June, 2004
I have not given this question much thought. A strong precedent of success must be seen before the United States submits itself to some foreign authority other than the United Nations itself.
[Editor’s note: One would wonder how a strong precedent of success can be possible without the support of the United States]
There’s a flourishing of artistic activity in relation to the Genocide, from film maker Atom Egoyan’s ’Ararat’, and the music of Diamanda Galas, through to popular rock bands such as System of a Down. Surely cultural examination, and artistic examination of the Genocide is much more important than any official recognition?
It is not so much official recognition which is desired but rather an end to official denial. The Turks have lost their propaganda battle. The controversy excited scholars to do research, and once that research was done it became obvious that there was an Armenian Genocide. Even the New York Times and the Boston Globe, two bastions of the establishment, have now made it policy to write about the Armenian Genocide without any qualifications and without the necessity of talking about the Turkish point of view.
I can only speak for myself. The recognition of the Armenian Genocide need not be too formal an event, it is just a matter of public policy. If the United States government had as its policy the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, there would be no need for formal action. The U.S. State Department could announce it in official papers as needed, as was done up until the 1920s, and the President could use the word genocide in his annual message of condolences to the Armenian people.
According to some Turkish readings of the events, prior to the First World War, the Armenians had been assimilated in the Ottoman Empire for centuries, peacefully. The conditions of war, and the threat from Russia, with whom Armenians in Eastern Anatolia were beginning to side, led to the violence of 1915. The theory is that these were extreme times, and acts of war and so, while regrettable, they can’t be referred to as Genocide.
Armenians, Greeks, and Jews were never assimilated into Ottoman society. They were dhimmi, or tolerated subject peoples, not citizens. The Turks consider them to be gavours, nonbelievers. As such, they occupied a position beneath Turkish society and there was no assimilation. It is true that a few Armenians rose to high places in the government, because of their unique talents, and were ‘ottomanized’, or accepted into Ottoman society, but still were despised outsiders. All of the sultan’s subjects were considered slaves of the Sultan, in any case, so as one of those slaves an Armenian could rise to high places.
Secondly, the Russian government was more progressive than the Ottoman government and gave Armenians more civil rights and protection of life and property. Not surprisingly, the Armenians in the Russian Empire were loyal and patriotic. While the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire were hardly patriotic, they were for the most part loyal. When representatives of the Young Turk Party went to the Congress of the Dashnaks in Erzerum, they promised the Armenians autonomy if they and the Russian Armenians would fight against the Russian Empire. In fact, the Czar made a similar promise to the Armenians. Experience had shown that neither of these promises could be believed. So, the Armenian delegates announced that Armenians in Turkey would be loyal to Turkey and Armenians in the Russian empire would be loyal to Russia. As a matter of fact, a few prominent Armenians went over to the other side, but they were insignificant in number and certainly posed no real threat to the Ottoman government.
Armenian young men of fighting age in the Turkish army performed heroically in the two Balkan Wars and also on the Turkish Eastern front just before the beginning of the genocide. Furthermore, Armenians were not only expelled from the eastern provinces but from all of Anatolia, east, west, north, and south. The Turks depend on the absolute ignorance of Westerners of Anatolian geography to carry on that ruse. Ankara is hardly on the Eastern front, much less Brussa and Marash.
( Article continues »»)All comments will be reviewed by TMO editorial staff, and if judged appropriate and in accordance with our comments policy, will be published.

Are you a budding/established writer? Would you like to see your work appear in Three Monkeys Online? We're always on the look out for new material - check here for our submission guidelines
Comments
Mrs. Rivka Cohen, the Israeli Ambassador to Armenia, answering a question about the so-called Armenian genocide last February said that the Holocaust is unique since it was planned and aimed to destroy the whole nation and that nothing should be compared with the Holocaust.
This wording, considered as a denial of the Armenian “genocide”, caused an uproar in Armenian press, some even asked that Mrs. Cohen be declared persona non grata. To calm the spirits Armenian Foreign Ministry gave a protest note to Israel stating that it considers unacceptable any attempt to deny or demean the reality of the Armenian Genocide but no reference was made for declaring the Israeli Ambassador persona non grata. The Armenian Foreign Minister, on the other hand, told on the matter that he was confident that the time will come and Israel will revise its policy and that this will take place as a result of the pressure of the Jewish people. He was referring most probably to some few Jewish scholars and writers who assiduously support Armenia and Armenians on every occasion.
As a matter of fact Mrs. Cohen’s words expressed nothing new. Mr. Shimon Perez, Israeli Foreign Minister, during his visit to Turkey last year said on that subject that Israel rejects any attempt to create a similarity between the Holocaust and the Armenian events and that nothing similar to the Holocaust occurred. The Israeli Foreign Ministry, in its reply to the Armenian note of protest, confirmed this official position by stating that “the (Armenian) events cannot be compared to genocide”.
Armenians expect every year that American President’s message on the occasion on “24th of April” contains the world “genocide” and try to put some pressure on the president to this end. This year about 160 members of the US Congress sent a letter to the president advising him to do so. But the Armenians were not happy with the President’s speech, which did not satisfy the Turks either, because he spoke of “massacre of as many as 1.5 million Armenians through forced exile and murder at the end of the Ottoman Empire”. One should say that the President’s words, although unacceptable, was better than the 2001 terminology which used the word “annihilation” i.e. complete destruction.
President’s message was unacceptable to the Turks because according to the Ottoman census on the eve of the First World War, the Armenian population in the entire Ottoman Empire was about 1.3 millions, therefore, logically, 1.5 millions could not be dead. It is a fact, some Armenians were relocated on the southern provinces of the Ottoman Empire. However, this cannot be identified as genocide or killing the Armenians at the hand of the Ottomans. In fact during the war years, the Armenian population decreased about 300,000 so did the Muslim population of Anatolia about 2 millions. This figure demonstrates how horrific the consequences of the war were . In fact, the number of people who died on the battlefield was much less than the people who died because of diseases, starvation, cold etc.
President Bush in his message said that he looks “forward to Turkey’s restoration economic, political and cultural links with Armenia”. Technically, Turkey has never banned the economic and cultural relations with Armenia. As to the establishment of the diplomatic relations Turkey rightfully expects that Armenia maintains good neighborly relations with Turkey by giving up her “genocide” allegations, recognizing the territorial integrity of Turkey (Turkey will do the same for Armenia) and putting an end to the occupation of Azerbaijani lands.