In the hundred years that Armenians have mourned the
Genocide’s martyrs and marched for justice, Turkey has exerted extraordinary
effort to fabricate an alternate reality.
In the hallucinatory history taught in Turkish schools and
peddled to the world by Turkey’s academic toadies, the Ottoman government
evacuated Armenians from the path of war in 1915 for their own safety.
The resulting deaths are described as unfortunate—tragic,
even—but unintended.
"As President, I will recognize the Armenian Genocide" -- Obama 2008 |
There are two problems with this denialist fantasy. That it
isn’t true is actually the lesser problem. The greater problem for Turkey is
that even if it were true, it wouldn’t matter.
As Geoffrey Robertson points out in An Inconvenient Genocide, the very facts admitted by denialist
scholars and Turkish officials would provide sufficient basis for prosecution of
genocide under international law.
I cite Robertson’s book because he makes the case
exceptionally well, focusing on facts rather than on the outcome. He avoids
sensational but questionable assertions and sticks to clearly admissible
evidence, which is fitting for one of the world’s most prominent and vocal
human rights attorneys.
The evidence he presents makes clear that the word “relocation”
used in Ottoman directives was a euphemism for extermination. The brutal
circumstances of the relocation of Armenians from their homes in Eastern Turkey
is well documented in accounts by non-Armenian sources, including Germans
working with the Turks.
Hundreds of thousands of people were marched without
sufficient food, water or shelter into the uninhabitable Syrian desert. These haggard
marchers were repeatedly attacked by thieves, rapists and murderers. Those who
survived the journey were left to die in the sun, or burned alive in caves.
None of this is compatible with the fable that the
evacuations were temporary. Even before these poor people were reduced to
bones, their homes were seized and turned over to Turks or Kurds.
One of the most egregious fallacies repeated by denialists
is that genocide cannot be proven without evidence that the government ordered
the extermination of all Armenians. But as Robertson explains, forcing even
part of a population into circumstances where most could be expected to die is
genocide, and it cannot be legally (or morally) excused by the exigencies of
war.
With that alone, the prosecution could rest its case except
that there is no prosecution and there won’t be.
Armenia’s suffering gave birth to the very
term genocide as well as to the international convention aimed at eradicating
this most inhuman of human crimes, but it all happened too late to bring
justice to Armenians.
Why is that?
In the wake of the First World War, Britain took the lead
among the victorious powers in urging prosecution of war criminals. The worst
offenders took off running. Turkish thugs sought refuge in Germany, while
Germany’s Kaiser fled to the Netherlands.
As disappearing acts go, this hardly rivaled Houdini but it
didn’t have to. Post-war politics and the nascent state of international law
made extradition difficult even in the case of Turks who were convicted in
absentia of involvement in the Genocide. Delay after delay ensured that all such
efforts petered out within a few years of the armistice.
What makes this not only relevant but important so many
years later is that America helped the bad guys get away with murder.
President Woodrow Wilson opposed creation of an
international justice tribunal because it would violate the “sovereignty
principle” that governments were responsible for punishing crimes against the
people they ruled.
As related by Robertson, Wilson reasoned that Armenians
“were Ottoman subjects, and their suffering at the hands of their own
government would have to be punished by their own government – present or
future – if they were to be punished at all.”
We know how that’s worked out—at least, so far.
Despite a century of disappointment and insults, Armenians are
making real gains in achieving international recognition of the Genocide. Response
to this year’s centennial commemoration has been overwhelming.
Turkey’s churlish attempts to draw attention away from the
Genocide memorial in April fell flat while Armenia’s pleas for recognition
generated a wave of support from around the world.
The European Union adopted a resolution recognizing the
Genocide while urging Turkey to do the same. Pope Francis also called on Turkey
to tell the truth, and he celebrated a mass in memory of the Genocide’s
victims. The president of Germany, Turkey’s war-time ally, called the Genocide
by its rightful name and admitted German complicity.
It is very nearly possible now to declare that no civilized
nation tolerates Turkey’s lies and evasions. Unfortunately, there are two
notable exceptions: The United Kingdom and the United States.
Both continue to avoid using the words genocide and Armenian
in the same sentence. Contrast the courage of Germany’s president with our own
President Obama, who broke his pledge to recognize the Genocide and turned down
an invitation to attend this year’s Genocide commemoration at the National
Cathedral in Washington, D.C.
Vice President Biden did attend. Like Obama, he was once a
vigorous advocate for Armenians and for truth about the Genocide. But he sat in
silence throughout the memorial ceremony and left immediately after. He
declined to speak to the gathering or to exchange more than polite greetings
with the president of Armenia.
This is very much in line with the Administration’s
insistence on not offending a vital ally. American presidents have followed
this crooked path to disappointment for decades. Not long ago, for example, Obama
thought he’d persuaded Turkey to join the fight against ISIS. Instead, it
attacked the Kurds who were fighting ISIS.
Obama’s abandonment has been so disappointing that some
Armenians have suggested there’s little point pressing this year’s presidential
candidates for their position on the Genocide. I think it’s more important than ever given the
momentum at work.
As an American, I certainly don’t want my country to become an outlier
as the world evolves toward zero-tolerance for genocide. What’s at stake is
much more than embarrassment.
If President Wilson had shown more gumption, the Armenian
Genocide could have been a powerful and far-reaching force for international
justice and human rights in the wake of World War One. Instead, Hitler was
encouraged by the world’s passivity. Robertson reminds us of this with the cover quote:
“Who now remembers the Armenians?”
He also reminds us that the truth of this quote is so
powerful that Turkey and its denialist clients insist Hitler never said it. He did. You could look it up.
Unless, of course, you’re in Turkey.
u know it is really great to know more about the history not only our culture but some others as well .this blog is very informative as i got to know about something new today.
ReplyDelete