Armenian-Turkish dialog

TURKISH REPORTER OFFERS A HAND OF FRIENDSHIP
YEREVAN, OCTOBER 13, ARMENPRESS:

The Armenian reporters were supposed to meet with two Turkish
reporters October 12 at the headquarters of A+1 private TV Channel who
have arrived in Armenia to probe into public reaction following the
passage of a genocide bill by a US Congress committee, pending now in
the House.

However, at appeared that one of the reporters, Nazim Alpman from the
Milliyet daily did not show up. His colleague from Hyurriet daily
Faruk Bildirici declared that he had come not to answer questions but
to offer a hand of friendship and try to seek areas for mutual
cooperation.

He said Turkish reporters had such an experience with their Greek
counterparts and it would be very desirable that the friendship
between Armenians and Turks began with that among reporters.

Following this introduction Mr. Faruk Bildirici had to go through an
ordeal of tough questions by Armenian reporters which he either could
not or did not want to answer.

[ November 23, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

Is this quick damage control on part of the Turks, you think? I honestly don't think any two turkish reporters would meet with the armenians and udnergo all that of their own free will.

Next...what of it? I don't think it changes much. Even I don't like the turks and I'm not much of a nationalist, believe me. So I doubt that this staged appearance will do much to promote "friendship" between the two nations.

skeptical as ever,
gayane

Gayane,

I suspect that not all of them are monsters. After all, what reasons do they have not to be friendly to us, or fake friendship?

Sure this incident itself has no consequences. But it has to start some place, right?

You know I used to call for reconciliation with the Turks, but now I am not so sure. I think they still are out to finish the job they set out to do 85 years ago. Its hard though, as I know there were and are Good Turks. I am amazed how much Anti-Turk feeling I have welled up in me. They stubborness to recognize their crimes really angers me. Turkce kopek!

Dear friends,

Let's all remember the level of hostility that changed overnight with the late Egyptian president's,Anwar Sadat,surprise visit to Jerusalem.

I believe we have no choice but to try to find a dialogue with Turkey.Granted,at the moment the Turks feel that "little Armenia" cannot match their proud grandeur,(population number,economic/military strength,etc...,most of all they do not consider themselves as the "sick man of Europe" anymore,on the contrary,they feel they are at the forefront in spreading "modernity" in a place that the West still considers "the wild,wild east" and Turkey their(West's)best chance in bringing those regions into West's(ie.US's) fold.

All these affect the Turkish mentality in a profound manner and get extremely upset and "hurt" when they become faced with situations that might put that "pride" into question,and realize that all those feelings of grandeur is in effect a fiction,and their importance would last as long as world poltics would deem Turkey "usefull" for their own perposes.
That is why,I think,it touches a raw nerve when their strongest ally "plays around" with a "so-called" Genocide recognition issue that seemingly ignors many years of "service" that Turkey gave to the US.

[from the way the Turkish parlaimentary delegation performed infront of the International Relations Commitee,you can see that they thought they had the Americans in the bag,but it didn't work that way...this shows that they expected an easy ride].

Perhaps the Armenian drive for Genocide recognition around the world,if nothing,acts as a reminder to the Turks that they are not as great as they think,and "little Armenia" deserves respect and "recognition" that so far Turkey has denied,and in absence of such respect Armenia could be a source of trouble,and furthermore, anti-Armenian stance in the Caucasus could be quite damaging for Turkish interests.

I think sooner or later Turkey is going to come to a decision (or forced to come to a decesion)that time has come to "talk" with Armenia.
You know,there is a saying that Turks are there and they are going nowhere,similarly, Turkey will realize that there is a "little Armenia",it is there and plans to stay for a long time.

With regards
Zareh

------------------
Zareh

Zareh,

I absolutely agree with you. And because I believe that the day of the dialog is not far away, I think that we have homework to do.

California Courier Online
October 19, 2000

Commentary

House Resolution Exposes Turkish Public To Armenian Genocide for the First
Time

By Harut Sassounian
California Courier Publisher

Turkish newspapers and airwaves have been inundated with news and
commentaries on the Armenian Genocide.

Ever since the U.S. House of Representatives started debating a Resolution
on the Armenian Genocide, this issue has been the leading news item in
Turkey. As a result, the Turkish public has now learned more about the
Armenian Genocide than in the past 85 years. No matter how distorted and
one-sided the information has been, the young generation of Turks has been
exposed for the first time to the fact that its ancestors killed a large
number of Armenians.

Several "dissident" Turkish writers have contributed to the process of
educating the Turkish public. They have bravely acknowledged that the
Ottoman Empire did indeed commit genocide against its Armenian minority.
In unprecedented face-to-face interviews at the end of September, the
Turkish affiliate of the American Gallup Poll asked 1,095 Turks in 17
provinces their views on the Armenian Genocide.

To the question: "Are Armenian claims on an act of genocide right or
wrong?" 11.7% said the claims are right, 78.7% said they are wrong, and
9.6% said they had no idea. Such a question could have never been asked
before in Turkey and, if asked, the answers could not have been published.

It is incredible that 11.7% of the Turkish population, which means several
million Turks, would openly admit that the Armenian Genocide is a fact, with
another 9.6% saying that they don't know. Given the repressive regime in
Turkey, which routinely sends people to jail for simply expressing their
opinion, I fully expected that all 100% of the respondents would have
"wisely" repeated the government's oft-repeated line that there was no
genocide. In fact, much more than 11.7% of Turks would have probably
admitted that there was a genocide, were it not for their fear of the
consequences. Remember, this was a personal, not an anonymous, interview.

In another candidly worded question, Turks were asked, "Are you informed on
the draft resolution that accuses Turkey of committing an act of genocide
against the Armenian citizens of the Ottoman Empire during World War I? "56%
said, "yes, we are," while 44% said, "no, we are not." This answer shows
that more than 25 million Turks, in a matter of few weeks, have been exposed
to the issue of the Armenian Genocide thanks to the Resolution in the
American Congress.

Another indication of the changing atmosphere in Turkey is that for the
first time, when a Turkish official makes an outrageous anti-Armenian
statement, other officials are quick to criticize him or her. A case in
point is Tansu Ciller, the former Prime Minister and the leader of the True
Path Party. She called on the Turkish government to expel from Turkey the
30,000 Armenian refugees who had come to Istanbul from Armenia in recent
years seeking employment.

Several Turkish officials and commentators castigated her for her racist
views and stated that the spectacle of deporting thousands of Armenians
across the Turkish border, under the watchful eyes of TV cameras, would
remind the world about the "deportations" of 1915! Oral Chaleshlar wrote in
Jumhurriyet: "If someone who has been Prime Minister speaks like this in the
21st century, imagine the things that the leaders of 100 years ago would
do!"

Despite this reassuring trend, there are still plenty of others who are
ready and willing to make irrational and uncivilized statements about
Armenians and the Armenian Genocide. Here is a recent sample from
various newspapers:

Metin Ergun, a member of the Turkish Parliament, and "an authority on
Turkish history," said there is no evidence that the Ottoman Empire
deliberately exterminated its Armenian population. "If they found one
single proof, we would accept it."

Tayyibe Gulek of the Democratic Left Party said that the U.S. Congress is
"desperate to get this [resolution] passed before the election. What's the
rush? You've waited 85 years."

Uzeyir Garih, a Turkish Jew and the President of the Alarko Holding
Company: "The Resolution is unfair, unscientific and baseless."

Prof. Huseyin Bagci: "The Armenian citizens of Turkey and their institutions
such as the Armenian Church and some foundations and business associations
will suffer under this new political environment."

The Economist: "The Turks are going through one of their bouts of feeling
lonely and unloved."

State Minister Abdulhalik Mehmet Chay: "The Turkish Republic is not the
53rd state of the United States." This State Minister is ignorant of the
fact that there are 50, not 52, states in the United States!

Former U.S. Senator Nancy Kassenbaum Baker who heads the American Turkish
Council said during a visit to Ankara last week: "This is a foolish
resolution. Not to take away from the tragedies that occurred, but I do not
believe that this is the time or place to address this issue."

If, as expected, the Resolution comes to the floor of the House this week
and passes, we will find out if the leaders of "modern" Turkey have become
any more rational than their genocidal Ottoman predecessors in 1915.

*****************************************************************
California Courier On-Line is a service provided by the California
Courier. Subscriptions or changes of address should not be
transmitted through this service. Information in that regard
should be telephoned to (818) 409-0949; faxed to:
(818) 409-9207, or e-mailed to: Ccourier@compuserve.com
Letters to the editor concerning issues addressed in the Courier
may be e-mailed, provided it is signed by the author. Phone
or E-mail address is also required to verify authorship

That's a key point we all need to be very aware of when considering the modern-day turkish public. It's similar to the generations of Americans that grew up with idea that American Indians/Native Americans were just "red savages" prior to being "saved" by the white man. History is often not taught in an unbiased manner.

More important than the US resolution will be the potentially modern attitude taken by the turkish people as a result of their newly gained information.

Listen, why don't we raise some money to help the Turks resettle in Mongolia? LOL! Seriously though, I drift back and forth between optimism and pessimism when it comes to relations with the Turks. Wow 11% accept the Genocide, what break through!

Who knows, FarsiS, who knows? With them you never know what's happenning from one minuite to the next.

What the hell!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't you see how those Asian Savages react?????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Even the Germans were civilized enough to admit everything and pay contributions!!

It seems like most of the Turks have 2 things installed in their heads:
1.We didn't do it at all
2.So what? It was long ago!
Dammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I wish I could be that brave Armenian student who sent Talaat's soul to HELLLLLLLL

By the way, Steve, I'm glad you changed your mind

Anybody else wants to join ASALA??

TURKISH Daily News
21 Oct. 2000

Comments and Analysis

What happens now is what is important

The withdrawal of the Armenian resolution does not save Turkey from
being
branded a nation of genocidal murderers: we should now wake up and spur
ourselves into action

Opinion by Mehmet Ali Birand


We escaped the Armenian resolution being seen at the U.S. Congress by
the
skin of our teeth. Had not President Clinton put his foot down, the
resolution would have been passed.

Let us not whoop for joy, claim victory and consider ourselves off the
hook
as regards allegations of genocide. It is not over yet. It will come
back to
haunt us again. We are going to face the same old situation every
election
time. And then we might not be so lucky.

We cannot continue our opposition by issuing threats. The resolution was

blocked, but the reasons were that Clinton is not taking part in these
elections and he views Turkey differently. The other is that
international
developments have worked in our favor.

The clashes in the Middle East, the Saddam factor that has refused to go

away, the wish to see no more tension in the Caucasus. Thanks to all
this,
the White House applied all its muscle on Congress.

There is a lesson we must learn and digest from all this.

There are 26,000 Armenian publications.

Should we not be asking ourselves now whether or not we got ourselves
into
this situation?

Just imagine you have been accused of a genocide you did not commit and,

worse, that the entire world comes to believe in it.

How did this all happen, then? How is it that Turkey has been identified
as
a murderous, genocidal nation?

The Armenians have managed to achieve this, hard though it is.

Let us not deceive ourselves.

Most of the Western media, politicians, young and old alike believe that
the
Armenians were the victims of Turkish genocide.

The Armenians are simply not going to abandon this campaign they have
been
pursuing for the past 35 years. They first started taking this issue
seriously in 1965. They never got fed up or exhausted. They resorted to
everything.

They killed Turkish diplomats to attract the world's attention.

There is no book they have not written, no expert they have not
commissioned
to write them. They have stuffed the world's libraries with 26,000
books,
journals and documents. They have managed to put their tales into school

text books and history books.

Turkey remained a bystander.

The Armenians managed to turn incidents of tit-for-tat massacres into
genocide.

So, was all this carried out under cover, without Turkey's knowledge?

No, it was carried out in broad daylight and Turkey looked on
impassively.

What is worse, Turkey hid the truth from its people, from everyone.

It was such an embarrassing situation that Turkish society, our own
generations, were only able to understand the depth and breadth of the
Armenian incident when they started killing Turkish diplomats in 1975.

At first we asked ourselves: "Why are they killing our diplomats?
Whatever
have we done to them?" This is because the official ideology of the
Turkish
Republic had not seen the "need" to let the Turkish public know about
the
Armenian incidents.

We were given a wake up call.

We looked and realized we just might have done some nasty things back
then.
Not genocide, but we had done things to our Armenian compatriots that do
not
make one proud.

But they carved us up and we bled too. It was not one-sided.

A small war was fought in a corner of Anatolia.

The Armenians have kept alive the pain of what happened to them. We, on
the
other hand, preferred to forget.

Look at where we are now.

Let us not get up and start accusing the Armenians and the Americans.
Let us
not blame everything on the distortions of Turkey's enemies.

We have to accept that our refusal to get involved is partly to blame
for
all this. We should act now and dispel these allegations of genocide.
Not
with threats, but by convincing people.

Mehmet Ali Birand's article is translated by TDN staff

Steve,

Turkce is the language. I think you meant Türk köpek.

Once again I find myself in agreement with Martin (aka MJ). Dialogue with Turkey is absolutely essential in my view. We should not run away from the inescapable reality.

The resolution was not approved...Is that so relevant ? I do not think so. It is a bit disappointing but not the end of the world.

http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/38333.asp
...
...In response to a question about improving relations between Turkey and Armenia, Ecevit said: “There are two requirements that Armenia must fulfill: the first being that it must cease its unfounded accusations aimed at harming Turkey. The second requirement is that it pull out of the 20% invaded territory of Azerbaijan...
...

Ararat,

You are right, but I don't think that the dialog at this stage needs to be between the Presidents of two countries, but rather between the journalist, intelligentsia, students, etc. When there is substantial dialog between these categories of people, and they shape adequate public opinion, the Presidents will follow.

In fact, I am convinced that many in the ruling circles of Turkey are for dialog, but consider it to be premature, since the public opinion is not ready for it, yet.

And they do need public opinion, so that to withstand the military hard-liners.

Don't forget that anytime the Turkish Military is unhappy with their civilian rulers, it steps in with a military coup.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MJ:
You are right, but I don't think that the dialog at this stage needs to be between the Presidents of two countries, but rather between the journalist, intelligentsia, students, etc. [QUOTE]

Can this be done by turkish people without fear of governmental reprisals? I don't mean that rhetorically, I'm really looking for an answer.

It sure does seem that trying to deal with this on a government-to-government basis is like trying to teach pigs to sing. They will not learn to sing and we will just get frustrated trying. Both countries have too much at stake.

Is dealing more on a grass-roots level feasible? Via the internet, unlimited, unrestricted information can be exchanged, but is anyone there listening? Are there currently anti-government activitists sensitive to turkey's past and on-going wrong doings? There must be, every government in every era has them.

Convincing those that seek the truth is an intelligent solution. But who is listening and how does one do it? I just want historical recognition. I don't want a dime and am indifferent as to getting any land back. The "fertile crescent" is probably an environmental disaster at this point anyway.

Dear Pilafhead,

Our ancestral lands are located far north from the "fertile crescent".
The shores of Cilicia are superb!
As to Mr. Ejevit's statement...he can kiss my a**!!!

Pilafhead, actually MJ is right. From our past experience, I can say that many young Turkish guys got understand everything truths. (I can repost here number of conversation, and you will see yourself). How, if we continue to evaluate this tendency, until their own people recognize the truth? Then it will be very hard for their government to deny. (Of course I do understand that things are not so simple, having our past experiance). We must be careful. It is easy to sit here and be Cyber-Shooters. We must think about our countrymen in Armenia. They live there, and will live another centuries side by side with their neighbors. I hope you understand what I mean.

`Armenians were killed by a special organization'

An interview with Turkish historian Halil Berktay
regarding the Armenian Genocide;

Translated from Turkish exclusively for ANN/Groong

Originally published in "Radikal" newspaper on October 9, 2000
Turkish original available on internet at http://www.radikal.c...insan/erm.shtml

The Armenian incidents were, for the first time, discussed by Turkish and
Armenian historians together at a symposium in Chicago last March. Professor
Halil Berktay participated in this event. Professor Berktay, a specialist
in Turkish history of the 19th and 20th centuries, has taught at Harvard
University, the Middle East Technical University in Ankara, and Bogazici
(Bosporus) University in Istanbul. He is currently on the faculy of Sabanci
University in Istanbul. After receiving bachelor's and master's degrees in
economics at Yale University, he completed his doctorate in history at the
University of Birmingham. He has published three books in Turkish.


Nese DUZEL

The `Armenian Genocide' issue has once again become topical. In Turkey,
this topic is taboo. We can't even discuss it among ourselves. No one
knows the actual facts, and we don't even know very well whence these claims
arise. With your permission, let's review the events of that time as
objectively as we can. How and in what year did the events that form the
basis of the genocide claim begin?

In fact, there is an entire 19th century that forms the background to the
Armenian events. The violence reached its peak in 1915, but there were
incidents underway from 1890 onwards. In other words, things started long
before the night of 24/25 April 1915, which Armenians mark as a symbolic day
of mourning. What occurred on 24/25 April was the arrest of the leading
members of Armenian organizations in Istanbul. And it's interesting that 24
April was also the day on which the British, French, and ANZAC forces began
out their landing at Gallipoli.

What sort of a connection do you see between these two developments?

The Allied landing at Gallipoli during the First World War created the fear
among the Ottomans, who had suffered continuous losses throughout the 19th
century and were now left with little but Anatolia, that `Now we're even
going to lose Istanbul, and we won't even be able to hang on to Anatolia'.
For this reason, there's an integral connection between the Ottoman
psychosis of having its back to the wall, being desperate and harrassed, and
the policy that the military dictatorship of the Committee of Union and
Progress (Ittihat ve Terakki) would launch against the Armenians on the
eastern front. The 24/25 April date was when this desperation was
crystallized.

Well, why did the Armenian organizations support not their own country but
rather the forces of the enemy during the First World War?

Whatever the problem had been with the Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs, Albanians,
Macedonians, and Arabs, all of whom had also been Ottoman subjects, the
problem with the Armenians was the same. The Ottoman Empire suffered a
complex process of dissolution during the 19th century. Trade, the money
economy, and capitalism first developed among the non-Turkish and non-Muslim
population groups within the Empire. In this way, these groups became more
open to nationalist movements, and initiated efforts to establish their own
national states. As for the Armenians, they experienced this process
somewhat later. This is important, since the sufferings experienced during
the uprisings in the Balkans had created a great deal of accumulated rancor
within the Turkish Muslim population. The fate of the Armenians cannot be
understood without taking into account this buildup of rancor.

Did the Armenian gangs kill a great many Muslims during those events?

Yes, they did. This was such a process that it's imposible to say just who
cast the first stone, and who was guilty first. Everyone has his own story
to tell. The Turks have their accounts, and the Bulgarians, Greeks, and
Armenians have theirs. In each of these accounts, those who tell them are
the victims; they themselves committed no crimes, and were always on the
receiving end. For instance, some today say that `Why is it that the
massacres of the Armenians of 1915 are remembered, but the massacres of the
Turkish Muslims on Crete of the 1900's are not remembered?'

Well, what do you say to this?

I'm from a family that migrated from Crete. I know that two of my great
uncles were hanged on a tree in front of their house by Greek insurgents.
But prior to these incidents on Crete there were the things that the
Ottomans did on Crete during every uprising throughout the 19th century. The
Ottoman slaughter of about 900 people, including women and children, at the
Arkadi Monastery in 1866, for instance: wasn't that a massacre? This was a
period in which the Ottomans tried to put down the nationalist uprisings in
the Balkans, and carried out massacres, and the others carried out massacres
against the Turkish Muslim population, who then fled in droves to Istanbul
and Anatolia. If we turn to the Armenians again.

Yes, what do we see?

Before 1915, there were the 1880's and 1890's. In the 1890's, during the
reign of Abdulhamit II, there were great massacres of Armenians whenever
indications of nationalist uprisings were perceived. There was a type of
blood feud that developed between the Armenians and the Ottoman
administration. In particular, Kurdish tribes and the Hamidiye Regiments
(Hamidiye Alaylari), which were composed of Kurds, were unleashed against
the Armenians. In fact, throughout this `century of dissolution', rather
than regular military forces, it was such irregular, undisciplined forces
that the Ottoman administration used, relying on their prmitiveness and
violence. Meanwhile, with Czarist Russia moving into the Caucasus, there
was a great wave of immigration not only from the Balkans but also from the
Caucasus region. These people, bearing a great deal of rancor from the
sufferings that they themselves had just experienced, moved into Eastern
Anatolia. And in addition, it's necessary to understand something not just
about the Ittihat ve Terakki, but also about the three-man military
dictatorship of Enver, Cemal, and Talat that headed it. These were not
traditional Ottoman notables. They were a new type of elite.

How were they different?

They were extremely ambitious and predatory. They were positivists, without
roots, and had risen only as a result of their education and thanks to the
army. They lived a life of violence. This violence was of a sort that had
been imposed on them by the great powers and the revolts in the Balkans, and
as a result they became extreme nationalists. They were fighting desperately
for the survival of the Empire. In fact, this period of the second half of
the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century was a time of
rapacious, social-Darwinist nationalisms in Europe, in which it was `kill or
be killed'. It was a time in which massacres, large and small, were carried
out, and in which the Turkish Muslim population was also very much a victim.
The Ittihat ve Terakki triumvirate of Enver, Cemal, and Talat was an
extraordinary administration that had been born in these conditions of war
and struggle.

The Ottoman state, led by these Unionists, ordered the deportation of the
Armenians from their region to other areas, after the Armenian revolts and
the assistance that Armenian bands gave to the Russians. Do we know how
many Armenians were deported in this way?

At that time there were 1 million and 750 thousand Armenians living in
Eastern Anatolia. The deportation order issued by the ruling military
triumvirate was drawn up so as to include all the Armenians in the region,
without exception. These things are documented in writing. There was no
mention of massacres or slaughter. The provincial governors and garrison
commanders were directed to deport the Armenians to the region south of
Turkey's current borders. However, it's clear that, in addition to these
official orders, separate, non-written orders were given to the most
rapacious members of the `Teskilat-i Mahsusa' (`Special Organization'), who
worshipped violence and were not bound by adherence to any normal moral
code.

For the Armenians to be killed?

Yes. Historian Taner Akcam has demonstrated this in a very sound way.
There was on the one hand a legal decision and implementation, and on the
other another mechanism entirely that proceeded in an illegal manner.

How many Armenians died during the deportations?

At least 600 thousand.

How did they die? Who killed them?

Those who issued these orders had them carried out via a special
organization, the Teskilat-i Mahsusa.. Think of it as a combination of the
forces involved in the recent Susurluk scandal and the Turkish Hizballah
organization. It is clear that Bahaettin Sakir, who operated as the
Teskilat-i Mahsusa's man for Enver, Cemal, and Talat, set up death squads in
the region. Some of these people were convicted criminals who were saved
from the gallows and released from prison just to carry out such
activities.. Do you know what types of people carried out these crimes? It
was the equivalent of today's `Yesil', Abdullah Catli, and the Turkish
Hizballah organization. The whole affair is that simple and clear.
Bahaittin was just like today's `Yesil' or Catli. In addition to them,
Turkish and Kurdish tribes also attacked the convoys of Armenians being
deported. In addition to these actual massacres, there were the terrible
losses caused by the deportations carred out in appalling conditions of
deprivation. Everywhere in the Western world, there are photographs of these
incidents which we can't bear to look at. The first time I encountered
these visual records, I cried and could hardly breathe for several minutes.
They are no different from the images of the concentration camps, or the
massacres in Africa. For there are huge numbers of people in these
pictures.

Well, didn't the Ottoman state try and punish those officials found guilty
of the deaths of Armenians?

Of course. These massacres were not the work of the regular Ottoman army and
bureaucracy. Historically, in such situations, the regular army and
bureaucracy hate and despise those `special teams' and gangs that carry out
such deeds. We can see that the Ottoman army and bureaucracy understood just
how terrible a thing this was , that they were repelled at the `special
teams' set up independently of the governors and garrison commanders, and
that there were even governors and commanders who issued an arrest order for
Enver and Talat's man Bahaettin Sakir in 1915-16 and tried to capture him.

Did the Ottoman leaders make any statements to defend themselves?

The Ottoman regular army and state bureaucracy, both as a result of the
repugnance it felt toward these events and in order to clear themselves
before the rest of the world, tried as best it could to capture, try, and
punish those responsible for this disaster. And there were definitely those
who were punished. After the end of the war in 1918 and the Ottoman defeat
and subsequent flight of Enver, Cemal, and Talat, who were the primary ones
responsible, the parliament (Meclis-i Mebusan) established an investigatory
commission just for this purpose. There was later a military trial in
Istanbul. This was a famous trial. Books on it have been published in
English and Turkish.

What were the losses of the Muslim population in that area during this same
period?

They may be 10,000 or 20,000. But it's not a question of `They only killed a
few, and the Ottomans killed a lot'. The issue is as follows: The
activities of the Armenian guerrilla bands were generally localized,
small-scale, and isolated. But for hundreds of thousands to die, there would
have to be a population of this size, which couldn't be attained merely by
wandering around the villages and hamlets. In addition, it's deceptive to
turn the matter into a question as to whether or not Enver and Talat *****
gave a written order to the `Yesil' or Catli of the day. They never did so,
and no such document will ever be found. In this regard, the witnesses of
the day are extremely important. There is a huge body of eyewitness
accounts and visual material concerning the Armenian incidents that never
reaches the Turkish public. Turkish public opinion is essentially ignorant
of what the people of Germany, England, France, and America see and read.

Why did the Republic of Turkey, which destroyed the Ottoman Empire, not
bring all this to light, but rather continue to conceal it just like the
Ottomans?

This is a very serious question. This constitutes a crucial error on the
part of the Turkish Republic. Turkey is undecided on the question of its
political and legal relationship to the Ottomans. The republic has not
fully understood and digested the fact that it did away with the old Ottoman
system and established a modern republic in its place. There is a serious
contradiction here. The republic is not responsible for these events. In my
view, the selection of Mustafa Kemal to organize the resistance in Anatolia
is also a very important factor.

Why is that?

It is very important that Mustafa Kemal was not implicated in the Armenian
incidents. When these incidents were happening Mustafa Kemal was not in
Eastern Anatolia. He was fighting at the battle of Anafartalar. In the
years 1918-19, when Unionist circles were debating who would lead the
resistance, who would be leader, a decision was taken in favor of Mustafa
Kemal. Mustafa Kemal was a war hero, and had never been tarnished by
inovlvement in the Armenian incidents.

Following the First World War, they killed the Unionist leaders Talat and
Cemal *****. At that time things were still very fresh, and so in spite of
everything such actions were somewhat understandable. But then years later
Armenians killed Turkish ambassadors. There is no logical explanation for
this. Why, in your view, did the Armenians initiate these savage incidents?
Did someone incite them, or did certain Armenians have a savage thirst for
revenge?

The ASALA attacks in the 1980's are a mystery to me. But there were these
attacks, which some 65 years later poisoned the atmoshpere and made the
matter impossible to resolve. They caused people to lose their objectivity
on the Armenian issue and caused the topic to become taboo. Any state in the
world, faced with such vicious attacks, would adopt a totally hard-line
approach. And that's what Turkey did. And these attacks, paradoxically,
created a defensiveness that greatly increased the feelings of
identification with the old Ottoman regime and its history.

Why has the Armenian genocide once more come onto the world's agenda now? Is
it a desire to come to terms with it in a moral sense, or is it a
preparatory phase for demands for land and compensation?

It's difficult to say. But these efforts are forcing the Turkish state and
Turkish society to become ever more defensive on this topic, and to withdraw
inwards and take a harder line. The political polarization on this issue is
so strong that it is extremely difficult to find the courage to speak on it.
Because there is a great political polarization. One pole is the policy of
`confirming and acknowledging the genocide', while the other is the policy
of `genocide denial'. This polarization, which gives rise to an intellectual
terrorization, makes it impossible to talk on any common ground. I think it
would be wrong for Turkey to apologize. The U.S. Congress is behaving like
some sort of morals police which carries out virginity tests. The Congress
is being asked to say `Yes, this was a case of genocide' on something that
happened 85 years ago in an entirely different part of the world. It's
unbelievable naivety for any parliamentary body to see itself as having the
right to decide such things on historical matters which are properly the
concern of scholarship. In fact, the Turkish Republic should also stop
talking about the Armenian issue.

How is that?

Turkey has been taking a number of different positions at the same time on
this issue. It says `it never happened', and then suggests that `it
happened, but there were serious provocations'. When the President recently
said that `The topic should be left to historians', he was right. The
Turkish Republic can say one very simple thing today: The Republic was
established in 1923. This incident occurred in 1915. The army and state
organizations of the Republic did not commit these acts. The Republic of
Turkey is a new state, and not in any legal sense the continuation of the
Ottomans or the Union and Progress administration. What occurred or did not
occur in 1915, during the tumult of the First World War, does not concern us
as a state or a government. We did not carry out these incidents, and we
are not responsible. But discussion on this topic is free. Anyone can
discuss it as they wish. We have no official position on the topic.