Genocide plays tricks on Turkey
By Chaja Zeegers
Trouw (Dutch newspaper)
November 24, 2004
Turkey never recognized the genocide on the Armenians of 1915. This
sensitive issue matters in the consideration for the accession of
Turkey to the EU. This month, for the first time, Turks and Armenians
in the Netherlands openly discussed the genocide in a debate.
The majority of the Christian Armenian minority in the Ottoman Empire
was brutally exterminated during World War I. The rest formed a
Diaspora. Armenians in Europe want Turkey to recognize the Armenian
genocide before she can become a member of the European Union. Today,
in Parliament, Minister Bot and State Secretary Nicolaï of Foreign
Affairs will discuss the political requirements for the accession
of Turkey. On December 16, the EU-Summit in Portugal under Dutch
presidency will decide whether Turkey can become a fully fledged
member of the European Union. Recognition of the genocide is not a
precondition, but it can be taken into consideration.
For the first time, Turks and Armenians in the Netherlands held
an open debate on this issue, which has stirred emotions for
almost ninety years. The Armenian genocide is a notion among
Armenians and the international community. But Turks are unwilling
to accept this. Speaking openly of this subject in Turkey is
still a taboo. Calling what happened a genocide is even liable to
punishment. With the discussion concerning Turkey¹s accession to the
European Union, Armenians in Europe see their chance for bringing this
issue under international attention again. “Turkey in the EU, recognize
the Armenian genocide now!”, is the slogan of the Armenians. They
want recognition by the candidate member before promises are made by
the European Union for accession.
The conflict goes back to the year 1915, when within just months
between 800,000 and one million Armenians were massacred in the east
of modern Turkey. If they were not killed directly then they died of
disease, thirst and exhaustion on the forced, excrutiating marches to
the desert in the south. Armenian women and girls were kidnapped and
raped. Moreover, children were taken to be turned into Turks. Churches
of the Christian Armenians were destroyed and Armenian possessions
disappeared into Turkish hands.
What remained of the Armenian society was disrupted. By now historians
have provided proof that it concerned a systematic approach, conducted
from above. Three ministers of the governing committee for Unity and
Progress in the Ottoman Empire, predecessor of the modern Turkish
state, took the initiative to eradicate the Armenians and had control
over its implementation.
Other minorities also fell victim to this policy, even if not always
on the same large scale as the Armenians.
Initially nobody in Turkey made secret of what had happened in 1915
and even a trial took place. That attitude changed in 1923 when,
under the leadership of Kemal Atatürk, the Republic of Turkey
was established. The state philosophy of this new Turkey was
based on a strong nationalism that offered no space for a less
heroic past. Successive Turkish governments continued to deny the
genocide. The Turkish population was raised with this incorrect version
of history. As such, historical facts were minimized and the genocide
was presented as a civil war with victims and perpetrators on both
sides. In the worst case the Armenians were not considered victims,
but were presented as perpetrators. By now, more than one generation
of Turks have been raised with this distorted image of history.
In recent years, however, some changes have taken place in this
attitude. Since the 1980s much more historical research has been
carried out on the factual events of that period.
The debate was opened since a number of Turkish scientists recognized
the Armenian genocide. According to Ton Zwaan of the Center for
Genocide and Holocaust Studies even in Turkey the phase of complete
denial is over, even as the denial and the distortion of reality
continue to echo.
This month, Turkish journalist Ragip Duran was in the Netherlands
for a debate on the accession of Turkey to the European Union. He
was once in prison in his own country for what he had written. His
experience is that journalists have a little more freedom in their
work nowadays. However, in practice there are still restrictions, for
example on articles on the Kurdish minority and on the Armenian issue.
Internationally there is political support for the Armenians. A number
of countries have already officially recognized the Armenian genocide.
Furthermore, the European Parliament already stated in 1987 that what
happened to the Armenians on Ottoman territory during the first world
war according to the definition of the United Nations of 1948 was
indeed a genocide. This is not unimportant, as Turkey wants become
a fully fledged member of the European Union. The agreement is that
Turkey can only join the European Union if it fulfills the Copenhagen
political criteria. That means that stable institutions must guarantee
democracy, legal order, human rights and respect for the protection
of minorities. Although much has changed for the better already, on
these points the end stop has not yet been reached. The question is
just how heavily these political criteria will weigh when the European
Union evaluates the accession of Turkey next month in Portugal.
That the Armenian issue is also alive in the Netherlands was obvious
in 2000, in Assen. A local Armenian asked for authorization to erect a
memorial at the local cemetery for his ancestors and his compatriots
who died during the genocide. A major demonstration by the Turkish
community broke out when they learned of this project. Especially
the word genocide did not go down very well with the Turks.
Certainly in view of the above, it is positive that a number of
progressive Dutch Turks had the courage to come to De Balie in
Amsterdam this month to speak with Dutch Armenians. These Turkish
participants are actually convinced that Turkey should recognize
the genocide in the long run. They feel the discomfort that is
prevalent among Turks over this issue. Privately it is discussed,
but not publicly. According to Hatice Can-Engin changes in this
area will happen slowly. ³Look at the discussion on honor killings;
it has only been going on for three years.²
Zeki Arslan of the multicultural Institute Forum calls on Turkish
organizations in the Netherlands to be outspoken on the Armenian
genocide and not hide behind fear. ³We must show compassion with
the Armenian community². But contrary to Armenians, the Turkish
participants do not want a knife to be put on the throat of the
candidate member. ³Then the nationalist tendencies will only try to
keep Turkey outside of the European Union and we will be even worse
off”, according to Arslan.
The Dutch Turks have good hope that Turkey will be positively
influenced by herself through contact with Europe and that eventually
recognition will come. Although the discussion ran quite smoothly,
protest from the overwhelming Armenian audience was to be heard. The
Armenians absolutely do not dare trust that everything will be well and
want tough requirements. According to them, first recognition should
come and only then accession, and not the other way around. You can
set requirements now, but not after accession.
Arie Oostlander, former Euro parliamentarian for the CDA (Christian
Democrats) and monitor for the candidate member, also believes
that recognition must come before Turkey joins the European Union
definitely, but he knows how sensitive this subject is. A direct
approach does not work, he says. At the same time this recognition
must be the final chapter of the Europeanization process. According to
him, there is a tremendous amount of guilt-feeling around the whole
taboo atmosphere of the issue. It is a great disadvantage that the
Turkish state is a product of ethnic cleansing. A few years ago, he
once openly asked the Turks whether they see themselves as less than
the Germans. After all, they have amply expressed their regret for
the holocaust during the World War II. No direct answer was given.
Oostlander’s statement has also been incorporated in a resolution
which has been adopted by the European Parliament. ³We must work
towards a point where Turks can be proud of having come to terms with
their past², Oostlander points out.
³With that, however, it is of utmost importance for the Turks not to
suffer from losing face. It is all a question of honor.² The former
Euro parliamentarian assumes a positive but strict approach. He
believes that the European and Dutch governments should not be too
gentle in persevering their requirements. Otherwise one will be faced
with the consequences later. But many European politicians and parties
want to approach Turkey enthusiastically because she tries so hard to
do her best. Oostlander does not think this is a right approach. As
monitor he has seen that Turks take him very seriously, because he
stands by his job. Soft behaviour does not earn respect.
Ton Zwaan of the Center for Genocide also believes that it is
important for Turkey to account for the negative sides of its
history. Recognition of the Armenian genocide can improve the relations
with neighboring country Armenia. Just like for the Jews after the
World War II, it is important for the millions of Armenian descendants
throughout the world to be able to heal from their past. But it is
also important for the Turkish democracy and for the lessening of the
pain under groups of Turks. They have also suffered from a distorted
democratization which involved much force and violence in which many
peoples got trapped.
It is crucial for the Turkish population to have the ability to
speak openly about the violent treatment that ethnic minorities have
suffered in the past. This freedom to speak about the past fits within
the Western democratic model.
According to Oostlander Europe should therefore tell Turkey now what it
comes down to, instead of expecting that this country will understand
it after seven or eight years. In the approachment between Turkey and
Europe, there is a chance for the entire Turkish society to organize
democracy in a different way.
³But”, Zwaan points out, ³he who denies the past remains imprisoned
in it, and he who recognizes the past can be released from it².
Copyright: Zeegers, Chaja
–Boundary_(ID_Buwoof22OiAgVbcKwoRWTw)–
From: Baghdasarian