Taner Akçam

Taner Akcam. Copyright (c) 2005, Raffi Kojian, all rights reserved

Taner Akçam (* October 23,1953, Turkey) is a Turkish historian, sociologist and publicist. He is one of the first Turkish academics to acknowledge and discuss openly the Armenian Genocide by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915.

Studies

Akçam studied at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. He was a faculty member of Administrative Sciences, Department of Political Economy. He received his Bachelor of Administrative Sciences in 1976. He stayed at the university as a Master's student and assistant in the same department for some time. In 1976 he was arrested and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment as the editor-in-chief of a political journal. He escaped prison one year later. He has been living in the Federal Republic of Germany since early 1978 as a political refugee. He continued his political actvities and in 1988 started working for the Hamburg Institute for Social Research on the history of violence and torture in Turkey. He earned his Doctorate Degree at The University of Hannover in 1995. The topic was called Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide on the Background of Military Tribunals in Istanbul between 1919 and 1922. Currently he belongs to the scientific staff of the Hamburg Foundation to promote science and culture, working at the Hamburg Institute for Social Research. Today, Akcam is currently a Visiting Associate Professor of History at the University of Minnesota.

Work

He has published various books and articles in English, German and Turkish on the subject of Turkish - Armenian relations.

Genocide scholar V. Dadrian comments:

"[Akçam] is one of the first Turkish academics to acknowledge and discuss openly the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915 [...] This book represents the first scholarly attempt to both document the Genocide and understand that genocide from a perpetrator, rather than victim perspective, and to contextualize fully the events of 1915 within Turkey’s political history, and western political policies towards the region more generally."

armeniapedia writes:

"He is one of a handful of scholars who are challenging their homeland's insistent declarations that the organized slaughter of Armenians did not occur; and he is the first Turkish specialist to use the word "genocide" publicly in this context. His new book represents the first scholarly attempt to both document the Genocide and understand that genocide from a perpetrator, rather than victim perspective, and to contextualize fully the events of 1915 within Turkey's political history, and western political policies towards the region more generally."

Partial bibliography

Books

• From Empire to Republic : Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide, Zed Books, September 4, 2004, ISBN 1842775278
• A Shameful Act : The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility, Metropolitan Books, May 16, 2006, ISBN 0805079327
• Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey, Publications on the Near East, University of Washington, Sibel Bozdogan (Editor), University of Washington Press, July, 1997, ISBN 0295975970
• Dialogue across an international divide: Essays towards a Turkish-Armenian dialogue, Zoryan Institute, 2001, ISBN 1895485037
• Armenien und der Völkermord: Die Istanbuler Prozesse und die türkische Nationalbewegung, Hamburger Edition, 1. edition, 1996, ISBN 3930908263, (German)
• Insan haklar¸ ve Ermeni sorunu: Ittihat ve Terakki'den Kurtulus Savas¸'na, Imge Kitabevi, 1. edition, 1999, ISBN 9755332464, (Turkish)
• Siyas¸ kültürümüzde zulüm ve iskence (Arast¸rma-inceleme dizisi), Iletisim Yay¸nc¸l¸k, 1. edition, 1992, ISBN 9754702497, (Turkish)

Articles

• Dialogue Across an International Divide: Essays Towards a Turkish-Armenian Dialogue, about this book and foreword, 2001
• “My Turkishness in Revolt”, about Hrant Dink's assassination in 2007.

• Taner Akçam unearths evidence of Ottoman decision to annihilate Armenians ClarkNow/Clark University

External links

• armeniapedia entry
• Turkish Scholar Taner Akçam Lectures on New Book
• Video outtakes from an interview with Prof. Akcam at Armenica.org

Non copyright free info

Akçam is the author of the recently published groundbreaking study From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide, as well as Dialogue Across An International Divide: Essays Towards a Turkish-Armenian Dialogue, and numerous other books and articles. Through his research, writings, and lectures, he has worked tirelessly to help the Turkish people come to terms with their history and to bridge the gap between Turks and Armenians.

He has said of his approach to the issues covered in his new book, “Any effort towards democratization in the region today must begin with a dialogue about history and, most importantly, the events that transpired during the transition from Empire to Republic. Scholarly activity has been locked into a cycle of verification or denial of what happened in history, as opposed to analyzing the socio-political and historical factors that allowed that history to unfold.”

“[Akçam] is one of the first Turkish academics to acknowledge and discuss openly the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915,” commented genocide scholar Vahakn Dadrian. “This book represents the first scholarly attempt to both document the Genocide and understand that genocide from a perpetrator, rather than victim perspective, and to contextualize fully the events of 1915 within Turkey’s political history, and western political policies towards the region more generally.”

Taner Akçam was born in northeastern Turkey and became interested in politics at an early age. He was active in Turkish politics until he fled to Germany as a political refugee. For many years, in the face of great adversity, he has worked to create a dialogue between Turks and Armenians. He received a Ph.D. from Hanover University in Germany. Currently he is Visiting Associate Professor of History at the University of Minnesota – Twin Cities.

---

The Armenian Taboo and Mustafa Kemal

By Taner Akçam

Yeni Binyil
Sunday, 8 October 2000.

Translated from Turkish by Sayat, EXCLUSIVELY for ANN/Groong

The uproar over the "Genocide Bill" continues. But these developments are no surprise. There is a nice saying: what is going to come on Thursday is obvious from Wednesday. Turkey is already cracking open the last taboo area of the [Turkish] Republic. Despite all the fuss and all the threats, we will have to see that we will, finally, have to start openly discussing the murders committed against the Armenians by the Committee of Union and Progress [Ittihad ve Terakki or Young Turks]. I don't know if they will ever call it a "Genocide" or when it will happen, but the Turkish Government will be forced to accept this historical fact.

Because, the Republic's final taboo is being cracked open. It is a historical process. It cannot be stopped by hurling obscenities, threats, or blackmail. The reason is simple: the Turkish Republic was founded on five taboos. 1) There are no classes in Turkey -- we are a tightly-knit mass; 2) There are no Kurds in Turkey. They are all mountain-roving Turks; 3) We are a westernized and secular nation. The existence of [our] Islamic culture is not even a topic for discussion; 4) There was no Armenian Genocide. The Armed Forces were assigned the duty to be watchful and defend this nation which was founded on these four taboos. It was illegal to discuss the influence of the military over the regime, and this was the 5th taboo.

It was considered a crime to talk about any of these taboo areas. Statutes in the Criminal Law like 142-4, 163, 125, etc. were legislated [for this purpose]. But overseers of each of the taboos made their presence felt and military coops, tortures, and deaths ensued. As a nation we suffered a lot but at the end the taboos disappeared one by one. In fact, through a timetable in accordance with the Helsinki decisions, it was resolved that these were a part of Turkey's realities and that they needed solutions. What we call the democratization package is nothing more than the recognition of these taboo areas and remedying them accordingly. Freedom of thought, steps needed to be taken regarding the Kurdish question, lessening the influence of the military over the regime, etc.... Turkey will become democratic only to the extent that it overcomes the taboos.

Note that of all of these taboos, only the Armenian Genocide issue had remained. Because there was nobody around to bring this issue up internally, there was no criminal law against it. However along with globalization and the membership process in the European Union, this issue will come or be brought before us with increasing intensity. There is a decision that was taken by the European Parliament in 1987. In order to become an EU member, it requires Turkey to admit to the reality of the Armenian Genocide and this admission, it is stressed, will not have binding responsibilities on Turkey's part. Since Europe cannot back away from this decision, it is up to Turkey to decide.

The matter is actually clear. In a nation that wants to be democratic, there can be no subject that would be illegal to discuss. A free society does not tolerate a taboo. In the end Turkey will admit that in 1915 a great human tragedy occurred. Just as the Kurdish reality is accepted [in Turkey] today despite the obstinacy and cries like "there are no Kurds, they are mountain-dwelling Turks", the reality of 1915 will too be accepted. The most important thing is that they must not be put on the agenda by foreign pressures and not come with a high price tag. 30,000 people should not have died for the Kurdish reality to be accepted.

Unfortunately, it is beyond debate that the events of 1915 qualify as genocide according to the 1948 UN definitions. Anyone involved in the issue with even a rough knowledge of the documents in the Ottoman, German, Austrian, Armenian, and British archives knows that the facts in these archives do not contradict, but on the contrary, support each other. And the underlying point is that the Ottoman subject Armenians were systematically murdered and left to die.

The claims that the events of 1915 does not constitute genocide cannot be addressed one by one. Here, I will suffice to say that the thesis put forward by some of our writers that a racist ideology is needed to call a mass murder a genocide can not be taken seriously. In reality, the question has several dimentions that go beyond the dilemma whether to call it genocide or not. Here, I would like to underline and bring forth one of these points I see everyone has forgotten about.

The fact that the Armenians were destroyed by the Ittihad was not even a debate topic.

The fact that what occurred in 1915 was a mass murder is accepted by anyone who lived at that time -- even by the leaders of the War of Independence. It may come as a surprise, but this is the truth. Of course the word genocide is quite new. It came into existence after World War II. During the [Turkish] War of Independence words like massacre, mass murder, and deportation were used. There were tens of speeches in which Mustafa Kemal described what was done to the Armenians as "cowardly [act]" and "savagery" and qualified them as massacre. In September of 1919, the American General Harbord upon visiting Mustafa Kemal said "he [Kemal] denounced the massacre of the Armenians." According to Kemal, "the massacre and deportation of the Armenians was the handiwork of a tiny committee that took over the government" (Rauf Orbay'in Hatiralari, Yakin Tarihimiz [Rauf Orbay's Memoirs, Our Recent History], Vol. 3, s. 179). In the same period, in an interview with the US Radio newspaper he says "we have no expansionist plans....We guarantee there will be no new Turkish atrocities against the Armenians" (Bilal Simsir, British Documents on Ataturk, Volume I, page 171, Ankara 1973). In a telegram he sent to Kazim Karabekir in May 1920, he asks Karabekir to avoid any undertaking that may be construed as another Armenian massacre. In a speech he made at the National Assembly on April 24, he called what the Armenians were subjected to in 1915 as "cowardly [act]" (Ataturk'un TBMM Acik ve Kapali Oturumlarindaki Konusmalari [Ataturk's Speeches in the Open and Closed Sessions of the Turkish Grand National Assembly], Volume I, page 59) and so on and so forth.

In those years whether the events of 1915 were a genocide was not even a topic of debate. In fact, it was being openly stated that the guilty would be punished. In September of 1919 there were a series of correspondances between the Ali Riza Pasha cabinet and Mustafa Kemal. Defense Secretary Cemal, representing Istanbul, asked Mustafa Kemal's Congress of Representatives [i.e. the precursor of the Grand National Assembly] to issue a declaration announcing that "those guilty of all sorts of murders during the War will not escape lawful punishment." In his response Mustafa Kemal says "it is our great aspiration to show that the big and small is equal in responsiblity in our country and that the era of perfect rule of law commenced in an entirely impartial and perfectly just fashion by bringing the wartime misrule into the open and meting out punishment". Moreover, he adds that he saw this punishment would be "more appropriate and beneficial to show it to friend and foe alike if it was actually put into practise rather than remaining as publicity on paper, as the latter case would cause many questions to be raised". In other words, what Kemal expected was punishment not for the sake of paper publicity but a real one (Nutuk [Ataturk's Oration], Volume III, Vesikalar, Vesika 141-2, s. 164-6).

The issue of trials for those guilty of massacre were taken up in Amasya negotiations. During the discussions, five protocols, three open and signed, and two secret and unsigned were agreed upon. In the first protocole from October 21, 1919 "the reawakening of the Ittihadism and the Ittihadist spirit in the country and even the display of some of its symbols is politically harmful.....The legal punishment of the guilty in connection with the deportations is necessary [both] judicially and politically". The third protocol is about the upcoming general elections. An agreement was reached on the necessity of barring the Ittihadists wanted for the Armenian massacres. For that purpose, the Anatolian movement [Congress of Representatives] reserved the right to interfere in the elections. "Since it is not acceptable that individuals assembling as representatives be connected to the evils of the Ittihad and tarnished by the [participation in the] acts of deportation and massacre and other evils against the true interests of the nation and the country, all necessary steps can be taken to oppose such a direction (Nutuk, Volume III, Vesika 159-160, s. 193-4).

It is possible to present pages and pages of [similar] examples. Here is what I want to get across: the fact that the events of 1915 were a mass killing was never a matter of dispute. The main issue of the time was the desire [by the Allies] to divvy up Anatolia on the pretext of punishing the Turks and using the events of 1915 as a justification. What Kemal and his friends were proposing was the punishment of the guilty but without the division of Anatolia. Today, instead of the hysterical cries, if we assumed an attitude as Mustafa Kemal did regarding the subject, we would have made great headway.

--

The Original in Turkish:

Ermeni Tabusu ve Mustafa Kemal

Taner Akçam

"Soykirim Tasarisi" üzerine kizilca kiyamet devam ediyor. Oysa sürpriz degil bu gelismeler. "Persembenin gelisi Çarsambadan bellidir", diye güzel bir söz vardir. Türkiye artik Cumhuriyetin son resmi Tabusunu da araliyor. Koparilan tüm gürültüye, yapilan tüm tehditlere ragmen görmek zorundayiz ki, artik, Ittihat ve Terakki'nin Ermenilere yönelik isledigi cinayetler üzerine açik açik konusmaya baslamak zorundayiz. Ne zaman olur, adina "soykirim" demeyi kabul eder mi bilemem, ama Türkiye Hükümeti de bu tarihi olguyu kabul etmek zorunda kalacaktir.

Çünkü Cumhuriyetin son tabu bölgesi aralaniyor. Tarihi bir süreç bu. Ne küfürle, ne tehditle, ne santajla bu isin önüne geçilemez. Nedeni çok basit. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti 5 büyük tabu üzerine kurulmustu: 1. Türkiye'de siniflar yoktur, hepimiz kaynasmis bir kitleyiz; 2. Türkiye'de Kürt Yoktur, hepsi dagda gezen Türklerdir; 3. Batici ve laik bir toplumuz, Islami kültürün varligi söz konusu degildir; 4. Ermeni Soykirimi olmamistir. Silahli Kuvvetler bu 4 tabu üzerine kurulmus devleti korumak ve kollamakla görevli idi. Onun rejim üzerindeki etkisi hakkinda konusmak da yasakti ve bu 5. tabu idi.

Her tabu bölgesi üzerine konusmak suç sayildi. 141-2; 163; 125 vb. gibi Ceza Kanununa ilgili maddeler kondu. Ama her tabu bölgesinin muhatabi "ben varim" dedi, darbeler, iskenceler, ölümler yasandi. Toplum olarak büyük aci çektik ama sonuçta tabular tek tek ortadan kalktilar. Hatta bunlarin Türkiye'nin bir realitesi oldugu ve çözüme baglanmasi gerektigi Helsinki kararlari ile takvime baglandi. Demokratiklesme paketi denen sey, aslinda bu tabu bölgelerinin taninmasi ve buna iliskin düzenlemelerden baska bir anlam tasimiyor. Düsünce özgürlügü, Kürt konusunda atilacak adimlar, Ordunun rejim üzerindeki etkisini azaltacak tebbirler vb... Türkiye tabular ortadan kalktigi oranda demokratik olacak.

Dikkat edilirse, bu tabulardan bir tek Ermeni soykirimi meselesi kalmisti. Bunu içerden gündeme getirecek kimse kalmadigi için bu konuda bir ceza maddesi yoktu. Ama Küresellesme ve Avrupa Birligi süreci ile birlikte bu mesele daha da artan bir tarzda önümüze gelecek ve getirilecek. Avrupa Parlamentosunun 1987 yilinda almis oldugu bir karar var. AB üyeligi için, Türkiye'nin Soykirim gerçegini kabul etmesi sarti kosuluyor ve bu kabulün Türkiye'ye hiç bir baglayici yükümlülük getirmeyeceginin alti çiziliyor. Avrupa bu kararindan geri dönemeyecegine göre karar Türkiye'ye kaliyor.

Mesele aslinda açik. Demokratik olmak isteyen bir toplumda, üstünde konusma yasagi olan konu kalmaz. Açik toplum tabu kaldirmaz. Sonuçta Türkiye de 1915'de büyük bir insanlik drami yasanmis oldugunu kabul edecek. Nasil ki tüm direnmelere, "Kürt yoktur, onlar dagda gezen Türklerdir" gibi bagirmalara ragmen, bugün artik Kürt realitesi kabul ediliyorsa, 1915 gerçekligi de kabul edilecektir. Önemli olan, bunlarin dis dayatmalarla gündeme gelmemesi ve yüksek bedellerin ödenmemesi. Türkiye'de Kürt realitesini kabul etmek için 30.000 kisinin ölmesi gerçekten gerekmiyordu.

1915'de yasananlarin, 1948 Birlesmis Milletlerce kabul edilen tanima göre bir soykirim oldugu ise, malesef tartisilmaz bir gerçeklik. Mesele ile biraz ilgilenmis, Osmanli, Alman, Avusturya, Amerikan, Ingiliz arsivlerindeki belgeler konusunda çok kaba hatlari ile de olsa bilgi sahibi olan her kes bilir ki, bu arsivlerdeki bilgiler birbiri ile çeliskili degildir aksine birbirini desteklerler. Ve söz konusu olan Osmanli Ermeni vatandaslarinin sistemli bir biçimde öldürülmeleri, ölüme terkedilmeleridir.

"1915 soykirim degildir", konusunda ileri sürülen iddialari tek tek ele almak imkansiz. Burada, bir toplu öldürmenin Soykirim sayilabilmesi için "irkçi bir ideolojinin gerekli oldugu" yolunda bazi yazarlarimizca ileri sürülen tezin fazla ciddiye alinacak tarafi olmadigini söylemekle yetinmek istiyorum. Aslinda sorunun, "Soykirim mi degil mi" ikileminden çok daha önemli olan boyutlari var. Burada bunlardan bir tanesinin altini çizmek ve herkesin unuttugunu gördügüm bir noktayi gündeme getirmek istiyorum.

Ermenilerin Ittihat ve Terakki tarafindan imha edildigi tartisma konusu bile degildi

1915 te yasananin bir toplu kiyim oldugu gerçegi, o dönem yasayan herkes tarafindan, hatta Kurtulus savasi önderleri tarafindan da aynen kabul ediliyordu. Sasirtici gelebilir ama bu bir gerçek. Elbette Jenosit (Soykirim) kelimesi çok yeni. 2. Dünya Harbi sonrasi çikti. Kurtulus Savasi yillarinda 1915 yilinda yasananlari anlatmak için kullanilan ise, "katliam, taktil, tebid" gibi kelimelerdi. M. Kemal'in Ermenilere yapilanlari "alçaklik", "vahset" olarak tanimladigi, katliam olarak adlandirdigi onlarca konusmasi vardir. Eylül 1919'da Sivas'ta M.Kemal'i ziyaret eden Amerikan Generali Harbord, Mustafa Kemal için, "Ermeni kitâlini o da takbih ediyordu", der. M. Kemal'e göre, "Ermenilerin katledilip sürülme-le-ri hükümeti ele geçiren küçük bir komitenin ese-ri"ydi. (Rauf Orbay'in Hatiralari, Yakin Tarihimiz, Cilt 3, s.179) Yine ayni tarihlerde, ABD Radyo Gazetesi'ne verdigi mülakatta "Hiçbir yayilma planimiz yoktur... Ermenilere karsi yeni bir Türk vahsetinin olmayacaginin garantisini veririz", der.- (Bilal Simsir, British Documents on Atatürk, Volume I, s.171, Ankara 1973) Kazim Karabekir'e 6 Mayis 1920'de çektigi telde, yeniden bir Ermeni kitali anlamina gelecek her türlü girisimden uzak durmasini ister. (K. Karabekir, Istiklal Harbimiz, s. 707) 24 Nisan'da Meclis'te yaptigi konusmada, 1915'te Ermenilere yapilanlari, "fazahat" (alçaklik) olarak tanimlar. vb. vb. (Atatürk'ün TBMM Açik ve Gizli Oturumlarindaki Konusmala-ri, Cilt I, s.59)

O yillarda, 1915'in bir katilam oldugu tartisma konusu bile degildir, hatta suçlularin cezalandirilmasi gerektigi açik olarak savunulur. 1919 Eylül'ünde, Ali Riza Pasa Kabinesi ile M. Kemal arasinda bir dizi yazisma yapilir. Istanbul adina yazismayi yürüten Harbiye Naziri Cemal, M. Kemal'in (Heyet-i Temsiliyenin) "Harp esnasinda yapilan her nevi cinayet faillerinin cezayi kanuniyeden kurtulamayacaklari", yolunda bir açiklama yapmalarini ister. Cevabi yazida M. Kemal, "harp esnasindaki suiidarelerin meydana çikarilip tecziyesi, vatanimizda mes'uliyetin büyük ve küçüklere seyyan oldugunu, kanun devrinin tamamen bitarafane ve kemali adlü hakkaniyetle basladigini idrak etmek ehassi amalimizdir", der. Üstelik bu cezalandirmanin, "birçok münakasalara sebep olacak olan kagit üzerinde reklam tarzinda nesriyattan ziyade bilfiil tatbikatile yârü agyare izharini daha muvafik ve faideli" gördügünü ekler. Yani M. Kemal'in bekledigi cezalandirmalarin kagit üzerinde reklam amaçli degil, somut uygulama biçiminde olmasidir. (Nutuk, Cilt III, Vesikalar, Vesika 141-2, s. 164-6)

Kirim suçlularinin yargilanmasi Amasya görüsmelerinde ele alinir. Görüsmelerde üçü açik ve imzali, ikisi gizli ve imza-siz bes protokol karara baglanir. 21 Ekim 1919 tarihli birinci protokolde, "1 Ittihatçiligin, Ittihat ve Terakki fikrinin memlekette tekrar uyanmasi, hatta bazi alâiminin meshut olmasi siyaseten muzirdir... 4 Tehcir dolayisiyla irtikabi cürmedenlerin kanunen mücaza-ti adlen ve siyaseten elzemdir" denir. Üçüncü protokol yapilacak seçimlere iliskindir ve Ermeni Kirimi nedeniyle aranan Ittihatçilarin seçimlere katilmasinin engellenmesi gerektigi konusunda anlasma saglanir. Bunu için Anadolu hareketi seçimlere müdahele hak-kini kendisinde sakli tutar. "Içtima edecek heyeti meb'usan meyaninda sahsiyetleri ittihatçiligi mesavisile alâkadar ve tehcir ve taktil mesailile ve menafii hakikiyei millet ve memlekete münafi sair mesavi ile lekedar olan kimselerin bulunmasi caiz olmadigindan bu cihete mâni olmak için mümkün olan esbaba tevessül edilebilir." (Nutuk, Cilt III, Vesika 159-160, s. 193-4)

Örnekleri sayfalarca aktarmak mümkündür. Anlatmak istedigim sudur: 1915'te yasananlarin bir toplu öldürme olayi oldugu hiçbir biçimde tartisilan bir konu bile degildi. O dönemin ana tartismasi, 1915'te yasananlari gerekçe göstererek, "Türkleri cezalandiriyoruz", denerek Anadolu'nun taksim edilmek istenmesiydi. M. Kemal ve arkadaslari ise suçlular cezalandirilsin ama bu cezalandirma Anadolu'nun paylasilmasi biçiminde olmasin, diyorlardi. Bugün, histerik çigliklar atilacagina, Mustafa Kemal'in konuya iliskin takindigi tutumu bile takinsak epey mesafe katetmis oluruz.

This article contains text from a source with a copyright. Please help us by extracting the factual information and eliminating the rest in order to keep the site in accordance to fair use standards, or by obtaining permission for reuse on this site..

---

The Chronicle of Higher Education August 10, 2007 Friday INTERNATIONAL; Pg. 26 Vol. 53 No. 49

Turkish Scholar Challenges Penal Code

AISHA LABI

A scholar at the University of Minnesota's Center for Holocaust & Genocide Studies has filed a case with the European Court of Human Rights that he says is the first attempt to overturn through that legal channel a controversial provision of Turkey's penal code that criminalizes "denigrating Turkishness."

Taner Akçam, a Turkish sociologist and historian, has faced retribution in his home country for his academic work about the killing of as many as 1.5 million Armenians during the waning days of the Ottoman Empire, which modern Turkish governments have refused to characterize as genocide.

Mr. Akçam has been outspoken in his willingness to do so, in, for example, his most recent book, A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility, which was published last year. He has come under attack as a result.

He was charged under Article 301 of Turkey's penal code, which has been used frequently against journalists, academics, and writers, and which Amnesty International says "poses a direct threat to the fundamental right to freedom of expression."

This article contains text from a source with a copyright. Please help us by extracting the factual information and eliminating the rest in order to keep the site in accordance to fair use standards, or by obtaining permission for reuse on this site..

Open Letter to the Prime Minister and Bülent Arınç

Published in Taraf, Saturday, March 13, 2010

There is something I have difficulty understanding. You, who have put an end to 95 years of “there are no Kurds, they’re just Turks who wander around the mountains” lying policies by the state on the Kurds; who have removed the military’s guardianship over politics, the same military that since the beginning of this Republic has decided who lived and who died and that initiated coups at the drop of a hat. How is it that you who have made such important inroads into this democracy can insist on continuing the 95 years of denialist policies when it comes to the subject of 1915?

All of us believed that when you signed those protocols with Armenia in October 2009, the 95 years of lies surrounding 1915 were coming to an end just as they had on the Kurdish issue. Could it be that when you signed those Protocols you believed that you were going to come to a resolution continuing the 95 year old policies of denial? Doesn’t seem possible….Could you have found a way out of the Kurdish problem by continuing to insist that “There are no Kurds, they’re just Turks who wander around mountains”? If you had stayed loyal to the logic of the problem solving methods of the Military when it comes to the Kurds, whereby they were equated with terrorist organizations, treating the Kurds as “nails” and themselves as the “hammer”, would you have found a way out of the impasse?

Well, it seems to appear that you seriously think you are going to find a resolution to the Armenian problem by continuing the 95 year old lie. Anyone opposing this view on the Armenian issue is the “nail” and you are the “hammer”….trying to intimidate the US, posturing like a bully…is this how you’re going to remove a 95 year old gangrene? Mr. Prime Minister and Mr. Arınç, if it could have been fixed this way, don’t you think it would have been, long ago? Heck, who even needs you then…Şükrü Elekdağ would have fixed it; Veli Küçük would have found a neat solution…right?

So, what happens if tomorrow Obama decides it’s time to call your bluff and gives you a taste of your own medicine. What if he comes out with a statement saying “You want to shut me up or get me to tell a lie by threatening me! You’re trying to force me to deny what I believe to be true with threats! Shame on you! Aren’t you the slightest bit embarrassed to be threatening me like that? I’m not lying any more….I am going to state what I believe about 1915. It was genocide”. What are you going to do then?

When the protocols were signed in Switzerland, we believed that it marked the end of 95 years of the policies of lies and that it was the death knell for the Gündüz Aktan, Şükrü Elekdağ and Yusuf Halaçoğlu era. Not only was the border going to be opened, but commissions devoted to making recommendations on how to resolve the issues stemming from history were going to be established. It seems likely that while Switzerland was mediating the agreement, it tried to convince both you and Armenia by pointing to the “Bergier Commission” which it had established in 1996, as an example of a “Commission of Independent Experts”. This commission had been formed to research the role that Switzerland had played in the Jewish Holocaust. After five years of work, it presented a final report in 2001 but during those five years, 25 research papers were published covering almost 11,000 pages of information.

There is a fact that is even more important than this however. One year before the commission was formed, in 1995, the Swiss government apologized to all Jews in the world for its policies during the Second World War. In actuality the commission was formed as a result of that apology. There is no possible way that you could not have known that one of the conditions for the establishment of the commission was an apology to the Jews. Even if the Swiss hadn’t mentioned it to you, it was a well known fact and we believed that you signed the protocols with full knowledge of this, and heralded the beginning of change in 95 years of the policy of denial…. “an apology to the Armenians is on its way” so we thought. Apparently that wasn’t the case; instead you had some “oriental inscrutability” in the works. You were going to continue the 95 year old policy of denial while fabricating a resolution to the problems that have plagued our relationship with Armenia. This is hard to believe but it is apparent from everything that you have done thus far.

Mr. Prime Minister and Mr. Arınç, I ask that you put this bit of information somewhere in the corner of your minds: you will never resolve the problem of 1915 by repeating a lie that’s been memorized over 95 years. If it could have been resolved by rote repetition, there were those before you, who were much louder, who would have achieved it. A black stain was smeared on the brow of the Turkish nation in 1915. The ones who did this were the Unionist murderers. If you don’t identify that stain and if you don’t put some distance between yourselves and those who placed that stain upon the brow of the Turkish nation, you won’t be able to take a single step forward on this issue. Don’t even bother trying.

Mr. Prime Minister, you’ve called what happened in 1938 in Dersim, a massacre. It’s true we don’t know exactly how many were killed, but you are acting like a bully towards those who condemn what happened in 1915, an event that involved at least 10-15 times more human beings than those who perished in Dersim. On the subject of war crimes committed by Israel against the residents of Gaza, you have shown your displeasure and lifted your voice in opposition, with justification. But when the subject of 1915 comes up, an event that involved killings of a level that can’t even begin to be compared with the violations of human rights in Gaza, you made absurd remarks like “No one can force me to admit that Moslems commit murders. My forebears were not murderers”. Don’t you think others are going to look at that and say “who is he kidding?”

You are the ones who have changed the traditional line that’s been followed on the Kurdish question, who have fought to push the military out of political life. Why are you parroting the same 95 year old lies that have been told by this military and this bureaucracy? Let me give you an example. You weren’t able to make any progress on the Kurdish and military matter by siding with the ones who called those involved in the Şemdinli event “one of our boys”.[1] You were only able to make progress after so many painful experiences, once you put distance between those “good boys” and yourselves. The subject of 1915 is no different.

“Our boys” are the ones who continue to deny that Armenians were annihilated in 1915! They’re the ones forming the Talat Pasha Committees and organizing the memorial meetings for Kemal, the murderous Mayor of Boğazlayan. And let’s not forget, they are the same ones who have planned assassinations against you and have tried to overthrow your administration…Don’t you realize that you will never be able to solve anything regarding 1915 by holding onto the same position of those who want to dig your graves?

Mr. Prime Minister and Mr. Arınç, the answers to the problems that are the legacy of 1915 can’t be found in the denialist policies of Veli Küçük, Doğu Perinçek, Şükrü Elekdağ and Yusuf Halaçoğlu. Don’t search for the answers there. You won’t get anywhere repeating the chorus they’ve been singing for 95 years. They are your adversaries on the issue of 1915, just as they are when it comes to the Kurdish issue and the issue of the military’s place in politics. You cannot construct your response to 1915 by holding rank with those who want to drag the country into chaos; who murdered Hrant Dink, who have planned massacres against Christians and who have been plotting coups against you.

If you are going to respond to 1915, you need to search for that answer in a place that is different than the answers given by Ergenekon or by the ones who plotted the coups. For this you should follow your Moslem roots in Anatolia that have risen alongside your party and take a closer look at what these roots did during 1915.

Mr. Arınç, these words are for you. With reason, you were angered by the way the women of CHP in Mersin tore up the Muslim veil [2] Do you realize, however, that with the position that you have taken you have torn the deep fabric of Anatolian Islam, have ripped apart the cultural legacy of Anatolian Moslems who can walk head held high for bravely challenging the murders of 1915? Do you know that when the Unionist gangs were murdering Armenians in 1915, the ones who put up the biggest fight, who challenged them the most were the Moslems of Anatolia? Did you have any idea that it was the Moslem community of Kastamonu that marched upon the Governor’s office demanding “we won’t stand for our neighbors being murdered”? Or that it was the Moslems of Yozgat who opposed Killer Kemal of Boğazlayan yelling “there’s no place in the Koran for the murder of innocents!”? Have you never heard of the important role played in the hanging of Killer Kemal by the written testimony of the Grand Mufti of Boğazlayan, Abdullahzade Mehmed? Did you know that in opposing the murders being committed by Killer Kemal, this Moslem Mufti said “Allah stands above us all. I fear his wrath”?

Mr. Arınç, are you aware of the order given by Commander Kamil Pasha of the Third Army in 1915? He stated “Who ever tries to hide Armenians in their homes will be executed before his front door and his home will be burned to the ground.” Despite this order, do you know that Haji Halil, a Moslem from Urfa, hid an Armenian family of eight in the attic of his home, in the market of Urfa for one full year despite the threats of death and burning? Go to Eastern Anatolia and ask the members of parliament from your own party. They’ll tell you dozens, hundreds of stories like this.

I don’t need to make a point that when the Unionists were massacring Armenians in Anatolia, pious Moslems were opposing what was happening and saying that the murder of innocents has no place in the Koran. Whichever conference I attend and whenever I’m talking with Armenians they tell me “if we are alive today, it is without a doubt because of the aid of some Moslems”. But they’ll also add “because of your government’s policy of denial, we can’t talk about it openly.”

Mr. Arınç, you can’t build a future on the backs of murderers. You can build a future on the backs of those righteous Moslems in Anatolia who challenged the murderers. In the same way that you can’t resolve today’s problems by supporting Hrant’s murderers, the “Samats” and the “Veli Küçüks”, you won’t get anywhere supporting the murderers of the Hrants of the past. The answers to 1915 can’t be found in the answers of Doğu Perinçek or Veli Küçük. They are members of the Ergenekon gang that killed Hrant Dink; it’s natural that they defend the murderers of the Hrants of the past. Let the “Veli Küçüks” defend the murderer Samat of today and the murderers Talat, Enver and Kemal of yesterday. Your place is not at the side of Veli Küçük. Your duty is to stand by the side of the “Haji Halils”, to stand up for those Moslems who put themselves and their families at risk opposing the massacres.

I would like you to recognize one more thing. Because of the 95 years of denialist policies and defense of murderers, from an international perspective there’s a second stain on the brow of Turkishness and Islam, next to the one created by 1915. Because of the policies followed by the Şükrü Elekdağ’s and the Veli Küçük’s, Turks are perceived as a people who enjoy murdering, who defend murders. We need to rescue Turkishness and Islam from the Talats and the Envers of yesterday and the Samats of today and to not allow the Elekdağ’s and the Küçük’s to define it. Turkishness and Islam are identities that are too honorable to be left at the hands of murderers and their defenders. I have an Armenian friend and he has said to me “Until yesterday, when I heard Turkish, I felt an hatred for it. I called it the language of my enemy. But since getting to know you, I’ve begun to say it’s the sound of my friend, a Turk”.

We need the honest and honorable cry of Turkishness and Islam. Let Doğu Perinçek, Veli Küçük and the ones who planned your assassination defend the murderers of yesterday and today. You need to see by now that the ones who defended Talat, Enver and Dr. Nazım in the past are the same people who defend Oğün Samat today.

If we can walk with a shred of self-respect today, head held high, it’s because we can point to Hrant’s killer and call him what he is. You need to see that once we acknowledge the murderers of the Hrants of 1915, we will walk with our heads held high, self-respect intact. Nazim Hikmet has the best words for describing what needs to be done in connection with 1915. I’d like to conclude this letter with him.

Grocer Garabed’s lights are on

He hasn’t forgiven, this Armenian citizen,

The way his father was slaughtered in the Kurdish mountains

But he loves you because you haven’t forgiven either

The stain that’s been drawn on the brows of the Turkish people

Mr. Prime Minister, I know that you like to read poetry. The Turkish person and the Moslems of the Middle East want to hear these verses from you!

[1] This references an incident where a book store in a Kurdish city was bombed. Officers in the Turkish military were suspected of having planned and/or executed the deed. The Chief of the General Staff was quoted as saying the officers were “our good boys”. [2] This is in reference to an incident during “International Women’s Day” where women members of the CHP (Republican People’s Party) tore up the headscarf of a Moslem woman.

See also

• The Akcam Case - Turkish government case against him for using the term Armenian Genocide
• When Was the Decision to Annihilate the Armenians Taken? - research showing where and when the decision for genocide was started (earlier than previously thought, and on a more regional level)