Turkish Embassy Disinformation

[THOTH]

Ali - super post. It may have been possibly I who talked of your progress (though in some cases maybe I would say lack therof...LOL). But first let me say - you are obviously not a genocide denier - and that should be clear. Secondly - I find your core positions as entirely reasonable - commendable even. Three - I basically agree with your land position - particualrly as stated here - though I would like to think that this is not an entirely settled issue. But back to progress - In the past you have raised the issue of Armenian violence against Turks prior to the Genocide/WWI as some rrational for the Turksih action and seemed to me that you were attempting to blame the Armenians. It seems that you have largely backed away from this - for the most part distasteful stance (and part of this is the claim of any significant Ottoman Armenian cooperation with the Russians). This is "progress that I see". Perhaps you will claim progress that Armenians even acknolwedge the presence of such bands...etc. I I think your perspective is valuable for us - agree 100% or not - it is educational - and we need this exposure - we need to learn how to talk together - IMO.

 

Anyway - I hope you don't leave. Losing Filiz from this forum was bad enough...so don't despair...and don't get too frustrated.

[nairi]

Ali, there's no point in trying to solve problems in this forum. You are very well-aware of the fact that the largest majority of Armenians who speak up in this forum is anti-land claims. If you want to sort out the land-claim problem, I suggest you start chatting to prominent Armenians who do support land claims. As far as I'm concerned, your job's done here. There's nothing left to discuss.

 

Nairi

[aurguplu]

dear thoth,

 

thanks. i agree with most of what you say except my position that i had stated re the issue of Armenian violence against Turks prior to the Genocide/WWI as some rational for the Turkish action. there was armenian violence, and there was turkish reaction. one is as much justified as the other (=neither is justified).

 

a turk by a far fetched argument could attempt to find some justification for the massacres of 1890s (and even then he would have a hard time explaining an incident in istanbul one day and several thousand armenian dead in adana the next, and still harder to justify the murder of thousands of innocent citizens on the pretext of the violence of some activists: if someone's guilty, go punish him, why do you kill babies and women?).

 

no turk by any argument could explain or justify ag (1915), however. this was pretty obviously an attempt to substantially eliminate the armenian element in anatolia. the "justification" was that as long as they stayed in anatolia they would constitute a threat whenever we got weak. this is akin to murdering someone who has reason not to like you on the suspicion that since he doesn't like you, he might attempt to kill you one day, the absurdity of which is obvious.

 

my attempt was not to "justify" the genocide by citing preceding armenian violence (i had stated at the beginning - when the issue arose - that nothing in my opinion could justify a genocide, and i stick to it) but to remind that i) armenian violence and separatist demands way before the genocide and even before the 1890s massacres did exist, and they are cited in third party sources (i have some english ones in my library, they are not difficult to find in europe), ii) they were used as a pretext by the CUP and it worked, and iii) denying them would only play into the hands of the ag denialists, since that sort of material really abounds all over the place (you can apparently still find that sort of material in turkey in the booksellers' bazaars).

 

in approaching an issue such as the ag we have to do our best to be calm (and given the fact that we both are parties to it and that we both cherish long-held positions with equal passion, our best will very frequently not be good enough, that's why i strive to be as patient as i can in the face of the torrent of insults that i receive whenever i log in) and accept from the outset that facts may emerge which will not suit us a bit. i recall a mhp member whom i had once known who knew that his grandfather was in one of the chetes (ostensibly to defend the muslims) but who learned only in his adult life (and long after he had joined the mhp) that his grandmother was originally an armenian orphan saved by his village when her village was wiped out. now what is this guy going to do? what is his identity? in such an issue where sides are so sharply defined, whose side is he going to be on? there are people, and not a few of them, who keep having to answer such questions every day. and no wonder they swing from one extreme to the next since they themselves are insecure as to where to be, as to who they are. we at least - at least as far as i can understand - on this forum have clear identities as to who we are: you rae armenians and i am a turk, no doubt about that. cards open on the table. now what we have to do is to bridge our our differences.

 

maybe this has been so hard because of one thing that i observe: i understand - from what i read - that many armenians here are hardliners (you are an exception) re the turkish-armenian conflict, whereas i am not a hardliner myself. the issue resembling a tug-of-war, each side is trying to pull the other side towards itself as much as he can. now this would be an even match if both sides grabbed the cord at equal distance from the centre and with equal strength, but in my case i grab it at a point closer to the general armenian opinion than most turks are (and hence near the centre), and am pulled by the armenian hardliners here as far as they can pull toward their side. if i were a denier, maybe the discussion would be about convincing me about the fact of the ag. since i accept that and you (not you personally, thoth) don't have to lose time on that with me, you concentrate on getting me as close to your side as possible and making me accept all of your positions.

 

now the reason why i am closer to your stance than the regular turkish stance re the ag and other related issues (excl. the land claims) is not because i had previously been forcibly pulled toward that direction by some armenian, but because i think yours is closer to the truth than ours. you got it right, we got it wrong (sort of). and i stick to my opinion on that, and defend my position re the ag over here as adamantly as i defend my position re the land in the forum. i hold the two opinions equally close to my heart:

 

1. there was an ag and it was a crime. it has to be acknowledged, apologised and compensated for.

 

2. turkey in its national boundaries is my country and i want it to stay in one piece.

 

some members here may ask "don't you see a discrepancy between the two? how can you accept the ag and its criminality and then defend turkish territorial integrity?"

 

good question. apart from the "we shall never surrender (quoted from Churchill)" line, on which i am not basing an argument, our moral right rests on the fact that i) we have been here for so long, ii) we are an outcome of the mingling of central asians and local anatolians, so there is no question of our nativity and hence "moral" right to be here (in sharp contrast to the americans, for instance, who have so little native american blood). this point is especially pertinent since so many of the turks whom some armenians here in this forum would like to see out of turkey are actually genetically at least partly armenian, and iii) my country does not owe its existence to the genocide. it was there, called turkey from the 13th century onwards (and then by marco polo and not us), and we had been a numerical majority on this land by the 18th century, long before there was even a hint of massacre. mind you, i don't know if anyone has checked, but it may very well be that the numbers of both the greeks and the armenians in the 19th century might have been very close to (and in some districts, larger than ) their numbers under the byzantine empire at the time of our arrival in the 11th century. this might surprise (or even anger) some of you, but if you look at the (admittedly not the most reliable) evidence, there were some 3.5 million greeks and up to 2 million armenian in turkey in 1914, concentrated in the aegean, istanbul, the black sea coast and cappadocia (the greeks) and northeastern anatolia and adana (the armenians), almost a third of the entire population of anatolia. this is half of the population of the byzantine empire in the 11th century (roughly 10 million), and the byzantine empire had a non-greek, non-armenian central and southeastern anatolia. (o.k. this has been a bit of a digression again, back to the topic).

 

so in brief my two positions and the bases they rest on are clear, and as far as i can see they do not clash. as i have stated several times, i am all for armenians returning to anatolia, and in fact many turks deplore the loss of the multiethnic cosmopolitan life of pre-republican turkey since it was so rich.

 

and as i have stated, if the problems were solved and you would have no obstacles in visiting & living in ani, van, aghtamar, mush, bitlis etc., would you really be so adamant about getting them away from the turks and including them in armenia?

 

i think it's time to conclude as we keep repeating ourselves now.

 

cheers,

[aurguplu]

nairi

 

i am surprised that this is coming from you (given one of your postings in the very recent past). most of the recent postings re the land claims had convinced me otherwise (you can check them if you want and see why). however, if this is the case, then fine.

 

i discussed the land claims issue (in fact it think it was mj who had started it long ago) as it came about and as it is an important issue, at least for us. since this forum is pretty much my only access to armenian opinion outside turkey, and since i don't know any prominent armenians, i discussed it with you. (also because i hold the opinions of the not-so prominent armenian masses as important as that of the prominent few).

 

but i agree that there's nothing left to discuss re this issue.

 

i shall hang on in the forum if "your job's done here" doesn't mean "get the hell out of here".

[THOTH]

Ali - I do hope some of our Armenian friends here take the time to read and digest what you have written here.

 

I'm not so sure I would call all the Armenians here who have taken issue with you as hardliners though. I think that they have chosen to concentrate on a portion of your position and disagreeing with it they have made argument. And I am sure that there is a certain amount of misunderstanding due to the imperfections of communications/language etc. For the most part - the vast most part - I cannot find any significant fault with your position (and I don't see any need to quibble at the moment - as you have said - we are repeating ourselves).

 

What I wish to adress is your (earlier made) contention of Turkey moving toward openess with the Armenain question with the ultimate idea of admitting...etc. First, while I see the liberalization - I don't see that Turkey has abandoned the fight against recognition - not at all. But as you do - can I ask what might be and when might we see the next step? (Would allowing the film Ararat to be shown in Turkey be a step and then open diologue? Is this at all likely?) I for one and still (unfortunatly) pessimistic for the time being.

 

You make a good point about the ability of Armenians to visit Turkey. I certainly have never encountered any offical obstacles - nor any harrassment or noticible hostility (outside a very few individuals when I mention that I am Armenian). I wonder though if purchasing property and such is a viable option...

[aurguplu]

dear thoth,

 

thanks. wow, we can move to a next step! that's a relief.

 

anyway here it is:

 

1. i don't think that turkey will openly move its official position in the very near future. the reasons for this do not stem from any perceived/real threat from the armenian side, but i) the political shambles turkey is in right now. i don't know whether you guys care, but the imminent elections (3rd november) are only going to give rise to yet another round of elections, and this time (hopefully) a two-tier, narrow-area system since the present system is so unrepresentative of public opinion. also, we have 23 parties at the moment, and as far as i can judge, the electorate is about 50% centre-right, 20-30% centre left, and 20-30% extremists (extreme right and the mullahs). so you really need about five parties: one centre right (anap+dyp), one centre-left (dsp+chp+ytp), one fascist (mhp+bbp), one fanatic (akp+sp), and one separatist (hadep+ödp etc). and this has not been happening for years. our political life got fragmented after the 1980 coup, when the soldiers first banned the old parties (there was no such profusion then), then allowed new parties to be formed, which quickly proved themselves to be continuations of the old ones), and then finally allowed the old guys (demirel, ecevit, erbakan, türkeş) to come back. we had a leader with great vision (albeit with not-so-great principles and morals), turgut özal, who could handle the situation, but after he died in 1993 we went back to the old days, this time in a different fashion. it is no coincidence that turkey ahs had a ramshackle economy domestically and made so little progress internationally in the 1990s, no wonder with that sort of political spectrum.

 

so at the present moment (for about two three years) i wouldn't expect much from turkey in any area, let alone the ag. let's first see how the implementation of the lifting of the restrictions on kurdish and minority foundations actually run "on the ground". but there is much openness re the armenian question, unthtinkable in my teens (and i am not that old after all, only 35 (ok i's half the road, as we say)).

 

i think the first thing that has to be done is to reinstate the armenians in the turkish psyche as people like everyone else, especially as people with whom we have lived for centuries and who contributed to us so very much. after that, with perhaps timid steps, we can tackle the fact that armenians existed here way before us and have left their mark there. at the same time (and actually right now) cultural exchanges between the two peoples must take momentum. you see, our problem is not only to solve differences over ag. our problem is to show both sides that they are both regular people. the vast majority of armenians still see the turks as savages bent on destroying them, and the vast majority of turks still see the armenians as traitors or separatists who want to throw us out of anatolia. we both have to prepare the ground for them to discover that they are just people like anyone else - and what is far more important - very much like one another. i think these are the first steps to be taken.

 

i wouldn't start by showing ararat or anything like it, because i) the contents (the message) are known, and ii) it will play into the hands of the denialists and hardliners if it is shown before the people have done some discovering themselves and are receptive to the message. some soul-searching along these lines has been going on for a few years by now and if you are here you can see the results (positive). of course, until the govt officially admits it, it will go on by attempting to provide more intelligent arguments re the denial, but as we say in turkish, you cannot smear the sun with mud. as far as i can see such official attempts only serve to get people more curious to learn what really happened, and since turks are almost genetically suspicious of any tune the govt plays (so many of their lies have been exposed), it will backfire. i think the govt is also well aware of that and don't underestimate the importance of the fact that with each passing year, some younger people come to prominence and they don't buy lies that date from the one-party times (1940s). it was a minister of state and a very prominent man (from the centre right) who wrote "the beads of salkım hanım" (the book about the property tax period with flashbacks to the hamidian massacres), which was then turned into a movie where the ag was explicitly referred to, by the armenian director of the movie, etyen mahçupyan. the fact that nothing whatsoever happened to him and the film was on show for weeks on end is a very strong indication to me at least that some very serious changes are now taking place. so i do not think that you have to pay that much heed that the govt is going on with ag denial. after all, it is what they are expected to do. what they are doing is to allow alternative opinions to be voiced and that is far more significant. as i have said before, the govt being a political structure and essentially populist (all democratic govts are to some extent) they have to carefully prepare the public opinion before the say something revolutionary likethe ag being a fact to avoid political suicide.

 

re visiting turkey. you are in a better position of course to judge than i am. after all, i am not armenian, and even in discussions re ag, it is taken for granted by both sides that both of us are turks. i know of unpleasant experiences armenians had and are probably still having in turkey, i cannot judge to what extent these reflect the general stance of the public. as a general rule, the public is against violence and discrimination, but there is one element that has been a major - and destructive - power in any society, and that is the mob. i am an optimistic, idealist guy, but by the time you are 35, you are no dreamer anymore: ugly facts exist.

 

as far as buying property is concerned, as i had said, there has been this armenian from california who bought a hotel in van and had called it vartan upon which it was closed down, only to be opened three years later when the court ruled in favour. we still have our xenophobic urges but things are improving. but i would of course be wary of attempting to buy large tracts of land because right now the whisper times in turkey reports that the armenian lobby of america is planning to buy large tracts in eastern anatolia adjacent to armenia with a view to driving the turks out and settling the place with armenians. i had heard that during özal they had tried it, and özal was not averse, but the army had stepped in and it was the end of the story. when dealing with turkey , never forget that the real ruler of the country is the military. they don't interfere with everything, but they do when they perceie something as a potential threat to turkey.

 

cheers,

[THOTH]

Yes I do understand what you are saying here. In fact I predict another coup in Turkey within the next 2 years - as your politicians cannot handle the issues your nation faces - and I think the extremist Muslims will again take hold (as they are perfectly positioned with the economic downturn and the fragmentation of the other parties).

 

And as much as I might want to - I for one would not sink any apreceable percentage of my retirement or other wealth into property in Anatolia - simple because I cannot trust your government...and I feel the same way about any nation that values the State over individual rights. Oh how I would love to own a nice place on the Torquise coast - simply paradise if you ask me...but oh well - visiting ewill have to do - and luckily for us the excahnge rate is so good...well you know what I'm saying...

[nairi]

[khodja]

A number of years back I met a beautiful young woman. As I do not have an Armenian surname and do not look very Armenian and did not recognize her surname as Turkish, we did go out on a date.

With the revelation of our respective heritages, we found the THE WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE was more than we could overcome in respect to continuing any relationship.

 

It is time to make peace. That does not mean that my family's place in Turkish history should not be rehabilitated, nor that I relinquish any right of ownership of family properties or confiscated bank accounts. The ongoing bad feelings are not beneficial for either of our nations, BOTH of which have been having economic difficulties.

 

The million plus Armenians in Eastern Anatolia did not just disappear, or go on a vacation in Cannes.

 

As Ali states the ruins are still there to show their presence. We should come to terms with each other and move on to economic greatness. This means to apprach this whole isue with our minds not our emotions.

[aurguplu]

dear thoth,

 

i don't know whether there will be a coup in turkey in the next two years (i hope there won't), if there will be one it will be a bloodless one like 28th feb 1997. but we all know the situation is very precarious.

 

i also would be very careful before investing in turkey, not because you are an armenian, but because turkey is not yet as far as i see an investment grade country. it is just too volatile. but of course the aegean coast is wonderful.

 

dear nairi,

 

o.k. i'll see you in the other forums. i used to post in language/arts/famous amenians, and especially in arts, i could make use of some info, especially re armenian architecture (esp. aghtamar) and some crafts, like the armenian red in iznik tiles.

 

dear hagarag,

 

i understand that at this day and age the burden of the past was weighing on both of you too heavily. we have to get rid of that, and time will heal. maybe future generations willl be luckier.

 

see you under other threads,

 

cheers,

[joseph]

Mayebe future generetions will be luckier.Ali Efendy,do you think waiting another fifty years will be enough so we might have more "open minded" turks pop out and then we will be luckier.Can you please tell the Azaries to wait like we did now for more than 80 years,you know we might have in Negorno Artsax more open minded people.

[nairi]

Dear Ali,

 

Actually I meant the threads that do not necessarily concern Turkish-Armenian relationships, such as the "Life" threads or "Other" threads. For instance, what's your opinion on homosexuality (a topic presently discussed), or reading books, which was discussed earlier? Do YOU have any fetishes? Basically all the non-political/cultural threads. I look forward to your contribution.

 

Nairi

[aurguplu]

hovsep efendi

 

no i don't think waiting for another fifty years will be enough, in fact i am doing my little bit to shorten that time span.

 

i can tell what i like to the azeris, but whether they will listen to me is another matter. but interesting, do you think that you might perhaps have made a bit of a mistake in nagorno-karabagh, or at least painted a picture of yourselves that doesn't quite fit with what you hold yourselves to be?

 

i don't want to get into yet another polemic, so you don't have to answer that one, at least to me. just think about it. when i had first encountered the fact of ag, i didn't - and didn't have to - answer anyone about it, i first thought about it myself.

 

this aside, i think the sooner the region's problems are solved, the better. we in our little quibbles overlook the crucial fact that practically none of the decisions concerning our destinies in the region has been taken by us or with our concerns in mind for the past fifty years. and right now it is yet another era of decision-taking, and unless we get our act together and sort out our differences real quick we may soon find that the place has been rearranged and we are given new roles and degrees of importance that we were not consulted about and had forgotten to agree with.

 

i am especially uneasy about this taliban+el kaida+iraq thing. this won't stop there. these guys (the usa) has to sell arms to make its economy pick up, especially after the accounting scandals, and for arms to be sold, new markets are needed. and we have always been good markets.

 

brrr...