Scholar: genocide underlie modern Turkish state

[Yervant1]

Scholar: genocide underlie modern Turkish state

 

July 21, 2012 - 10:13 AMT

 

PanARMENIAN.Net - A new political order is emerging in the Middle

East, and Turkey aspires to be its leader by taking a stand against

authoritarian regimes, Taner Akcam, a professor of history at Clark

University, says in his article `Turkey's Human Rights Hypocrisy'

published by The New York Times.

 

`Earlier this week, Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan,

went so far as to denounce the Syrian government's continuing

massacres of civilians as `attempted genocide.' Turkey's desire to

champion human rights in the region is a welcome development, but Mr.

Erdogan's condemnation of Syria is remarkably hypocritical. As long as

Turkey continues to deny crimes committed against non-Turks in the

early 1900s, during the final years of the Ottoman Empire, its calls

for freedom, justice and humanitarian values will ring false,' prof.

Akcam says.

 

`Turkey's attempt to cultivate an image as the global protector of

Muslim rights is compromised by a legacy of ethnic cleansing and

genocide against Christians and terror against Arabs and Kurds.

Memories of these crimes are very much alive throughout former Ottoman

territories. And Turkey cannot serve as a democratic model until it

acknowledges that brutal violence, population transfers and genocide

underlie the modern Turkish state,' he says.

 

`Using documents from the Ottoman government archives in Istanbul,

which were once classified as top secret, I have sought to pull back

the veil on Turkey's century of denial. These documents clearly

demonstrate that Ottoman demographic policy from 1913 to 1918 was

genocidal. Indeed, the phrase `crimes against humanity' was coined as

a legal term and first used on May 24, 1915, in response to the

genocide against Armenians and other Christian civilians,' the author

says.

 

`Britain, France and Russia initially defined Ottoman atrocities as

`crimes against Christianity' but later substituted `humanity' after

considering the negative reaction that such a specific term could

elicit from Muslims in their colonies.'

 

Prof. Akcam goes on to say: `Today, Mr. Erdogan is seeking to be a

global spokesman for Muslim values. Speaking in support of oppressed

Muslims has earned him popularity. But if Mr. Erdogan aspires to

defend freedom and democracy in the region, he must also address the

legitimate fears of Christians in the Middle East. Just as the

European powers opted for universalism in 1915 by denouncing `crimes

against humanity,' Mr. Erdogan must move beyond his narrow focus on

`crimes against Muslims.' All oppressed peoples deserve protection.'

 

`It isn't a coincidence that many Christians and other minorities in

Syria support Bashar al-Assad's Baath Party; they are willing to

sacrifice freedom for security. While Turkish rhetoric appeals to the

Sunni Muslim majority's demand for freedom in Syria, it does not

relieve Syrian Christians' anxiety about their future. On the

contrary, Syrian Christians listening to Mr. Erdogan and his denialist

rhetoric are reminded of 1915, and that makes Turkey look very much

like a security threat to them,' he says.

 

`Confronting the past is closely linked to security, stability and

democracy in the Middle East. Persistent denial of historical

injustices not only impedes democratization but also hampers stable

relations between different ethnic and religious groups. This is

particularly true in former Ottoman lands, where people view one

another in the cloaks of their ancestors. In addition to the

reverberations of the Armenian genocide, mass crimes against Kurds and

Alevis in Turkey, violence against Kurds and Arabs in Iraq, and

Christian-Muslim tensions in Syria and Lebanon continue to poison

contemporary politics.

 

`The popularity of the AKP in Turkey and the Muslim world affords Mr.

Erdogan an opportunity to usher in an era of tolerance. By

acknowledging the genocide against Christians and crimes against other

groups, the Turks can become leaders in the realm of human rights. But

Turkey's efforts to paint itself as a beacon of freedom and democracy

will fail so long as Turkey refuses to atone for Ottoman sins.

 

`Moral purists and hard-nosed realists mistakenly believe that

pursuing justice and national interests are mutually exclusive. But

acknowledging historical wrongs is not a zero-sum game. In the Middle

East, the past is the present. And truth and reconciliation are

integral to establishing a new, stable regional order founded on

respect for human rights and dignity. Turkey should lead by example,'

he concludes.