Armenian people and that of other oppressed peoples.

bb. The International Armenian Congress decided that although it was in no way connected with any state or power, it would accept aid and assistance from any country that respected and supported the Armenian cause.

c. It was decided to send a note to the United Nations, the USA, the USSR, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Armenia, the Council of Europe, the unaligned states and all signatories of the Lausanne Agreement bringing to their attention the fact that the Armenians were the only people who had failed to profit from the abolition of colonialism.

d. The Congress, convinced that Turkey should be compelled to admit its involvement in the genocide of 1915 and that such an admission would open the way to the liberation of Armenian territory, decided to disseminate information on this question and to have recourse to the necessary quarters.

The USSR was praised for its recognition of the genocide of 1915 and for the publication of an article on this subject in Pravda in April 1985, while at the same time criticism was levelled at the American administration for having failed to ensure the passage through the US Congress of a genocide bill.

TERRORISM

THE ARMENIAN CONSTITUTION

In his speech introducing the Armenian Constitution, accepted by “Third International Armenian Congress”, Mr. James Karnuzian declared that "the Armenians had been greatly handicapped by their lack of unity" and that the only means of removing this handicap and ensuring unity was to form "a unified group”. He went on to say that the text known as the "Constitution" comprised all the various views consonant with this aim.

Impartial observers announced that, in the event of this Constitutions being put into effect, "all groups and organizations engaged in the struggle for the victory of the Armenian cause would be gathered together under the aegis of the Armenian Congress".

The main aims of the Armenian Congress as reflected in the Armenian Constitution were as follows:

a. To unite the Armenians scattered throughout the world into a single body.

b. To disseminate information throughout the world concerning the work of the Congress.

c. To make use of all political and diplomatic means at their disposal to liberate Armenian territory now under Turkish occupation.

d. To organize the return of the Armenians to their homeland and to make the necessary preparations for this.

In order to realize these aims, the Congress would seek ways of ensuring the participation of other groups, without, however, sacrificing anything of their independence and autonomy. Every group of ethnic Armenians composed of over twenty members should have the right to representation in the Congress in accordance with democratic principles, thus accepting the principle of a wide popular base.

According to the Constitution the work of the Congress centre should be based in Switzerland.

Traditional bodies such as the "Armenian National Council" should be divided into organizations such as the "General Council" and "Executive Council".

CONCLUSIONS

What is the truth concerning the "Armenian Problem" and the "Armenian Question" that lies behind the renewal of terrorist activity in the years between 1973 and 1985?

What are the lessons to be learned from this terrorist activity, which far surpasses in ruthlessness the work of any of the Armenian terrorist groups of the past?

What light can be shed on future developments by an evaluation of the events of that period?

As a conclusion to this comprehensive study, almost entirely based as it is on Armenian publications or on works deriving from sources sympathetic to the Armenian cause, we believe a satisfactory reply can be given to all these questions.

1. The propaganda formerly used to exploit the various interests, aims and expectations of the Armenians living within the Ottoman Empire, and at converting these minority groups into a problem for the Ottoman State, is still being propagated under the guise of an "Armenian Cause" in various countries in the world, including the Armenian Republic, which now forms part of the USSR. It is now no longer a question of an "Armenian Problem" but of an "Armenian Cause", a concept that is now being thrust upon world public opinion, international organizations, and various parliaments and senates. The new Armenian terrorism of 1973-1985 employs weapons, crimes, massacres and attacks as propaganda aimed at enforcing acceptance of the justice of this "cause". In other words, all these massacres, crimes and attacks have a single aim - to publicize the "Armenian Cause", to emphasise its scope and dimensions, and so arouse fear and apprehension regarding the lengths to which this terror could well be taken.

2. There are certain lessons to be learned by humanity as a whole, as well as by the Armenians themselves, whose names have become associated with a terrorist activity in which they have been in no way involved, from the new wave of Armenian terrorism of 1973-1985. The use of terror as a means of propaganda and psychological pressure is a question of concern to all states, and it from this point of view that the 1973-1985 era must be evaluated. States founded on principles of law and order find their field of activity restricted or even rendered utterly powerless in the face of a terror that acknowledges no law and regards all means as legitimate. Even more important, some states sympathise with this terrorism and even support it on geopolitical grounds, failing to realize that one day the same weapon may be turned against themselves. From this point of view, the new wave of Armenian terrorism contains a number of very valuable lessons.

From another angle, the apparent differences, conflicts and even divisions between the various Armenian terrorist groups are purely superficial. As a means of propaganda for the propagation of the "Armenian cause", whatever the method of application, range or scope, all these apparently discrete elements complement each other in their work towards the achievement of a common aim. And the expert in the use of psychology in political struggle is presented with clear evidence of terror as one aspect of psychological warfare.

3. Future developments will be determined by the attitudes adopted by states who see in the acceptance or rejection of the "Armenian Cause" the realisation of the geopolitical expectations of international organizations, states, parliaments and senates in the field of international relations, and they will increase commensurately in importance.

The acceptance of the "Armenian Cause" in the form in which it is now presented, means the advance acceptance of an attitude that will not be content with sporadic massacres, crimes and attacks, but which will inevitably turn towards the waging of a regular war.

If the "Armenian Cause" is interpreted as being the preservation and development of the Armenian language, religion and culture, this will result in the complete rejection of terrorism, and will liberate the Armenian people from a situation which is causing them great anxiety and apprehension. Otherwise, they will finally become the victims of a steadily increasing anarchy and the incriminations of others.

ARMENIAN TERRORISM

AIMS OF ARMENIAN CONGRESSES

Throughout the period covered by the "Armenian Question" or "Armenian Problem" the Armenian terror groups have been given indirect encouragement by certain churches and states, while at the same time a number of Armenian congresses have been held at their request and invitation. Most of these congresses have been organized by the Dashnak or Hunchak terror groups and attended by their own members, together with other Armenians interested in the topic and representatives of the churches. Such congresses have normally been in the nature of forums at which topics such as the actual situation and conditions together with the activities and potential capabilities of the organization were discussed, and at which a number of decisions were taken. These decisions were, however, very rarely actually applied and most often served merely to foment faction and conflict.

TERRORISM

ARMENIAN DEMANDS AND PROPAGANDA

The Armenians' demands from Turkey are recognition and compensation of so-called genocide, and grant of land. These demands are based on following claims:

1. The Turks occupied Armenia and deported the Armenians.

2. The Turks systematically massacred the Armenians from after Russo-Ottoman War in 1877-78.

3. From the beginning of 1915, the Turks methodically annihilated the Armenians.

4. Talat Pasha gave secret commands for the annihilation of the Armenians.

5. 1.5 million of Armenians had been killed in the genocide.

All these claims can be vanished with an objective research:

- When the Turks came to Anatolia, an independent Armenia did not exist; thus, it is impossible to say that the Turks occupied the Armenian lands.

- The Armenian riots following the Russo-Ottoman War in 1877-78 are mentioned above. Today it is clearly known that the Armenians revolted to attract the attention of the European Powers.

- Events of 1915 were just a measure taken by the Ottoman government to provide security in its territories against the Armenians who stabbed the Ottoman Army from its back. Besides United Nations describes genocide as a government's intention to annihilate a race. There is no evidence to prove such an intention of the Ottoman government. The Ottoman archives are opened to the historians and any further investigation would reveal the facts.

- Armenian historian Andonyan claimed that he found the confidential documents of Talat Pasha and for many years these documents used as the evidence of so-called genocide. However, two Turkish historians researched those documents and proved they are counterfeit.

- These telegrams were published in British "Daily Telegraph" in 1919. It was believed that during the occupation of Aleppo forces of General Allenby had found some documents remained from the Ottoman government. When the British Foreign Affairs Bureau have investigated this issue, they have learnt that the documents belonged to an Armenian group in Paris. The original documents of this investigation are still in the British archives.

Talat Pasha was killed by an Armenian terrorist called Tehliryan, in Berlin. During Tehliryan's trial in Berlin, five of those counterfeit telegrams adduced to the court although their nullity was proven. The language and the paper of the telegrams were not in the Ottoman style and the experts have clarified this fact.

The number of the Armenian casualties does not have any valid basement. It is said that 1.5 million Armenians were killed but, according to the Ottoman records, there were 1.3 million Armenian habitants. If the total Armenian population was, 1.3 million it is impossible to kill 1.5 million Armenians. However, there is neither a method nor a record to count the Armenian casualties. For example, the president of the Armenian delegate in the Lausanne Conference Bogos Nubar stated that, in that time, 700.000 Armenians migrated to other countries and there were only 280.000 Armenians in Turkey. If these numbers are correct and the Armenian population was 1.3 million, the casualties should be 300.000 including the ones joined the Russian Army and died in the First World War.

In 1918 edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica the number of the Armenian casualties is 600.000 but in its 1968 edition, the number is 1.5 million. As seen the casualties increase on paper.

After the war, in Istanbul, Mustafa Pasha Council was formed and the remaining members of Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) were arrested. The list of the suspects were given by the British and four group of people were arrested:

1. The people who harmed the Armenians and the Greeks during the war.

2. The people who disobeyed the war rules.

3. The people who disobeyed the armistice.

4. The people who disobeyed the allies in Caucassia (these are the Azerbaijani Turks).

At first, the trial was planned to be holding in Istanbul but later the suspects were taken to Malta. Most of them would have been judged from the Armenian genocide. The court took more than a year and the British made long investigations. The arrests were made usually on denunciations, which still exist in the files. The British government asked the Royal Attorney if it is possible to suit against these people but the response was negative, because there were not enough evidence to trace a trial. Britain then asked for evidence to the Embassy in Washington but the response was the same, there was no proof of genocide in the American archives.

The telegrams which, Andonyan mentioned in his book were in Britain at that time. If they were real the British government would have absolutely revealed them to the court and sentence the suspects. If the most keen, Turk opponent Lloyd George's government did not prove anything, it means there is no proof to condemn Turkey.

During the displacement, the Ottoman government associated with Armenian Relief Society and USA. USA distributed aids to the refugees. In this respect, it is illogical to accuse the Ottoman government by a methodical annihilation movement.

To conclude, it is irrational to accept a counterfeit genocide.

In the period 1973-1985, during the New Armenian Terror, congresses under such titles as "The International Armenian Groups" were held in Paris in 1979, Lausanne in 1983 and Sevres in 1985. At these congresses attempts were made to address world public opinion, as well as the various Armenian communities and members of the Armenian terror groups. At the congress held in 1985 under the chairmanship of a priest, James Karauzian, the text of an "Armenian Constitution" was accepted. The declared aims of the congresses held during this period were "to foster unity and co-operation among Armenians", "to form a centre for the formulation of political demands and aspirations", and "to combine the various Armenian terror groups in a single organization". Priority was given to a massive propaganda and psychological campaign to inform international public opinion of their activities. Attempts were also made to interest Armenians in the work of the various groups and to involve them in terror or other operations. Another aim of these congresses was to ensure harmony and co-operation between the various separate Armenian terror groups. Thus all terror and other activities could be presented as the common policy of the international Armenian community, and the various elements brought together in a united front.

These congresses had a number of characteristics in common:

a) In all of them priority was given to discussions concerning armed struggle. Disagreements between those who supported armed struggle and those who opposed this strategy finally led to splits in the Armenian terror groups. ASALA refused, or was not allowed, to participate in any of the congresses held after the Paris Congress of 1979.

b) It was decided that the texts of all decisions taken at these congresses should be forwarded to the various international bodies and that these decisions should be considered and discussed at various levels in the international forums. Means were also discussed by which this decision could be put into effect.

c) One of the most important topics of discussion was the union of all Armenians in a single organization, but no agreement could ever be reached on how this aim was to be achieved. The text known as the "Constitution" accepted the idea of a preparatory period.

d) The number of participants at these congresses steadily diminished.

e) No effective measures were taken to remove the differences of opinion that were very clearly revealed at these congresses.

6:19 PM | Add a comment | Permalink | Blog it | Armenian Issue. allegations - facts.