Ninety years post Ottoman Turkish Genocide of the Armenians:
Lessons learned and challenges to overcome
PRESS RELEASE
New York: AASSSG
185 E 85th Street,
NY NY 10028
Phone: 201 941-2266
E-mail: [email protected]
The Armenian American Society for Studies on Stress & Genocide
(AASSSG) presented a symposium commemorating the 90th Anniversary of
the Genocide of the Armenians. Dr. Kalayjian, President of AASSSG,
organized and chaired this symposium.
The keynote speaker was Professor Roger Smith, who received the
AASSSG 2005 Outstanding Achievement Award. This award is given to
those scholars who excel in the area of Genocide studies, research
and publication. Professor Smith is Professor Emeritus at the College
of William and Mary in Virginia.
Prof. Smith stated how hard it was to focus on the topic of lessons
from the Armenian Genocide and remaining challenges to overcome. He
then discussed the following issues: knowledge acquired from the
Genocide, the shape of memory, denial, and the possibilities of
reconciliation.
KNOWLEDGE: The Armenian Genocide was the first large scale genocide
in the 20th century. It should have been a warning to what could lay
in store later in the century: it showed that human beings were fully
capable of systematic destruction of other humans, that genocide was an
ever present possibility. But this was largely forgotten. The Holocaust
took place, but this was viewed as an aberration and allowed to drop
from sight until the 1960s. Subsequently it was held out as the model
of all genocide, but this was misleading. Rather the Armenian case
was the prototype for most genocides since 1945: nationalism, a simple
technology of destruction, and targeting of victims within more or less
given territories, as opposed to any global attempt to annihilate them.
The Armenian Genocide helps us to understand many of the conditions for
such acts and particularly the relations between war and genocide. It
also teaches some negative lessons: threats of intervention that are
not carried out may be worse than silence (Bosnia, Darfur).
SHAPE OF MEMORY: Recollection of historical events, including massive
killing of innocents, does not follow a straight or continuous
path. The Armenian Genocide was well known at the time it took place,
by the early 1920s the erosion of memory had set in. Even survivors
were often silent (see, for example, Balakian’s BLACK DOG OF FATE). But
the pain and trauma were there. In due time, the stories would be told
within the Armenian family and community, but not much beyond it. The
trauma, plus the rage/humiliation engendered by denial would continue
down the generations. Genocide does not end with the last atrocity.
But by the 50th anniversary public commemorations took place; this
was followed by stepped up efforts by Turkey at denial; followed in
turn by greater efforts to overcome the denial.
DENIAL: The arguments of denial refuse the fact that the term
“genocide” is applicable to the events, and the significance of
the events (rationalization, relativization, and trivialization). In
recent years, there has been widespread affirmation of the Genocide by
scholars, scholarly organizations, states, international organizations
and the Pope. These affirmations are a matter of recognition, not
legislation of truth; they also offer recognition that the Turkish
government’s denial is essentially political, not historical. But
some states have aided and abetted Turkey in denial out of expediency,
rather than acceptance of Turkish arguments.
POSSIBILITY OF RECONCILATION: Reconciliation can take place at either
the individual or state level. It is difficult for an individual to
forgive or forget the Genocide. Forgiveness would require, at minimum,
acknowledgment, apology, and making amends to the extent possible. At
the state level, partial reconciliation may be possible without
acknowledgment of the Genocide (the US has good relations with Japan
though Japan refuses to acknowledge its war guilt. There are various
steps that Turkey could take: diplomatic recognition, lift embargo,
allowing Armenia access to the sea, etc. Even if these steps were
taken, without acknowledgment and acceptance of responsibility,
no full reconciliation can take place at the state level.
Turkey has much to gain from facing its own history and accepting
responsibility for it. But this will occur only when Turkey has become
a more open, democratic, and pluralistic society. That time may come,
especially with pressure from the E.U., but it is not here today.
Professor Dennis Papazian is the Director of the Armenian Research
Center at the University of Michigan in Dearborn. He pointed out
that after all, Hitler read about the Armenian Genocide in his
contemporary newspapers while he was a corporal in the German army
and his bosom friend, Max Erwin von Schubner-Richter was actually one
of the hundreds of foreign witnesses to mass killings of Armenians
during WWI and notified the German Foreign Office, allies of the
Turks, that the Turkish Government was attempting to eradicate the
Armenian population of the Empire. It is worth looking into whether
other Germans who were in Turkey during the Armenian Genocide later
became active in the Nazi Party.
Why is the Armenian Genocide the “forgotten genocide” and the
Holocaust so much in the public mind? Just think for a moment what
would it be like if all of Turkey had been occupied by the Allies and
war crime trials had been brought to a successful conclusion? The
episode would be widely followed, the chief perpetrators punished,
and restitution made to the survivors. The survivors would then urge
the world to remember their tragedy and seek to prevent such a tragedy
from happening ever again.
And just think for a moment if the Nazis had survived World War II
and there were no Nuremberg trials for the perpetrators of the Jewish
Holocaust. The Nazis, just as the Turkish government today, would
deny the Holocaust and its memory might fade into history. The Jews,
of course, would demand recognition and attempt to keep their tragedy
in the public eye, but most of the public would forget over time and
the Holocaust might be known today as the “forgotten Holocaust.”
The Turkish government has spent millions of dollars on public
relations experts attempting to eradicate from the public mind a
memory of the Armenian Genocide or at least to cast doubt in the
public mind. This attempt is made easier by the fact that few Americans
today know anything about Turkey, Turkish history, and most certainly
Turkish geography. The Turkish government does not have to disprove
the Armenian Genocide; it merely needs to cast doubt on what happened
in 1915-1923.
Their job of propaganda is made easier by the inclination of most
Americans not to think evil of anyone and always give the accused
the benefit of a doubt. Genocide is so ultimately an evil that there
are not two sides to it, and those who perpetrated it, or their legal
successor, must face the consequences of their actions. The greatest
aid to the denialists is the nice people who don’t want to take sides.
Fortunately, there are now people in Turkey who are speaking out
about the Armenian Genocide, but the more these few speak out, the
more the reactionaries make outlandish claims. At the time of this
writing, early April 2005, there seem to be indications that the
Turkish government will make some kind of simple form of confession
in the nature of, “Oh, we don’t see it as Genocide but you may call
it what you will.”
Prof. Papazian then presented the chief arguments of the Turkish
government and its supporters in denying the Armenian Genocide and
the answers.
Prof. Ann L. Saltzman is the Co-Director of the Center for
Holocaust/Genocide Study at Drew University. She spoke about her
journey from the first time she heard about the Genocide till today,
and what she has learned. The lessons were presented insightfully
and emotionally.
Prof. Saltzman said “as I look back over the programs we have
offered in memory of the Armenian genocide, I note how the series
itself traces our developing knowledge of it. Thus, for our first
program we showed the film, “The Forgotten Genocide,” and asked your
president, Anie Kalayjian, to be our discussant. We needed to start
with some basic history of what had happened. But it didn’t take long
before our programs began to “take on” one of the central issues of
the study of the Armenian genocide: the refusal to recognize it as
such. Our second program, subtitled “Art as Resistance in Countering
Genocidal Denial,” featured a slide presentation and discussion
of the art of Robert Barsamian. For me, it was the beginning of a
dawning awareness of how deep this denial went. The following year,
we invited Peter Balakian to speak, and in response to my mentioning
this to a colleague at another school, I was “jokingly” asked,
“Does Turkey know?” At this point, I knew that there was denial,
but I don’t think I truly understood how much economic, political,
and psychological energy Turkey was putting into making sure that no
country would call what had happened in 1915 a genocide. And I think
I was just beginning to understand how much psychological havoc this
denial was creating for the Armenian community. Certainly Balakian’s
book Black Dog of Fate helped me to see the parallels with the second
and third generation of Holocaust survivors. Also, his impassioned
lecture which called upon us all to “deny the denial.” Still further,
in response to last year’s showing of the film Ararat, it became
even clearer how important it is for a people’s healing to know what
happened to them in the past and to have others acknowledge it. I
began to relate this to my own un-named sorrow and terror in response
to the veiled way in which the Holocaust was discussed when I was
a child. Unless the story could be told and affirmed, the feeling
of being haunted by something I didn’t understand remained. I now
understand that about the Armenian genocide as well.
Prof. Saltzman concluded stating: “So the first thing I have learned
about the genocide is that there was a genocide. It is where one
must begin. I think my first reading about the Armenian genocide did
not actually occur until 1990 when I was preparing to teach a First
Year Seminar at Drew, entitled “Obedience to Authority: The Holocaust
and Beyond.”
I learned that there was a genocide, I learned that there are powerful
forces at work to deny that there was a genocide, and I have learned
that until the truth is told and acknowledged, that the people against
whom this genocide was committed will remain under its shadow. Still
further, only last night at Drew’s annual commemoration did I realize
that children and grandchildren of survivors and victims of the
genocide at still searching for answers to questions and information
about what happened to their relatives, some 90 years later.
A lively discussion followed. The presence of Armenians, Turks
and Americans made it very insightful, challenging and extremely
rewarding. The youth were calling for more information and more
details of the history itself. Recommendations were made to have a
smaller group focusing on education and dissemination of documents
from history.
For more information on these informational groups kindly contact Dr.
Kalayjian at: [email protected] or check