German Archive Material Raises Stir in Turkey

[Yervant1]

German Archive Material Raises Stir in Turkey

 

Armenian News Network / Groong

July 22, 2012

 

by Muriel Mirak-Weissbach

 

 

`Especially as 2015 approaches, the pressure will increase. Turkey

will, as it has done before, react harshly. It will utter threats,

but they will remain ineffective.

`Do you know why? It is because the Armenians have gotten a

significant part of the world to accept their claims of genocide.'

 

 

Who is speaking here? Is it a Diaspora Armenian bragging about

progress towards Turkish recognition of the 1915 genocide? That might

seem most likely. But, no, these are the words of a Turkish journalist

writing in the pages of the daily, Hürriyet.(1) The article, entitled,

`We are surrendering ourselves to `genocide,'' appeared in the April

28th edition of the paper. Although Hürriyet is generally considered

rather nationalistic, the commentator Mehmet Ali Birand is known as a

liberal. He is not bragging. Quite the contrary: he raises the alarm

that, as the centenary of the genocide looms, Turkey may finally be

forced to acknowledge its occurrence.

 

The reason for concern he identifies in the circulation of a new book

in Turkish, a hefty 1000 pages long, which presents irrefutable

evidence of genocide. The book, issued on January 12, 2012 by Belge

Publishing House - whose owner Ragip Zarakolu was recently put on

trial on hoked-up charges - contains translations `into an extremely

comprehensible and beautiful Turkish' of documents from the German

Foreign Ministry archives during the First World War. Wolfgang Gust,

`the famous German journalist and writer,' put it together; first

published in German in 2005, Birand tells us that it also exists in

other languages. It is entitled, Alman Belgeleri: Ermeni Soykırımı

1915-1916 (German Documents: Armenian Genocide 1915-1916).(2)

 

His assessment of the power of the documents is straightforward.

`Without going into detail,' he writes, `if you read the book and look

at the documents, if you are a person who is introduced to the subject

through this book, then there is no way that you would not believe in

the genocide and justify the Armenians. Even if you are an expert on

the subject,' he adds, `or have researched what went on from the

Turkish side, again, you will be confused. You will have many

questions' (emphasis added-mmw).

 

Birand concludes his somewhat agitated report with a challenge

directed to the leaders of his nation. `Now, I want to ask all Turkish

officials: In the last 50 years, have you done such a study? Have you

researched international sources and - however biased or one-sided it

may be - have you been able to publish such a book? What kind of study

have you made - moving outside our own sources - that would convince

the international public? Were you limited to or satisfied with using

only Turkish archives because you could not find plausible documents

or evidence?' And his conclusion is brutal. `Let us not deceive each

other: If you can give answers to these questions, then you will be

able to clarify some very key facts for us.' But will they do so?

Birand's view: `I know you will be silent.'

 

The Turkish edition of Gust's monumental compilation of historical

records has indeed shaken the fragile edifice of lies and distortions

which constitute the official Turkish denial of events. It is one

thing if historical records on the genocide from Armenian sources --

or American or British archives -- are published, because denialists

can shrug them off as `propaganda' by Turkey's wartime adversaries. It

is quite another matter when detailed accounts of the atrocities and

official discussions about the extermination policy originate from the

archives of Turkey's wartime ally Germany - and that they now appear

in Turkish translation.

 

In October 2011 another book containing much of the same documentation

had appeared in Turkish, translated and with a lengthy introduction by

Serdar Dincer. This book, entitled Alman-Türk Silah Arkadasligi ve

Ermeniler, was published by Iletisim Yayinevi publishing house and was

reviewed, among other places, in AGOS, the Istanbul-based paper of the

late Hrant Dink. Dincer, who lives in Berlin, drew his material from

the same archives, and stressed the role of German militarism in his

analysis. In addition to positive reviews in AGOS and Radikal, several

Turkish journalists picked up the themes without directly citing the

source, possibly because they objected to left-leaning references in

the introduction; others, seeking to deny that genocide occurred,

picked out isolated references to argue that the Armenians had been

`terrorists' and deserved to be deported, etc. Prior to the appearance

of Dincer's book, other volumes claiming to deal with the German

documents had appeared, among them one whose leitmotif was that the

`Armenians are lying.'

 

Blame It on the Germans

 

The more serious writers who attempt to blunt the impact of the

documents as Gust presented them seize on the German connection and

distort it. Ã`mit KardaÅ?, a retired military judge, published a major

piece in Today's Zaman, a leading Turkish daily on May 20th , in which

he tried to twist the facts.(3) Entitled, `German militarism's

connivance with Committee of Union and Progress,' the article

identifies the book issued by Wolfgang Gust and his wife Sigrid

explicitly, then proceeds to argue that it was German militarism which

was ultimately responsible for the genocide.

 

KardaÅ? writes that the Germans `perceived the region as an area of

interest as a German colony,' and, through their military alliance

with Turkey, `meddled with the political affairs of the CUP.' He

claims that `Non-Muslim groups living in the Ottoman Empire posed an

obstacle to Germany's economic and ideological aspirations in the

East' and `Thus began the connivance of German militarism with the CUP

for inhumane practices against non-Muslims in the Ottoman Empire.' The

author states that `Germany's policies ¦ had overlapped with the CUP's

policy of homogenizing the country,' i.e. turning it into a Turkish

Muslim state. He quotes a passage from one of the documents which

refers to those Turks and Arabs who disapproved of the massacres, and

who held the Germans responsible `as Turkey's schoolmaster' during the

war. KardaÅ? ends with this assertion: `The conclusion confirmed by the

documents published by Gust is that German military officers as agents

of German militarism endorsed the forced relocation, and they found

military justifications for it¦. And the CUP leaders violently

implemented its Turkification and Islamification policies with support

and connivance from Germany.'

 

KardaÅ?'s review grossly misrepresented the work by Wolfgang Gust. The

German scholar set the record straight in a Letter to the Editor of

Groong Armenian News Network on May 21. In it, Gust explicitly stated

his thesis as follows: `The Armenian Genocide was genuinely a project

of the CUP and the Germans accepted it more or less. Some of them

protested against the extermination of the Armenians, others even

recommended the deportations, two German officers actively

participated in the assassinations. But the Armenian Genocide was

never a German project, what the Turks at the time often tried to

propagate.' He added that `other conclusions of the author [KardaÅ?]

are not based on my documents.' In sum, `the Armenian Genocide in the

First World War was a Turkish undertaking with despicable German

assistance.'

 

Psychological Truth

 

With the exception of some crude falsifications committed by die-hard

denialists in Turkey, the debate sparked by the circulation of the

German Foreign Ministry archive material represents an attempt to deal

with the factual documentation of an atrocity which Turkey since its

founding as a modern state has categorically denied. To `deal with'

the matter is psychologically complicated because acknowledging the

genocide is tantamount to undermining the identity of Turkey and

Turkish citizens. It is no coincidence that the legal code's infamous

Article 301, which penalizes discussion of the genocide, did so under

the rubric of protecting `Turkishness.' Orhan Kemal Cengiz, writing

in Today's Zaman on November 24, 2011, explained the difficulty in

discussing the Armenian issue with `the fact that `modern Turkey' and

the `Turkish identity' are founded upon a sort of `exclusiveness,''

meaning that the founders of Turkey were `those who were not the

non-Muslims.'(4) And, since some of those responsible for 1915 were

also the fathers of the Republic, it follows that to acknowledge the

genocide would mean `that we may lose our founding `heroes' and have

them turned into a series of `murderers' to be embarrassed about

instead.' He went on to state: `It is now clear that we in Turkey have

constructed an identity on top of this whole denial mechanism.' And he

urged his compatriots to face up to the past.

 

The psychological pressure placed on commentators by this complex

inevitably erupts in their writings. Thus, KardaÅ? ends his article

confessing that `Reading the details of the documents Gust has managed

to retrieve ¦ has left me in utter shame and gripped my soul.'

Referring to Germany's `tradition of offering official apologies about

such periods of shame' - i.e. the Holocaust --, KardaÅ? concludes: `If

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Turkish Prime Minister Recep

Tayyip Erdogan together condemn the atrocities and massacres their

ancestors performed, the souls of the victims, squeezed somewhere,

will turn into doves. Does conscience tell us to spare our words from

the oppressed?'

 

Significantly, this is not the first time KardaÅ? has addressed the

issue. Back in May 2010, he published a lengthy commentary entitled,

`Do we have to defend the actions of the Committee of Union and

Progress?' in Today's Zaman. (5) Summarizing the history of the

concept of genocide as shaped by Raphael Lemkin and embodied in the UN

Genocide Convention in 1948, KardaÅ? reviewed the Ottoman persecutions

of Armenians and other Christians up to the 1890s, then presented the

CUP's `homogenization' campaign of ethnic cleansing through

deportations and massacres. He offered the following reflections:

 

`A regime that hinges upon concealing and denying the truth will make

the state and the society sick and decadent. The politicians,

academics, journalists, historians and clerical officials in Turkey

should try to ensure that the society can face the truth. To face the

truth is to become free. We can derive no honor or dignity from

defending our ancestors who were responsible for these tragedies. It

is not a humane or ethical stance to support and defend the actions of

Abdulhamit II and senior CUP members and their affiliated groups,

gangs and marauders. Turkey should declare to the world that it

accepts said atrocities and massacres and that in connection with

this, it advocates the highest human values of truth, justice and

humanism while condemning the mentality and actions of those who

committed them in the past.'

 

He concluded with the proposal that Turkey should invite all Diaspora

Armenians to return to their former homeland and become citizens. This

`may serve to abate their sorrow, which has now translated into

anger.' Furthermore, he urged the opening of the border to Turkey.

Through such actions, `Turkey will become free by getting rid of its

fears, complexes and worries by soothing the sorrows of Armenians.'

 

Breaking the Floodgates

 

Three years remain to the centenary of the Armenian Genocide. During

this period, the discussion process inside Turkey will only

accelerate, hopefully culminating in the psychological-political

breakthrough of which these and other Turkish intellectuals are

harbingers: official recognition of the genocide.(6) The publication

in Turkish of documents from the German archives has turned a

simmering debate into an explosion. Yet more documents from the

archive have recently been posted on Gust's website, dealing with

Germany's Orient policy during the war years. Although available only

in German thus far, the new material has attracted widespread

attention. Of the almost 8 million (!) visits to the site, a large and

growing number are from Turkey. Articles like those by KardaÅ? have

provoked a stream of comments on the internet and the trend will only

intensify. The floodgates have been broken, and Birand was right in

saying, `This process is like a Chinese torture. Especially as 2015

approaches,' he went on, `the pressure will increase.'

 

Notes

 

 

1. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/we-are-surrendering-ourselves-to-genocide--.aspx?pageID=449&nID=19114&NewsCatID=405

2. http://www.armenianweekly.com/2012/03/22/zarakolu-zoryan-collaborate-in-turkish-publication-of-german-archives/

The original German version is Der Völkermord an den Armeniern

1915/1916. Dokumente aus dem Politischen Archiv des deutschen

Auswärtigen Amts. Zu Klampen Verlag, Springe 2005. See

www.Armenocide.net for documents. Birand is wrong in thinking there

are Spanish and Portughese versions. An English edition is in

preparation.

3. http://www.todayszaman.com/newsDetail_getNewsById.action?newsId=280848

4. http://www.todayszaman.com/columnist-263841-regarding-dersim-what-about-1915.html

5. http://www.todayszaman.com/newsDetail_getNewsById.action;jsessionid=86615BA3EC5423C0E815A51488480925?newsId9026

6. In remarks made by Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet DavutoÄ?lu

following a meeting with his French counterpart Laurent Fabius, he

spoke of the search for `a new language of communication' and `new,

different relations with the diaspora.' He said he was `not a foreign

minister who keeps telling them that `no, nothing happened in 1915''

and added that `we are preparing for new messages regarding 2015. We

are searching for a new language around the term `fair memory.'' Such

statements, however ambiguous, denote the growing pressure on Ankara

as 2015 approaches. See

http://www.todayszaman.com/columnistDetail_getNewsById.action?newsId=286138

 

--

Muriel Mirak-Weissbach is the author of Through the Wall of Fire:

Armenia - Iraq - Palestine: From Wrath to Reconciliation (edition

fischer, Frankfurt). Her new book, Madness at the Helm: Pathology and

Politics in the Arab Spring (Ithaca/Garnet, London), will be released

soon. She can be contacted at mirak.weissbach@googlemail.com and

www.mirak-weissbach.de.