Erdogan And The Armenian Genocide: The Dangers Of Distorting History

In late April, the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, offered his condolences to Armenian families over an event that occurred nearly a century ago. Erdogan’s statements held particular significance given they occurred on the eve of the 99th anniversary of the onset of the Armenian Genocide – which began on April 24th, 1915 and continued throughout World War I. In his statement, Erdogan characterized the mass killings committed by the Ottomans as inhumane, but stopped short of formally recognizing the genocide.

Prior to WWI, there were 2 million Armenians living in the collapsing Ottoman Empire, but by 1922 there were fewer than 400,000.  The 1.5 million that perished were killed in what most historians, but not Turkey, consider to be a genocide – also considered by many to be the first genocide of the 20th century.

As Constanze Letsch notes for the Guardian:

The interpretation of the mass killings in 1915 remains a highly contentious issue in the country and abroad, and has fueled bitter controversy between Armenia and Turkey. Armenia has urged Turkey to recognize the killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians as genocide. Turkey, which puts the death toll at 500,000, says they died of fighting and [of] starvation, and categorically rejects the term.

Hence, Erdogan’s statements were one of the first instances of a Turkish government official publicly acknowledging these events. As noted by the Washington Post, “The Associated Press called the comments an ‘unprecedented, conciliatory message to Armenians,’ while a Turkish official told Reuters that it was the first time a Turkish leader had offered condolences so directly to Armenians.”

Yet, many were left unsatisfied by his remarks, as they were in many ways in line with the Turkish government’s tradition of rejecting the inherently genocidal nature of the events. In fact, in early April, the Turkish foreign ministry condemned a U.S. Senate committee resolution that called the killings a genocide, stating that “We reject this attempt at political exploitation that distorts history and law and we condemn those who led this prejudiced initiative.”  

The history behind the Armenian Genocide is complex, but like Jews during the Holocaust, Armenians were essentially made a scapegoat, and viciously targeted as a consequence. The genocide was directly tied to the demise of the Ottoman Empire. As the Ottoman Empire declined, a group of ambitious young officers, known as the Young Turks, seized power.  They sought to modernize, strengthen, and in many ways homogenize, or “Turkify,” the empire.

Picture showing Armenians killed during the Armenian Genocide. Image taken from Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, written by Henry Morgenthau, Sr. and published in 1918.

Armenians were historically a class of merchants and shrewd businesspeople located throughout the Caucasus region, and were often better off than many Turks. They also had ties with many different peoples. This is precisely why the Young Turks accused Armenians of siding with the Russians during the war. While it is true that a small group of Armenians did cooperate with Russia, the Young Turks made sweeping generalizations about Armenians in order to demonize them.  In Turkish propaganda, Armenians were labeled as overwhelmingly pro-Russian and saboteurs. Beginning on April 24th, 1915, the Ottoman government arrested hundreds of Armenian intellectuals and community leaders, who were later executed.

The Young Turks, calling themselves the Committee of Unity and Progress, took it upon themselves to deport anyone they felt was a “security threat.” At that time, this meant Armenians. Hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children were marched across the desert to Syria; many were killed or died of disease or starvation along the way. Armenians in the army also had their weapons confiscated, and many were transferred into labor battalions where they were essentially worked to death or killed. A law was also passed making it legal to confiscate “abandoned” Armenian property.

According to the New York Times,

Thus, the nature of language continues to be vitally important in terms of the interpretation of history in the political arena.  Moreover, others are skeptical about the timing of Erdogan’s remarks, as Turkey’s government has come under increasing international pressure in the midst of government crackdowns on opposition – including widely publicized bans on Twitter and YouTube. Perhaps Erdogan wanted to exhibit that he can be progressive, but in many ways his remarks were nothing new in terms of Turkey’s official interpretation of the events of WWI.

It is extremely important that this event is recognized as a genocide, in order to prevent such heinous acts from occurring in the future. This is precisely why genocide education is so vital.  As the Jerusalem Post argues, there is a moral imperative to recognize the Armenian Genocide, in the same way that the world must avoid silence surrounding the Holocaust.

The origin of the term “genocide” is intimately connected with the histories of both the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust. Raphael Lemkin, a lawyer of Polish-Jewish origin, invented the word. He combined the Greek word “genos” (race or tribe) with the Latin word “cide” (to kill). Lemkin‘s work was originally inspired by accounts of the mass killings of Armenians. Tragically, Lemkin’s entire family was killed during the Holocaust, only he and his brother survived.

Lemkin’s work led directly to the adoption of the UN Convention on Genocide in December 1948, which entered into force in January 1951.

Article Two of the convention defines genocide “as any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and]forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

If one studies the history of the Armenian Genocide, it is readily apparent that it fits the UN definition. As the BBC notes, “Argentina, Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, Russia and Uruguay are among more than 20 countries which have formally recognized genocide against the Armenians.  The European Parliament and the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities have also done so.”

Some historians have argued that what occurred does not qualify as a genocide because there is not enough evidence to prove that the extermination of Armenians was systematically planned. Yet, a majority of historians do not concur. Moreover, Henry Morgenthau, Sr., the former American Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (1913-16), once wrote in his memoirs, “When the Turkish authorities gave the orders for these deportations, they were merely giving the death warrant to a whole race; they understood this well, and in their conversations with me, they made no particular attempt to conceal the fact.”

Thus, one might argue that Erdogan’s remarks were a step in the right direction in terms of Turkish-Armenian relations and the recognition of the genocide. Yet, it has been nearly a century, and still the Turkish government refuses to fully acknowledge what much of the international community and historical experts have clearly recognized as a deliberate attempt to eradicate an entire people. Genocide is the most heinous crime a people can commit, and until it is fully recognized the wounds it creates can never begin to heal. Moreover, it is imperative that future generations understand the meaning and history of genocide in order to ensure that the world never witnesses these types of horrible crimes ever again. Stopping short of a full recognition distorts that history, which is both unacceptable and dangerous.