Us v. them

[oz]

Hi Raffiaharonian;

 

I wish one day you may visit your grandparents hometown.

 

My grandparents were from Selanik and Girit (Crete). They relocated to Turkey by Greek Government; many of their relatives murdered.

 

Last year I had an opportunity to visit Crete for this first time, it was really nice. The nicer thing about my vacation was Greek people. Generally, they didn’t bother me because of being Turkish. I had some good friendships there.

 

You might have noticed that, in last couple of years we really developed our relationships with Greece. Personally, I’m glad to see Greek people in Turkey. I hope we can do the same thing with Armenia.

 

I’m not dreaming having my grandparent’s lands back. It was the war, biggest crime against humanity, and I can’t do anything about it. Instead, I’m trying to improve my relationships with them to avoid further problems.

 

I will continue to discuss other issues...

[oz]

cont.

 

Dear Raffiaharonian;

 

2- You are accusing us for an alliance with Israel. So what? Armenian government is in alliance with Iran, which is officially announced as a terrorist county. What can I say? I don’t like Israel’s policy against Palestinians.

 

3- Again, I must disagree with you; please remember that when you are pointing someone with your finger, other fingers show you. Violation of human rights is a big problem in all European countries. Turkish minorities in Greece still don’t have right to open their own schools, many other countries like France, Germany and Italy don’t let Muslims for having their own mosques; they just let them have mescits (a small mosque) German and French governments don’t hesitate to deport some immigrants for their minor crimes even if they had born and grown in their countries.

 

Why don’t you get an Albanian passport and did something wrong(!) in France? I’m sure you will find the meaning or human rights then.

 

----

 

I have full respect for all Armenian freedom fighters. They fought and died for their people's independence. Please read my previous postings for my opinions.

 

Personally, I’m against to all kind of violation. I’m not in a position to make a serious comment about Albanians or Chechens but I can say that I believe in freedom.

 

By the way, I think you mean the word “gavur”. You don’t need to offence that much, it is not that bad.

 

I checked it from dictionary for you: It means a person who is not Muslim, Christian.

 

On the other hand, I know you have really bad expressions for us.

[oz]

quote

As far as the Kars treaty of 1921 is concerned, we haven’t signed that treaty and we cannot cancel it, similar to our inability to cancel the Congo-Zimbabwe Treaty of 1956 (I am making up this Treaty). However, I have a question to you. Have you ever read the text of the1921 Russo-Turkish Treaty? It is an outrageous violation of all norms of International law, and it is despicable act of state vandalism

MJ;

I'm a little bit confused about the agreement you are talking about.

I know three agreements that could be you are looking for.

1- Turkey-Armenia-Azebaijan-Georgia, Kars-1921

2- Turkey-Russia, Moskow-1921

3- Turkey-Russia, Moskow-1921

I can send them to you, but unfortunetly I have only Turkish and French versions.

[MJ]

Oz,

 

I don't know of three agreements. I know of two. It is my understanding is that there has been one Russo-Turkish Treaty in 1921, unless there is a secret protocol, of which I have heard only rumors, to which I have not had access.

 

In fact, the Kars four-lateral treaty is a duplicate of the Moscow Treaty. The explanation of the circumstances of signing of the Kars Treaty could be understood by analyzing the paragraph 15 of the Moscow Treaty, and by recalling that Armenia at the time was at a complete control of Bolshevik Russia. So you can guess how Russians had twisted the arms of Armenian Bolshevik government to fulfill their obligation (by the paragraph 15 of the Moscow Treaty).

 

In one of your previous postings you say the Turkish Government has recognized the massacres of Armenians and has condemned. Can you point me to one resolutions of the Turkish parliament where the condemnation has been expressed? Is there any proclamation by the President or the Prime Minister of Turkey on that subject?

 

I promise you to give you the name of the Turkish publisher (I have the name in my mind, but don't want to give it until I double-check it, so that to be sure I am not misspeaking. I have to give few calls next week - it may take few days, because I am in a major transition.), who was sentenced to 11 month jail term for publishing a book on the subject of the Genocide.

 

You are referring me to the Lahey Justice Court. Could you give me some precise references, please, on where does it preside, where can I find their charter and the description of their jurisdiction, etc. After all, they should have a Web site, if they are such a major Institution, shouldn't they?

 

I also welcome your suggestion of the dialog between the two governments. But it is the government of Turkey that has imposed transportation blockade on Armenia, and has refused to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, isn't it? What kind of dialog the two governments can have, if they don't have diplomatic relations.

 

Now, you say that you, or even the Turkish government recognizes the crimes of the Ottoman government. In particular, the massacres of Armenians. Do you recognize that the basis of those massacres has been the national identity of Armenians, i.e. they have been massacred just because of being Armenian, that it has been organized by the highest levels of the government of Ottoman Turkey and it has been a centralized effort? Let's refrain from the term 'Genocide,' for now.

 

Also, you are saying that what has happened should not be judged under the Genocide law. What law are you referring to? I am aware of only a definition of 'Genocide," and a condemnation of it. Where can I find the law of Genocide?

 

As it pertains to the publications of Dadrian, I disagree with you. I think Dadrian is one of the most professional, and most recognized Genocide scholars. His arguments are stripped of off emotions, and are based on analytic thinking and fact, to which, by the way, he always refers to. His publications always provide us with references on independent sources of information, i.e not Armenian sources. A significant chunk of his references are taken from the Turkish sources, as evident.

 

As far as Admiral Bristol's letter to Mark Barton is concerned, yes, it is an authentic document. I don't have a problem with it. Sure, it is not a pleasure for us to read such characterization, but we have sustained Genocide, have sustained the lose of our ancestors, our family property, our country, and our lands, we can also sustain that criticism. But it has to be noticed that the description of the events in the letter of Brystol is related to the post-Genocide period, and is related to the policies of the government of the Republic of Armenian, on the territories of the Republic of Armenia, which has existed outside the boundaries of the Ottoman Empire, during 1918-1920. In my next posting, I will paste here a detailed analysis of that letter.

 

I have to disagree with you regarding posting such materials. You are welcome to post all the professional materials that you (or the Turkish organizations) have at your disposal. We will do our best to reply. What is accurate, we would agree with, regardless of how painful the truth may be, what is inaccurate in our view, we will try to refute. After all, that's how the dialog evolves. As long as we are professional and ethical in our discussions and materials, I would say everything goes. Agree?

 

I will revisit all our postings of the last couple of days at my earliest opportunity, so that to check if I have addressed all your comments, and if I have provided all the materials that I have promised.

[MJ]

The Washington Times

February 13, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition

Controversy continues over Armenian 'genocide'

 

Aylin Direskeneli's Feb. 8 letter, "Armenian 'genocide' legislation is

politically motivated," in response to your excellent Feb. 5 editorial, "Genocidal politics," exposed the disdain for learning

through dialogue that guides those who deny the Armenian genocide. To counter your editorial position in favor of U.S. recognition of this genocide, she re-submitted a piece of "exculpatory evidence" that was already debunked on the same letters page only four months earlier.

 

Ms. Direskeneli pointed out that in an "Oct. 13 Commentary column, 'Genocide gyrations,' Bruce Fein pointed out the exculpatory evidence of Rear Adm. Mark L. Bristol," the U.S. high commissioner in Turkey after World War I: "'I see that reports are being freely circulated in the United States that the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in the Caucasus. Such reports are repeated so many times that it makes my blood boil. The Near East Relief have the reports from Yarrow and our own American people which show absolutely that such Armenian reports are absolutely false.'"

 

Ms. Direskeneli should know that in an Oct. 18 letter, I had already documented the futility of using Adm. Bristol to counter the

unimpeachable testimony of America's wartime ambassador in Istanbul, Henry Morgenthau. So for Ms. Direskeneli's benefit, I will say it

again: Adm. Bristol's letter - written in 1921 - does not disprove that Armenians suffered a genocide, because it refers to the Caucasus in 1920, not to the time and place the great extermination occurred. The central scene of the crime was in the Ottoman Empire; the crucial years were between 1915 and 1918. Manipulating

Adm. Bristol to deny the destruction of the Armenians twists the truth, because Adm. Bristol himself believed Ottoman officials ordered large-scale massacres.

 

Writing to the State Department in 1924, Adm. Bristol referred to "the most barbarous acts of the regime in power at the time of the Armenian massacres," to "the cruelties practiced upon the Armenians by Turks

acting under official orders, and in pursuance of a deliberate official policy," for which "there can be no adequate excuse."

 

Adm. Bristol also wrote a lot of false and misleading letters because he - motivated by economic interests - was trying to "wipe the spot," as he put it, that stained Turkey. And now, Ms. Direskeneli is repeating Mr. Fein's failed effort to use one of those letters as a rag to polish Turkey's image. Their tactic is a shameful disservice to courageous Turks of decency who are struggling to elevate Turkey by acknowledging the facts of history.

 

It will be more difficult for Armenians and Turks to reach a mutually beneficial end to this conflict if we refuse to respect the written word and the probative value of the arguments advanced by both sides.

 

So if Ms. Direskeneli did not get it the first time, I suggest that she sit back with a cup of good Turkish coffee, relax, and read

carefully, in order to learn the difference between falsification and fact: "In fact," Adm. Bristol admonished a Turkish reporter in 1919, "the massacres of the Armenians have made a spot which is difficult to

eradicate. You ought not to have done such things, yes, you ought not to have done it."

 

LEVON MARASHLIAN

Professor of History

Glendale Community College

Glendale, Calif.

[MJ]

Oz, can you be a little bit more factual, please?

[oz]

International Court of Justice

 

Also known as Lahey or Hague

http://www.icj-cij.org/

[MJ]

OK. I know of it only under the name of Hague. I will reply to you later on this subject.

[MJ]

Oz,

Do you also believe in freedom of Karabagh Armenians?

[oz]

1- MJ, I still have no idea about the agreement. Can you send a copy to me?

 

Its a little bit confusing becouse in 1921 Armenia was an independent republic, how can we decide your internal affairs?

 

2- As long as Armenian Govertments aggressive policy continues I'm not expecting an offical announcement of condemnation.

 

It doesn't mean that we don't recognize all horrible things happened to your people. We just need to improve our diplomatic relations to say it loud.

 

We are not refusing diplomatic relations, simply, Armenian Government prefers to communicate with other countries rather than us.

 

3- Yes, there is a law that describes genocide, as I mentioned briefly in my previous postings. I think you can find it.

 

4- Since there is a suspicion on these letters honesty, I don't see any point to discuss them here.

 

You might find yourself qualified enough to evaluate this letters, but I am not.

 

If we will go on court on this issue, I'm sure that all this letters will be evaluated and considered by professionals.

 

Actually, its like a tragic divorsion case. Both sides trying to hurt other, as possible as they can.

 

Since then, I think we should discuss how we can develop our relations.

 

[ April 21, 2001: Message edited by: oz ]

[oz]

I don't have any discrimination in my beliefs.

[MJ]

1- MJ, I still have no idea about the agreement. Can you send a copy to me? Its a little bit confusing becouse in 1921 Armenia was an independent republic, how can we decide your internal affairs?

 

Unfortunately, I don’t have access to an electronic copy of the agreement. I am puzzled as why none of the involved governments have made such a copy available in the internet. I can acquire an Armenian hard copy of it, which I have studied in the past for long time, but that wouldn’t help much.

 

Referring to the independence of Armenia in 1921, you have hit the nail on the head. Indeed, at the time of signing the Russo-Turkish Treaty (March 17, 1921, I believe), Armenia was practically independent. First of all, the Caucasian Federation was not formed, yet, and obviously, neither was the USSR. So the Socialistic Armenia was indeed independent. Moreover, two months later after the capitulation of the government of the first Republic of Armenian under the ultimatum from the Russian and Turkish Armies (December 1st, 1920), on February 7th,1921, Armenian under the command of General Garegin Nzhdeh had rebelled, had overthrown the Armenian Communists, had defeated the Russian Red Army detachments, and had reestablished the independence of Armenia under a new leadership. The Russo-Turkish Treaty has been signed under these circumstances. Two foreign countries have come together, and have bargained on the territorial integrity and the sovereignty of a third country. Much like it has taken place some 20 years later between the Germans and USSR on the subject of Baltian countries (Ribentrope-Molotov Treaty, I think, 1939).

 

This is why I have qualified the Russo-Turkish Treaty of 1921 as an outrageous, in fact, case study, of state vandalism and barbarianism.

 

The rebels have successfully deflected all Russian attempts to take over Armenia for almost 6 months. After resolving their issues at the Polish front, and demolishing Kol’chak’s White Guradia in Syberia, Russians have thrown all those Armies at Armenia. In the summer of the 1921, the Russian Armey has succeeded in taking over Armenia one more time. The Kars Treaty has been signed under these circumstances. According to the paragraph 15 of the earlier Russo-Turkish Treaty, Russia has taken the obligations of making sure that all the paragraphs of that Treaty are properly executed, and as of today, it remains the guarantor of that Treaty.

 

 

Perhaps, I have to appeal to some Armenian Academic circles to find out if any of them has an English Electronic copy of the Treaty.

 

2- As long as Armenian Governments aggressive policy continues I'm not expecting an official announcement of condemnation.

It doesn't mean that we don't recognize all horrible things happened to your people. We just need to improve our diplomatic relations to say it loud.

 

We are not refusing diplomatic relations, simply, Armenian Government prefers to communicate with other countries rather than us.

Let’s just agree that this statement of yours is not your most sincere argument. In what way is Armenia’s Policy aggressive in the region? As recognized by all major International Powers, Armenia conducts a very balanced foreign policy in the region. How can a tiny Armenia, the economy of which is pined almost at the ground zero be aggressive towards Turkey? IS there any rationale in your last argument?

 

3- Yes, there is a law that describes genocide, as I mentioned briefly in my previous postings. I think you can find it.

No. I don’t know about that low. Please help me to find it. Additionally, if Turkey has not committed Genocide, it has nothing to fear of. Proving of a charge of a Genocide is a very high threshold, and it requires an uphill battle from our side.

4- Since there is a suspicion on these letters honesty, I don't see any point to discuss them here.

In fact, as evident, I have not questioned the authenticity of the letter. I have admitted that it is authentic. I have just brought to your attention the professional dishonesty of Mr. Fein, who is an American lawyer hired by the American Turkish lobby, and the naivety of those who have read this letter without carefully analyzing what Bristol is referring too, and by taking the letter out of context, the ATAA and other organizations have attempted to deny the Genocide, by using a totally irrelevant document. So much about the professional integrity of Mr. Fain and the leadership of ATAA.

And don’t worry, we will meet in the court some day, unless the Turkish Government demonstrates a greater wisdom, and accepts what is undeniable. As a matter of fact, given that the Genocide was not a mere historic event, and it was not an ethnic or religious Genocide, but it was a political Genocide, i.e. Genocide conducted due to political motivations, it is quite appropriate to have it addressed at the political courts of the world - that is at the Parliaments of different countries.

And we are always open to discussing the topic of the further development of our relations. As far as I understand, so is the government of Armenia. The only partu standing on the way of the materialization of this discussion, by your own recognition is the government of Turkey.

[oz]

Admiral Mark L. Bristol to Dr. James L. Barton (1921)

 

Rear Admiral Mark L. Bristol was the U.S. High Commissioner and then the first U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Turkey between the years of 1920 and 1926. Below is his letter, dated 28 March 1921, to Dr. James L. Barton of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. As a U.S. diplomat living in Turkey, Ambassador Bristol talks about his experience and observations about the Armenian claims and how they relate to reality.

 

What follows is Dr. Barton's reply to Ambassador Bristol. Dr. Barton talks about the Armenian lobby in the United States and their claims, which he believes are far from reality.

 

On Board U.S.S. ST. LOUIS At Sea.

En route from Island of Rhodes to Constantinople, Turkey.

 

MLB: JJT.

 

28 March, 1921

Dr. James L. Barton.

14 Beacon Street,

Boston, Mass.

 

Dear Doctor Barton:

 

Your letter of 14 of January was duly received. Shortly after receiving your letter I started on a cruise to Egypt, Palestine, Syria and Cilicia. I have been gone over a month and we are at the present time entering the Dardanelles, and will be in Constantinople tomorrow morning. Mrs. Bristol, with some other ladies, made the same trip by mail steamer and railway, so we had some very pleasant excursions, visiting the places of interest during our trip. It has been most interesting, instructive and enjoyable. I needed a change of scene and rest and have profited fully by this outing.

 

During this trip I have had an opportunity to meet General Allenby, and our own representatives in Egypt, to have an audience with the Sultan of Egypt and meet some prominent Egyptians. This experience had given me a sidelight, from personal associations upon the affairs of Egypt.

 

In Palestine I came in personal contact with the new Jewish movement. I met Sir Herbert Samuels, Colonel Stores, and many others belonging to the Staff of the High Commissioner in Palestine. Colonel Deeds, who was with the British High Commissioner in Constantinople for some time, is the Chief Political Officer under Sir Herbert. Likewise, I was able to see our Delegate here, Consul Heiser, and his relief which arrived at the same time I did, Mr. Southard, who has just come from Aden. I had an opportunity to look over our different institutions at this place. I was surprised to find that the Near East Relief work at Jerusalem is practically a Jewish affair.

 

In Syria I had a very pleasant association with Comte de Caix who is acting as High Commissioner because General Couraud is away. Comte de Caix, is, of course, the power behind the throne, and I was most pleasantly surprised at his ability, frankness and optimism. At the same time he has no illusions in regard to the difficult work that he has before him. It was from him I first learned that the French had come to an understanding with the Kemalists and would withdraw the French troops from Cilicia. Likewise, the boundary between Syria and Turkey will be established on lines that are much more sensible than the one provided in the Sevres treaty. He is very much opposed to any Armenian refugees from Cilicia being allowed to come into Syria. I quite agreed with him in regard to this, except that I do believe the French should guarantee the safety of the Armenians in Cilicia and should evacuate from Cilicia those Armenians that especially aided the French, and particularly the Armenians that were disbanded from the French Foreign Legion or were mustered out after serving in the French Army. If you can bring any influence to bear in Washington I would suggest that you work along these lines. I believe it would be a grave mistake for the Armenians to get in a panic and make a general exodus from Cilicia when the Turks return to power. I think it would be very much better for the Armenians to stay there and the Turks be compelled to grant them proper rights.

 

I visited Alexandretta and Mersine. I found out there that an armistice had been arranged between the French and the Kemalists from 19 of March for the period of one month. The result has been that the conditions have quieted down, although since the armistice began a French officer and some soldiers have been killed and the railway broken. But at Mersine, for instance, the fighting that had been going on almost continually day after day just outside the city has recently stopped. I had a talk with Dr. Chambers, Mr. Applebee, Head of the Y.M.C.A. Dr. Chambers agreed with me in regard to the Armenians not evacuating Cilicia, and using all influence with the Turks for the benefit of the Armenians. If the Armenians started to run away this would encourage the Turks to attack them, not only on account of the fear shown, but probably with the hope of driving the Armenians out of the country. However, if the Armenians remained in Cilicia and the moral influence at least of Europe and America was brought to bear on the Turks, I believe that the Armenians would be all right, except for individuals that have been active in opposition to the Turks during the past year.

 

I see that reports are being freely circulated in the United States that the Turks massacred thousands of Armenians in the Caucasus. Such reports are repeated so many times it makes my blood boil. The Near East Relief have the reports from Yarrow and our own American people which show absolutely that such Armenian reports are absolutely false. The circulation of such false reports in the United States, without refutation, is an outrage and is certainly doing the Armenians more harm than good. I feel that we should discourage the Armenians in this kind of work, not only because it is wrong, but because they are injuring themselves. In addition to the reports from our own American Relief workers that were in Kars and Alexandrople, and reports from such men as Yarrow, I have reports from my own Intelligence Officer and know that the Armenian reports are not true. Is there not something that you and the Near East Relief Committee can do to stop the circulation of such false reports? I was surprised to see Dr. McCallum send through a report along this line from Constantinople. When I called attention to the report, it was stated that it came from the Armenians, but the telegram did not state this, nor did it state that the Armenian reports were not confirmed by our own reports. I may be all wrong; but I can't help feeling that I am not, because so many people out here who know the conditions agree with me that the Armenians and ourselves who lend ourselves to such exaggerated reports are doing the worst thing we possibly can for the Armenians. Why not tell the truth about the Armenians in every way? Let us come out and tell just what the Armenians are and then show our sympathy and do everything we can to make the future of these people what it should be for human beings. I am sure that the mass of people at home believe the Armenians are Christians in action and morals, and that they are able to govern themselves. You and I, and others that know them, know that this is not the case. We believe that they have been made what they are by the conditions they have been compelled to live under, and we want to get them out from under these conditions so they can become Christians and able to govern themselves. But I cannot believe that right is ever produced by wrong-doing. As I have stated to Dr. Peet and many others, I believe that so long as we don't refute these false reports made by the Armenians, or don't come out and state the true facts in regard to the Armenian question, we run the risk of being accused of being party to this information. Dr. Peet and I had a long talk about a year ago along this same line, and I think as a result of it he wrote to you. I don't want to appear as being critical at all and you know that. But I do realize that we are human beings and when we realize the suffering of the Armenians our sentiments make us respond to our human instinct, and especially our American ideas of fair play, so that we forget, and even desire to conceal, the failings of the Armenians in order to obtain their release from the oppression of the Turkish rule. It may be that I am wrong in my idea that the best way to obtain this is by stating fully just what the Armenians are and what they are capable of and then tackling the whole job of cleaning up this Near Eastern mess.

 

I certainly was surprised to hear, from your letter, that there was a movement on foot to loan money to Armenia. I don't think that the question of money, or the amount of money, should enter into the question of assistance to the Armenians, but I do think that any money loaned to the Armenians under the present conditions is wrong. I do not believe in the loan to Armenia to be used under an American Commission unless the United States is prepared to furnish the troops and the means to maintain Armenia as a country and protect it against all aggression from outside. We have already loaned Armenia over 50 million and that money is lost. I recommend against this loan at the time. Another loan would be simply putting good money after bad.

 

As long ago as last July I reported officially to the Department that there [were] strong Bolshevik feelings amongst the Armenians and that many of the Army officers were Bolshevik in sentiment. I stated then it was only a question of time when Armenia would go Bolshevik. Armenia did turn Bolshevik and was not compelled to do so by the Russians, although they may have been influenced by Russian propaganda. The Bolshevik leaders represent one party, the Dashnaks represent another, and the National Democratic Party of Armenia represents another party. As far as I am concerned I can find very little difference between the party leaders of these different parties. While the Dashnaks were in power they did everything in the world to keep the pot boiling by attacking Kurds, Turks and Tartars; by committing outrages against the Moslems; by giving no representation whatever to the Molokans which are a large factor in the population of the Caucasus Armenia; by massacring the Moslems; and robbing and destroying their homes; and finally by starting an attack against the Turks which resulted in a counter attack by the Turks, and then the Armenians deserted and ran away and even would not stand and defend their women and children. The acts of the Armenian army at Kars absolutely disgusted our Americans, including Yarrow. During the last two years the Armenians in Russian Caucasus have shown no ability to govern themselves and especially no ability to govern or handle other races under their power.

 

During over two years that I have been here in Constantinople I have had occasion to see nearly everyone of our Americans that have gone to, or returned from, the Caucasus, and I think I am safe in stating that I have never had one of them that believed the Armenians had any ability to govern themselves, and most of these Americans that have been working with the Armenians have come away disgusted.

 

I am not disgusted with the Armenians, and I pity them; but I cannot believe in the idea of the establishment of an independent Armenia in a country where not 25% of the people are Armenians. I do not believe the Armenians are able to govern themselves, and especially should not be allowed to govern other people; and certainly, if any of the other races here in this part of the country are under the Armenians, they are going to be submitted to oppression and outrage. I believe in helping the Armenians, but not in this way. I believe that if we come out and state all the facts regarding the Armenian question, and all combine, we can get the United States to help them. However, so long as we proceed along the present line I do not believe we will succeed because I don't believe it is right.

 

In regard to loaning the Armenians money without Armenia being under a mandate I believe this is an unjustifiable waste of money. For two years we have expended money in relief work for the Armenians and we supplied them flour on a loan covering over 50 million dollars. What is there to show for all this vast expenditure? There is nothing to show except ingratitude, and when an emergency arose, one of the greatest friends Armenia ever had and the one that had been working and giving his best efforts for relief work amongst them, had to depend upon the Turks for his own personal protection. It is a well known fact that in the beginning of our relief work flour and provisions turned over to the Armenian Government for the starving were taken by the high officials of the Government and sold for their own benefit. Then finally Armenia turned Bolshevik and repudiated all her debts; and one of these debts was for the flour we had furnished on their word of honor to repay, because they certainly had no security to offer. It was a sentimental loan based on faith in a people, and they have gone back on us.

 

You write that if the United States loaned Armenia money for her rehabilitation and for her protection of the boundary fixed by President Wilson the countries of Europe would be requested to protect Armenia from attacks from without. I am afraid you have more faith in European countries than I have. Thus far the European countries have protected none of the races in this part of the world. The fact is, in my opinion, the plans that they have been carrying out have resulted in greater harm to the so-called Christian races than if nothing at all had been done. I cannot imagine anyone believing that the European countries would do anything to protect the boundary of Armenia fixed by Mr. Wilson unless it was to their selfish interests to do so, and I do not see what selfish interests would be involved by our loaning money to Armenia. As regards the United Staes guaranteeing the protection of that boundary from within, I cannot imagine the United States ever consenting doing this. Such an undertaking would certainly be the best possible way of involving America in European entanglements; and still more, in my opinion such entanglements would not be justified. The boundary laid down by Mr. Wilson was certainly an arbitrary boundary and it was so stated in the report defining this boundary.

 

I note that you state Armenia at that time was an established fact so far as political recognition was concerned. I cannot understand this point of view because the Sevres treaty was ratified by no one and there was no possible hope of anybody ratifying this treaty. The determination of the boundary of Armenia was based upon a ratification of the treaty and in my opinion should not have been made until after the treaty was ratified. Probably there is no doubt that the fixing of this boundary brought about the attack upon Armenia by the Turkish Nationalists. Thus again Armenia was injured by the best intentions in the world. You will note that at the present conference in London the Armenians are being given practically no consideration. Another example of this is the withdrawal of French troops from Cilicia. You will see that in the end European Powers are going to do little or nothing for the Armenians. Therefore, I believe that we should not try to dicker with the European Powers, but come out in America with a fixed policy for the good of all races in the Near East. If we had adopted such a policy two years ago and worked steadily for it I feel certain we could have accomplished something. I haven't yet given up hope because I think it is too late. It is never too late.

 

I believe in starting a campaign and placing the Armenian and Greek situation before our people in the United States squarely and fairly, telling both sides of the story. The Greek propaganda in the United States has given our people a wrong idea entirely in regard to the Greek question. The European countries lend themselves to this misleading propaganda. The difficult situation that the European Powers have got into the Near East is due in my opinion to basing their action upon wrong-doing. There was no justification for putting the Greeks in Smyrna and this was borne out by a report of investigation which was as fair and square an investigation as was ever made. This report is in the State Department. The Greeks keep contending they have got a majority of population in the parts of Asia Minor that they occupy. You know, and we all know this is not true. Those who know the Greeks out here know that they are not in any war representative of the ancient Greeks that we all admire. In fact, they are just the opposite.I don't believe there is a single representative of a European Country in Constantinople that does not deprecate the occupation of Asia Minor by the Greeks. There is no doubt in the world that the support of this is simply upon the old principle of maintaining a balance of power in the Near East. I don't think there is any doubt in the world that if our people at home were made to realize this that they would rise up against any support of Greece by money or moral influence.

 

There is another fact that should be brought out and that is that the administration of Turkish law by the old Turkish Government and the Turkish Government that has existed for many centuries is a vile administration. This administration should never be allowed to continue, and yet European countries are proposing to reestablish a part of this country under Turkish rule with practically no guarantees for the minorities. The mass of the Turks are ruled by a few intriguing Turks that represent in Turkey, more nearly than anything else, the Manchus that were overthrown in China. These few Turks have a spattering of education and a moral character developed by intriguing and deceit. They have unlimited power which has debilitated their moral character so that they are not fit to administer any law. It is my opinion that America should come out against this horrible outrage of placing these people in power to administer the Turkish law over anybody.

 

The Near East is a cesspool that should be drained and cleaned out without any halfway measures. The idea of establishing an independent Armenia and placing the Greeks over a part of the territory is only creating what, with the new Turkey that would be established, three cesspools, instead of one. Therefore I beg you to use your influence and that of all those with you that I know have much influence in America to have our people in the United States fully informed regarding the Near Eastern question. Let us adopt a big policy and stand for it and do our best to get this policy carried out. I know that sometimes it is a good thing to take less than the ideal when that is all you can get. But I do believe in placing our ideal in full light of the day so that when you accept less than the ideal it is done with a full knowledge. I am not certain that America if she fully realized the big task in the Near East and at the same time could be made to see what a big opportunity there was for America to do, probably the biggest thing in the world for true peace, would not tackle the job. Our people like to do big things. Then too, I believe if they would take a mandate for the whole of the old Ottoman Empire it would not involve us in the European affairs as much as we are bound to be involved in the future if this Near Eastern question is not properly settled at this time. Still further, I am absolutely certain that any assumption of responsibility for a part of the old Ottoman Empire, like an independent Armenia, is bound to get us involved in European affairs and involved in a way that we could not justify our action because such a procedure is not based upon what is right and just. I agree with you that it would be more difficult for America to take hold now than it was before because we have been contaminated by this advocacy of Greek and American claims and, in a measure, our reputation has been destroyed by the belief that we are working with the Allies of Europe, or at least supporting them in the schemes that they have been carrying out in the Near East.

 

I certainly am glad that you did not resign from the Near East Relief. Likewise, that Mr. Dodge is going to hold on. However, I hope you adopt as a policy relief work for all orphans and destitute women, without any regard for sect or religion. I have just been to Beirut where they have started a relief work for orphans to extend over ten years, so as to bring these children up self-supporting and at the same time not to educate them beyond the position that they will be required to hold in their own country. At the present time the French seem very friendly to American institutions in Syria, but on general principles I would warn against counting on this attitude after the French have obtained the mandate for Syria and are fully established beyond dispute. I do not believe the French are going to give up the idea that we Americans are not carrying on our institutions to DOC undermine the French influence. We must do everything in the world to destroy this impression by assuming a most neutral attitude regarding politics and religion in carrying on our work. This is not only for the sake of French good-will, but in order, as you agree I know, to continue the reputation that our institutions have.

 

In regard to the Custer case I am afraid no one is to blame but Custer himself, and I do not believe his act is going to hurt the other Americans. He can undoubtedly thank Miss Graffam for his liberty. Such acts as drawing a revolver on a policeman is not countenanced in any country, especially when it is not justified, and the policeman was carrying out his duty. On the whole our Americans are being treated very courteously by the Turks in the interior and I believe we will continue to have this treatment so long as we play perfectly fair and square and don't take up sides with anyone, and especially if we will carry out relief work on the broad principle of giving relief to anyone that may require it.

 

I do not agree with Lloyd George that Mustapha Kemal has mutinied and is a rebel. He may be a rebel in the strict and technical sense, but it was the action of the Allies that drove the Turks to rebel. I do not justify the Turks in their acts but, knowing the Turks, if you want to control them don't goad them like you would a wild bull in a bull ring.

 

In regard to the policy of the Near East Relief, I am sure that the workers in the field do not understand the instructions that there should not be any discrimination in matters of religion in applying relief. At the assembly of workers here in Constantinople last Autumn this question was taken up and was very heatedly discussed. Mr. Vickrey himself told me that you have changed your policy, but that is neither here nor there. There is no doubt whatever a policy was carried out of giving relief only to Armenians, except in cases like Miss Cushman and Miss Graffam and Miss Allen, and some others that I might mention who know the way to establish good will in the country and therefore assist the Turks. The charge made by the Armenians in their papers that our relief organizations was using 80% of all the receipts for work with the Turks and Kurds, is, I am sure you will admit, in keeping with the accuracy of the statements that the Armenians are given to making. Don't you think that we can stand any of the accusations made by any of the races in this part of the country? I am very proud of the work that our people have done in this part of the world and it doesn't make much difference what anyone says about the work. I would suggest that it would be well if the workers in the field clearly understood that the relief work was to be carried on without any discrimination as regards race or religion. I know that they do not understand that now, even after the assembly at Constantinople last Autumn. Yes, I did know the Red Cross made large contributions to the Near East Relief work and therefore feel that it was not right to expend the funds, especially the Red Cross funds, for any particular race or sect. And again, I know that lots of the workers did not and that the Red Cross funds were a part of the contributions.

 

I have dictated this letter as I have felt because I feeI deeply. Still further, I have an impression that since things have been going steadily from bad to worse in this part of the world, and this has been brought about by following a policy that I have never been in sympathy with, it may be that I have not done all that I could to improve conditions in the Near East and that I should make greater effort. I appreciate that this may sound to you, and to others, in some parts like criticism, but I do not intend it in that way because I do not want to arouse opposition, but only to establish a new policy that I believe is right. I believe you will forgive me for anything stated herein if you believe that my sole intention is simply to do what I think is right. I simply want to get us all to work together. I want to work with you because I know that your aims are just as sincere as mine. However, I am sure you will agree that our ideas frequently change, and if this will bring from you a reply that will change my ideas, I am only too ready to grasp the opportunity.

 

I thank you very much for your good wishes, and reciprocate, hoping that your efforts there have continued for so many years for the good of this part of the world will meet with success, and that I may be able to help you in your work.

 

With best regards,

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Mark L. Bristol

Rear Admiral, U.S. Navy

UNITED STATES HIGH COMMISSIONER

[oz]

I'm sorry but I can only agree with that part of Vahakn Dadrian's study.

MJ, I think posting that kind of letters or studies is not a great idea. I know that you have a bunch of them, so me too.

[MJ]

That's very brave of you.

[levonyeshilian]

As you see Oz has a good English,this shows he went to a good turkish university or whatsoever and must have below much more education from an ordinary turk.I personally always try to seperate good from bad,doesn't matter if he's a turk............................................................................

..................

But Oz,

Please tell us what does Armenia is agressive means?,is 70 million populated turkey afraid of 2 millions populated Armenia?Or do you think there will be a crusade over turkey by the western Christian forces?Please try to see and accept your faults.

All those Armenians over the world didn't leave their homes and homeland with business-class plain tickets to have red-fast cars and a house with a pool in early 1900's.You always say Armenians are free for anything in turkey but I don't even have my Armenian name on my ID.You'll ask why?Don't you remember what Bozkurts did before 1980?or in 1960?or the 'tax of wealth'for Christians in 1940s???Another fault of you is to forget what you did yesterday and to call it history as if it happened thousands of years ago.

[oz]

What can I say? Please read my post again.

By the way, my grandparents were from Crete, not Cyprus.

[Karine]

Sorry, Oz, wich lands are you refering to, wanting back? Your dreaming!!!

If I´m not misstaking it was Turkey who occupied northern part of Crete, wich mainly was populated by greeks.If the greeks relocated you to Turkey, the turkish goverment was acting likewise against the greeks living in northern Crete.

[oz]

quote

is 70 million populated turkey afraid of 2 millions populated Armenia? Or do you think there will be a crusade over turkey by the western Christian forces?

 

This is a quite nationalist approach; I'm not talking about attacking each other, I'm talking about diplomacy.

 

I think we should revise this issue to clarify:

 

Armenian Government knows that Turkey has no doubt about the massacres and crimes of Ottoman Empire. Only disagreement is the usage of the term “Genocide”.

 

If their purpose is recognition of genocide, they should go Lahey (Hague) Justice Court. It is how it works between civilized countries. Turkey is a member of UN and recognizes the decisions of Hague.

 

However, Armenian Government (or Diaspora) tries to persuade foreign parliaments to recognize the genocide.

 

They are lying to their own people, foreign parliaments cannot force Turkey to recognize the genocide; it is an internal affair of Turkey.

 

Armenia knows it very clearly, but also enjoys continuing its policy; probably because of different purposes.

 

As you can see, nationalist groups both in Turkey and Armenia are taking the advantage of the situation and cultivating hatred in people's mind.

 

This is why I’m calling it as an aggressive policy.

 

I'm sure one day we will find a solution for this problem but I have no idea who will clean this ultra-nationalism and racism mess from our people's mind after then.

 

quote

Don't you remember what Bozkurts did before 1980?or in 1960?or the 'tax of wealth'for Christians in 1940s???

 

You were not alone.

 

Ultra-nationalist groups in Turkey didn’t discriminate anyone because of their races, thousands of young Turkish people either murdered or wounded by these groups because of their beliefs. So, if you just talk about Armenians it would be a misleading.

 

On the other hand, Kurds, Greeks and even Armenians co-operated with them on their dirty jobs. Who can deny this? I lived in Turkey, I know how it works.

 

Finally, tax of wealth was not only for Christians. I think you don’t know the subject clearly.

 

quote

I don't even have my Armenian name on my ID

 

There are violations of human rights in Turkey and we are trying to get over it.

 

However, I’m not sure about the application on names and surnames. I know a lot of Christian names in Turkey (for example Manukyan) but it would be better for me to check first before making a comment.

 

By the way, I cannot say other countries in Europe are perfect on the application of human rights.

 

I think current human rights violations in Europe is a great subject to discuss and I would be glad to talk about it in another group, so we can stick to the main subject here.

 

[ April 23, 2001: Message edited by: oz ]

[MJ]

This is a quite nationalist approach; I'm not talking about attacking each other, I'm talking about diplomacy.

Which part of it is nationalistic, OZ?

I think we should revise this issue to clarify: Armenian Government knows that Turkey has no doubt about the massacres and crimes of Ottoman Empire. Only disagreement is the usage of the term “Genocide”.

You haven’t given any explanations, yet, as why it is not Genocide. Turkish government has not agreed that it has committed massacres. If it has, [lease show me the declaration. As a matter of fact, many in the government claim that, instead, Armenians have committed massacres.

If their purpose is recognition of genocide, they should go Lahey (Hague) Justice Court. It is how it works between civilized countries. Turkey is a member of UN and recognizes the decisions of Hague.

Until the independence of Armenia, Armenia couldn’t go to Hague, since it was not a member of the UN. As you may know, last year, the president of Armenia presented the case to the General Assembly of the UN. In 1985 the Human Rights Commission of the UN has already condemned the Genocide of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey. The International Justice Court in Hague is just another element of the UN structure. Per its own recognition, when even one of the parties denies the charges, the matter may be studied by the court, itself. However, as they indicate, Court’s general practice is that the study of the matter takes normally up to ten years. So, it is a long process, therefore it has to be prepared. Additionally, the parliaments subject to discussions are of UN member countries, and operated under the auspices of the UN. There is nothing wrong in pursuing the mater in these parliaments, since these countries (including Turkey) have signed the UN resolution on the Genocide, and the Hague Court operates within the same framework. As I have promised, I will study the charter of the International Court of Justice at my earliest opportunity, and will clarify if Hague has jurisdiction on a matter that has taken place before the formation of the UN, and even the League of Nations. Regardless of the jurisdiction of the Hague Court, the Parliaments of the member countries have the jurisdiction and the competence to give a political assessment to a crime against the humanity.

 

However, Armenian Government (or Diaspora) tries to persuade foreign parliaments to recognize the genocide.

And why shouldn’t it do it, in principle? On the other hand, the Armenian Government does not try to do it. Armenian government has made its declaration at the UN General Assembly. The Armenian Government has no jurisdiction or leverages to influence the Parliaments of Foreign countries. Such an attempt from the Armenian government would be qualified as interference in the internal affairs of foreign countries. Under the best scenario, Armenian government may send a note to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of that Country.

They are lying to their own people, foreign parliaments cannot force Turkey to recognize the genocide; it is an internal affair of Turkey.

It is correct that foreign countries cannot force Turkey to recognize the Genocide. But nobody is lying. As a matter of fact, the only liar here is the source of information from which you acquire your knowledge. Additionally, as recognized by the UN, including Turkey, Genocide is a crime against humanity, therefore it is not an internal affair of any country.

Armenia knows it very clearly, but also enjoys continuing its policy; probably because of different purposes.

Again and again, you make this false accusation. The only policy that Armenia conducts in the region is that of friendly relationship between all countries of the region. There is one purpose in the persuasion of the recognition – recognition of a crime. Everything else, whatever it may or may not be, is an expected consequence, not a purpose.

As you can see, nationalist groups both in Turkey and Armenia are taking the advantage of the situation and cultivating hatred in people's mind.

 

This may be true, however, on the subject of the condemnation of the Genocide, there is not disagreement between any of the forces in Armenia or in the broader Armenian Society. The nationalists and the moderates alike are similarly minded on this subject.

This is why I’m calling it as an aggressive policy.

Well, then you are giving a new meaning to the word aggressive. How can the effort of a victim to see justice be qualified as ‘aggressive?”

I'm sure one day we will find a solution for this problem but I have no idea who will clean this ultra-nationalism and racism mess from our people's mind after then.

The only party who can clean the ultra-nationalistic and racist ‘mess’ from Armenian minds is the government of Turkey.

As it pertains to Human Rights, we are not talking about perfectionism here, but rather on the most rampant violations of the most basic Human Rights of people living in Turkey.

[raffiaharonian]

Dear Oz,

The fact that you seem to be one of the few fortunate Turk citizens who had and have access to ‘education’ and the proper verbal/written use of the political/legal language, makes me wonder if a layman like myself have the right to engage into communication with you on a such delicate and sensitive issue, like the Genocide issue.

I cannot prove it but it seems that you are one of those inner circle Turkish intellectual elite class, whose sole aim is the falsification of history and the creation of the so called ‘grey-zones areas’ in sensitive issues, whereby the humanistic and emotional aspect is absent intentionally and systematically.

 

I am not accusing you of wrongdoing (after all,you are in your own beliefs, pursuing your country's interests )but I am wondering if I am doing a service to my country by engaging into a fruitless and ‘dead-end’ discussion with you. Not that I don’t want to, but I am not ‘trained’ to engage into a vicious circle of discussion whereby the audience leave the auditorium with a sour taste of “I don’t’ know finally what is the truth and who is right or wrong…”

 

‘Human Rights’ is absent in Turkey because of a single reason and that is the attitude of the ruling class, whereby the citizens are not treated as such, but as mere instruments of economical production machines and the supply of the necessary human power in the Turkish military machine.

The mentality of the Ottoman Empire has not been ridden off and continues to exploit the vast masses of poor Turkish people.

Talking about Human Rights abuses in Europe by Turkey is a joke that belongs in the section of political satire and the ‘jokes’ sections of children’s magazines.

I am not of those who deny the existence of certain ‘human rights’ abuses in the European continent, but coming from Turkey I cannot help myself but laughing.

 

By the treatises of Serves and Lauzane (if I am not mistaken), the issues of the minorities in Turkey and Greece have been attended.

Since you are using ‘legalistic’ language, let me remind you that there is no such minority as ‘Turkish minority of Greece’. Instead there are religious minorities, who unlike Turkey’s own minority groups, they have doubled/tripled in size and live quite prosperous lives. The Moslem Turkish-speaking minority of northern Greece has even elected 2 members of parliament, who are being directed and instructed by Ankara. Greece however does not dare accusing them of treason (because siding with Turkish interests in the Greek parliament or using insulting political language or conflicting pure Greek interests is a treason act under all standards...), because of the fear of being accused by the world as human rights violator.

 

Where are the hundreds of thousands of Greeks of Constantinople of the mid 1950’s?

There are only 2 thousands of them left today. And what about their properties and assets? What about the Assyrians and other minorities?

Please DON’T talk about Human Rights, you of all the people of the region should have the honesty to admit your crimes and seek reconciliation with your past.

 

Europe is one of the major income sources of Turkey, through its millions of immigrants who have sought work and freedom in Europe. The fat cow (even though somehow mad and full of mouth and feet diseases, just to add a humor tone), which is called Europe, is being milked by Turkey and instead of it being grateful, it turns back and asks for more or bites its breasts.

You are pretty aware that most of the Turkish immigrants of Europe are not hard working and law-abiding residents, but they are the abusers of the welfare system and the naïve attitude of the Europeans.

 

Finally , you are pretty aware what is the deep meaning of ‘kiavour’ or ‘kavour’, which all nations once living under the tyranny of the Ottoman Empire have felt on their shoulders and throats.

 

The much advertised and proclaimed moto of “Lets forget about the past , which belongs to the Historians and the scripture of History Lets look forward for a better future for all the people of the region” works quite well for Turkey , especially taking into account the fact that it has NOTHING to lose, nothing to give in , but A LOT to gain and profit.

 

We can move forward only if the taste of injustice is removed from our hearts , and this is not possible as long as Turkey doesn’t take care of its dirty past!

 

Indeed I would like to see the day that we can sit around a table and make ‘kef’ with each other and looking into each other’s eyes with dignity and care.

 

[ April 23, 2001: Message edited by: raffiaharonian ]

[levonyeshilian]

Oz,

Another false example turks always give is 'Armenians are sooooooooo comfortabe here'.Why do you insist of giving the wealthy Armenians in Istanbul example?Last year i've read on a Turkish newspaper 'Radikal' that only ''''''''''1''''''''' Armenian's left in Diyarbakýr -Digranagert-.What's happening to those in eastern Anatolia?

[Harut]

yesterday i posted a massege here.

where is it?!!!!!

did somebody delete it?

[oz]

Hi folks;

 

Sorry for not replying, but I was really so busy.

 

I'm leaving country for a project in an overseas country. Probably I will spend 8 to 10 months over there.

 

So, I will try to respond all your messages as soon as possible.

 

Thanks...

[oz]

By the way, yesterday French government relased Varujan Garbisyan and sent him back to Yerevan.

 

What are you thinking about that?

 

[ May 12, 2001: Message edited by: oz ]