Hot Air From Gunduz Aktan

[Z'areh]

Gross injustice

From the New Anatolian

Gunduz Aktan

17 February 2007

Font Size: default medium large

 

Following last month's assassination of Hrant Dink, some U.S. State Department officials and Armenia's foreign minister urged Turkey to use this opportunity to normalize relations with Armenia by opening the border and "face our history" by abolishing Article 301.

 

The Americans say that if Turkey "helps itself" by taking such steps, the administration will be able to defend Turkey more easily in Congress. One cannot help wondering whether the "opportunity" that arose as a result of Dink's murder is for Turkey to use in order to serve the interests of the U.S. and Armenia.

 

Even though Turkey hasn't established diplomatic relations with Armenia, it recognizes the country. The Turkish-Armenian border is closed, but goods are transported annually by 4,000 TIR trucks to Armenia via Georgia. In this way, Turkey is the second-biggest trading partner for Armenia. There are 60,000-70,000 Armenians illegally working in Turkey. Flights are operating to Istanbul and Antalya, etc.

 

Despite these facts, an additional demand to open the border and set up diplomatic relations would mean abandoning Azerbaijan in the face of the continuing Armenian occupation of Karabakh and other parts of this country. Moreover we have to keep in mind that the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) does everything for a solution while the international embargo against it continues.

 

There is not a single Ottoman monument left in Armenia. Not a single Turk or Azeri lives there. You could think that the Ottoman Empire's Revan province never existed. However, we invited the Armenian diaspora to restore the Akhdamar Church. Since there was no reply, Turkey did the restoration as a gesture. In return, the infamous bill was introduced to the French Parliament and a resolution introduced at the U.S. Congress.

 

Meanwhile, pressure on us to repeal Article 301 is continuing. Thus, we are expected to "face our history" and recognize that the 1915 events amounted to genocide. Actually, if we accepted the genocide, nobody would want us to face our past.

 

Today, Armenia is a Tashnak dictatorship. But it dares to urge us to expand freedom of expression. Not a single book that denies the genocide claims is sold in Armenia. Let alone those written by the Turks or foreigners, even the report (rather the testament) submitted to the Tashnak Assembly of 1923 at Bucharest by the first prime minister of the independent Armenia and the most important Tashnak leader of the era, Hovhannes Katchaznouni, is still banned. They do not read documents by even those who played a leading role in their history so that they can keep intact their belief in a genocide.

 

Considering that it is almost impossible to have serious cooperation with such a country, the U.S. should be expected to put pressure on Armenia with a view to accelerating the democratization of its regime. The U.S. not only does not do this, it does not even try to prevent the unilateral genocide propaganda in its schools. But it gives priority to influencing our attitude.

 

Under these conditions, there is no alternative other than seeking a solution to the problem by adjudication or arbitration. Mr. Gul expressed this view in December during the budget debates. In response, not a word was heard from the U.S. administration, EU countries or institutions, Armenia or the Armenian diaspora. It's as if all of a sudden everyone became deaf and mute.

 

In Turkey too, none of those who consider themselves intellectuals said, "All right, let's solve the problem by adjudication or arbitration." They murmur, "It cannot be done through adjudication. We should face our history and use empathy with the Armenians," just as Armenia and the Armenian diaspora demand. I hope that they do not render these services without remuneration.

 

Can adjudication be done without facing history? All the archives will be opened and population statistics, forensic research, hospital records and all incidents that happened during the relocation will be thoroughly examined. Nothing better can be done to face history.

 

No, they urge only us to face history. They wish to ignore Armenian insurrections, massacres, collaboration with the enemy, and betrayal. As a result we would appear as perpetrators and they as victims.

 

The attempts to portray Turks as being responsible for genocide are the basic reason for the current psychological regression and the harsh nationalist reaction in our society. Nobody should entertain any illusion that Turkey will eventually yield to these unilateral allegations. We will take Armenia and its supporters to court and will make them face history together with us. And we will make them respect our dead as well.

 

There is no way out for anyone anymore

 

[Z'areh]

My response to the above article sent to the New Anatolian

 

 

 

Mr.Aktan laments the fact that Turks are being faced with "Gross Injustice". After reading his article one begs the question, "who is to blame for this so-called injustice that Mr. Aktan is talking about"? Years of government manufactured history about covering up the Armenian Genocide has simply run its course and no matter how much Mr. Aktan and co. push the non-existent "they stabbed us in the back, therefore we defended ourselves" myth will continue to denegrate the image of Turkey internationally. But more dangerous is the assertion that future violence might erupt if these "allegations" continue. This is nothing but an invitation for more bloodshed, and individuals such as Mr. Aktan will share the responsibility for these crimes by showing an "understanding" of the deeds of future Turkish nationalist murderers.

 

As for the often touted idea of “let’s take them to court”, Mr. Aktan should know the difference between a bluff and a genuine proposition. Let the Turkish government announce officially that they will abide by the ruling of an international court, at the cost of reparations, both financial and territorial, then the Turks will know whether the Armenians will respond to such "invitations".

 

One would think the TARC experience would have taught Mr.Aktan a thing or two about letting a third party decide whether 1915 qualifies as genocide or not.

 

A lot of hot air Mr. Aktan.

 

Sincerely,

Z

[Stormig]

There is not a single Ottoman monument left in Armenia. Not a single Turk or Azeri lives there. You could think that the Ottoman Empire's Revan province never existed. However, we invited the Armenian diaspora to restore the Akhdamar Church. Since there was no reply, Turkey did the restoration as a gesture. In return, the infamous bill was introduced to the French Parliament and a resolution introduced at the U.S. Congress.

As if the church HAD to be restored or else.

[Stormig]

Today, Armenia is a Tashnak dictatorship. But it dares to urge us to expand freedom of expression. Not a single book that denies the genocide claims is sold in Armenia.

Denies? Do denialists use that word per se to describe what they're doing? I would have thought something more dignified, such as "fighting for the truth," or something. Freudian slip?

[MosJan]

 

There is not a single Ottoman monument left in Armenia. Not a single Turk or Azeri lives there.

 

 

YES! AZERIES LIVE IN ARMENIA

 

There are Azeries living in Armenia and many of them even do not hide their nationality. If we speak in terms of international terminology, they are ethnic risk groups.

 

Hranush Kharatyan, head of department of national minorities and religion affiliated to the Armenian government, pointed out to several residential areas where they live. It turns out that they mainly reside in Yerevan, Armavir region and Vardenis.

 

Kharatyan did not say anything about their number saying Armenia has signed an international document which prohibits to announce the number of ethnic risk groups. She said their number is rather big according to the recent census.

 

By the way, many have told about their national identity during the census. However, many keep silent. Anyway, their neighbors and fellows know about that but that did not stop them from communicating.

[MosJan]

There is not a single Ottoman monument left in Armenia ??? monument ??

 

we do have one - you can't miss it

 

it's called a Monument in memory of Armenians massacred by ottoman turks

 

ehhh

before i send anything to turky to restore what has been demolished / disasembled / destroyed by none Armenians - i have more important places to support in Armenia, my schools, my churches and temples in my Armenia

[Armenak]

I don't think the current Republic of Armenia was ever under Ottoman control long enough for there to have been any remaining buildings or structures.

 

I'd like to know what an Ottoman monument is? A church converted into a mosque?

[Error 404]

Usually ottoman turks prefer to demolish than build something. Ghegis Khan did the same...

 

Ottoman historical monuments in current Armenia? You gotta be kidding.

[Z'areh]

Today, Armenia is a Tashnak dictatorship. But it dares to urge us to expand freedom of expression. Not a single book that denies the genocide claims is sold in Armenia.

Denies? Do denialists use that word per se to describe what they're doing? I would have thought something more dignified, such as "fighting for the truth," or something. Freudian slip?

 

 

Very good observation Stormig, It was amusing to read that passage. I am always amused to read Gunduz, no matter how much he tries to come across as an all-knowing personality, he fails to portey himself as anyhting other than a donkey. Poor donkey!

 

His best genocide-busting theory so far has been the notion that to have a case of genocide one must establish hatred and racism, and since according to him there were no racist hatred against Armenians in the Ottoman Empire genocide could not possibly have happened.

 

no racism in Ottoman empire.... I guess he thinks there is no racism in Turkey today either.

Edited February 20, 2007 by Z'areh

[Yervant1]

I guess he thinks there is no racism in Turkey today either.

Of course not, they are all Armenians, they are all Hrant Dinks.

[Stormig]

no racism in Ottoman empire.... I guess he thinks there is no racism in Turkey today either.

To outright reject the existence of racism in the Ottoman Empire in the heydays of nationalist movements is a fallacy. And of course we know better, that there is more to it than that, unless one suffers from self-inflicted selective memory syndrome. SISMS... Hey I like that.

[Aubépine]

The Ottoman machinery itself was racist from the beginning. But then racism wasn't an issue in those times. It's wrong to compare or judge countries, nations with today's value system.

[Stormig]

The Ottoman machinery itself was racist from the beginning.

It certainly was far-removed from today's values, but "racist" somehow doesn't seem right. When I hear "racist," I think of the pre-Civil War America, the Middle Passage, apartheid South Africa, the Third Reich, the Hindu caste system...

[Aubépine]

It was very racist. No need to muddle the waters. When you think of the whole preatorian-nomadic military system they have used, there is no difference. They were only slightly better than the Mongols.

[Aubépine]

Granted because of the dhimmi precept they treated their slaves better than the Spanish conquistadores. But still they meted out unbelievably cruel forms of punishment and retributions to those who resisted them in warfare. You are probably aware what they did to the civilians in the Balkans. Not to mention all the "picturesque" forms of torture and execution styles which were used in the Ottoman empire and which one can read in Murat Bardakçı's column.

[Stormig]

Cruel and barbaric, yes. In punishment, certainly yes. But punishment and racism, nah, I don't see the connection. I don't see what's racist and discriminatory in Cele Kula, other than that it is the only example I know of. Not everything that is cruel is racist. Likewise I'd be hard-pressed to use a blanket statement and call Genghis Khan "racist"...

To tie it up and whatever the case may be - the Ottoman Empire got its fair share of nationalism and racism, albeit perhaps a bit later than most other "millets" in the empire.

[zurderer]

don't think the current Republic of Armenia was ever under Ottoman control long enough for there to have been any remaining buildings or structures.

 

I'd like to know what an Ottoman monument is? A church converted into a mosque?

 

Yerevan was a muslim town.

 

 

 

Emperalism, racism and cruelty(Every states, not only empires were cruel at that times.) are different words.

 

Ottomans were absolutely not racist. There were rulers and people.This is same for all empires. Standart people should bow to rulers.

 

Also Ottomans used byzantium way much more than nomad ways.Realy a weird accusation against ottomans, They dislike nomads(Turkmens) Infact they belittle nomads.

 

 

Exiling rebellions, jenisarry system, building a totally religious state is not nomad way, but byzantium way. Ottomans just improved it. Giving other religous groups more freedom than byzantium.(Reason may become pragmatic one but still they gave more freedom.)

 

Of course I am talking about time span before Abdulhamit 2. With him, ottomans become more muslim state and with Young Turks ottomans become more Turkish state. With Ataturk, Ottomans become only Turkish state.

 

 

 

 

 

[Z'areh]

Yerevan was a muslim town.

Emperalism, racism and cruelty(Every states, not only empires were cruel at that times.) are different words.

 

Ottomans were absolutely not racist. There were rulers and people.This is same for all empires. Standart people should bow to rulers.

 

 

 

 

If every empire/state behaved similarly at the time it doesn't mean Turks were not an exception.

 

saying "Ottomans were absolutely not racist" does not correspond to what the people who felt that racism might say.

There are ample turn of the century Armenian literary works that underlines Turkish/Muslim racism and religious antagonism that Armenians experienced.

 

Ottoman racism might not correspond literally to US racism towards the black population. But racism manifests itself in many different ways. The slave/master relationship throughout the ages between Armenians and Muslims of Anatolia was a clear demonstration of racism. That was the reason why Armenians demanded reforms in the first place, remember?

 

Turks are fond of mentioning the rich and prosperous Armenians of Istanbul as a proof of non-racist atmosphere in the Ottoman Empire. That is simply putting blindfolds on. With that logic we should also conclude that there was no racism in Germany either, for throughout the past centuries the Jews prospered and occupied posts of teachers, bankers, opera/symphony orchestra conductors, excelled in the sciences and music and business. There were even intermarriages between Christian and Jewish Germans. This does not mean that non-institutionalized racist feelings were non-existent in Germany.

 

Wars bring out the worse in a society, it institutionalizes racism. It was true to Ottoman Turkey as it was true to Nazi Germany.

 

 

Your assertion of "absolutely not racist" is therefore utterly baseless.

 

 

You only have to go back a few years, to see that racism is alive and well in modern Turkey. When a newspaper suggested that Attaturk's adopted daughter could have been of Armenian origin, the masses responded by screaming "how dare you insult us"?

 

Being of Armenian origin=insult in minds of many in Turkey of today.

 

[Arpa]

If every empire/state behaved similarly at the time it doesn't mean Turks were not an exception.

 

saying "Ottomans were absolutely not racist" does not correspond to what the people who felt that racism might say.

There are ample turn of the century Armenian literary works that underlines Turkish/Muslim racism and religious antagonism that Armenians experienced.

 

Ottoman racism might not correspond literally to US racism towards the black population. But racism

Let us not get carried away with emotions and let those wolves in sheep’s clothing “pull the wool over our eyes” so to speak. Let us not get deluded with all those myths and half truths about tolerance and imperial good will. It may be best described as necessity. I will spare us the details about the morality and conduct of war as per the Talmudic vs. Koranic, you can search and see. In short the Talmud prescribes total annihilation, not sparing man woman and child, animal and plant while the Islamic law prescribes sparing women, children, animal and plant as , in their words those have not only ”not sinned against us but they can also be of use to us“.

Just as in Christian Europe where usury, money lending for interest was against their Christian customs, so was, and still is in Islamic culture. If one were to closely read Judaic law one would see that usury was sinful even in their tradition. That is another story. The reason why the biggest and the most prosperous money lenders, bankers , if you will. Remember Shakespeare’s Shylock in the Merchant of Venice. Such was the case in Muslim Ottoman empire where the finance was monopolized and remanded to Jews and Armenians.

In addition to finance look at the arts and the trades. When the average Turk was totally illiterate all clerical and literary work was done by the non-Muslims. Speaking of arts, science and trade look who was among many the most prominent and celebrated scientist physician, surgeon general of the Sultan was. The Armenian Amirdovlat Amasiatsi. Now, let us get to less noble trades. Look at the regalia of the Ottomans, and at the latest fashionable suits of the Young Turks. Who do you think tailored those garments? Does Terzi-an/Tailor ring a bell? How about “kouyoumji-an/silver/goldsmith? Demrirj-ian/ironsmith. Deyirmenj-ian/miller, P/Banjarj-ian/Vegetable grower/farmer. Topji-an/cannon maker. Tufenkj-ian/rifle maker. Dashji-an/Tashji-an/ stonecutter/ mason. Koshkarian/Shoemaker…..many, many more. Not to forget the likes of master architect Sinan.

That was until those savages, just as in Europe learned how to read and write, how to count money, how to make shoes etc. And once that happened all that tolerance shmolerans was expressed at the point of those swords and muskets that our ancestors forged, or in the European case, all those chemicals compounded by Jewish chemists was used in the gas chambers.

 

Go ahead! Tell us about that myth about “imperial tolerance and goodwill”.

What is even more sad is that we, the architects, the stonecutters, the shoemakers, the gunsmiths, the financiers, the clerks and bureaucrats became and still are the laughing stock of the world.

It shows that a financier without firepower, a gunsmith without the art and the will of using the weapon , (Don’t tell me it is against our cowardly pacifistic Christian culture!!), will forever be at the mercy of the “emperor”.

Anyone know that tune from Evita;

"Don't cry for me Armentina"??

 

Yeah, yeah. We know. We are the "fFrst Chrstian Nation". Ergo! The whole Christian world owes us a debt of gratitude.

Edited February 20, 2007 by Arpa

[neko]

 

Ottoman racism might not correspond literally to US racism towards the black population. But racism manifests itself in many different ways. The slave/master relationship throughout the ages between Armenians and Muslims of Anatolia was a clear demonstration of racism. That was the reason why Armenians demanded reforms in the first place, remember?

As the brave Ayaan Hirsi Ali would stress, "Religion is not a race".

Edited February 20, 2007 by neko

[Z'areh]

As the brave Ayaan Hirsi Ali would stress, "Religion is not a race".

 

 

Yes but if on top of religous antagonism there is a racial devide then you have a more deadly combination.

 

that's what I say.

Edited February 20, 2007 by Z'areh

[zurderer]

saying "Ottomans were absolutely not racist" does not correspond to what the people who felt that racism might say.

There are ample turn of the century Armenian literary works that underlines Turkish/Muslim racism and religious antagonism that Armenians experienced.

 

Turkish? It is a new nation so we cannot talk about turkish racism.

 

Muslim racism? It is impossible. Islam is a religion not a nation or race.

 

The slave/master relationship throughout the ages between Armenians and Muslims of Anatolia was a clear demonstration of racism. That was the reason why Armenians demanded reforms in the first place, remember?

 

Master/slave relation was not against armenians. Ottomans treated alevi turks and armenians not much different. Infact alevi turks suffered much more than armenians.(Because of their rebellions)

 

You only have to go back a few years, to see that racism is alive and well in modern Turkey. When a newspaper suggested that Attaturk's adopted daughter could have been of Armenian origin, the masses responded by screaming "how dare you insult us"?

 

I am not talking about turkey. am I?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Z'areh]

Turkish? It is a new nation so we cannot talk about turkish racism.

 

Muslim racism? It is impossible. Islam is a religion not a nation or race.

 

 

 

You're right, what was I thinking/ Turks did not exist before 1923.

 

persecution based on race or religion serves the same end, there is no difference.

 

 

[Stormig]

You're right, what was I thinking/ Turks did not exist before 1923.

LOL...

Well, unfortunately, such is the intellect of the average Turkish citizen there for you. Excuses, excuses, excuses...

[Yervant1]

LOL...

Well, unfortunately, such is the intellect of the average Turkish citizen there for you. Excuses, excuses, excuses...

Excuses=zurdeve=BS=horse manure=turkey droppings