Today’s Zaman , Turkey
Dec 20 2008

"Joint committee" of historians on Armenian debate

Debates about genocide claims would be routine agenda items of April
every year. With the "apology" campaign launched by a group of
intellectuals, we have made an early start this year. There is now
complete confusion.

The president, the prime minister, intellectuals, columnists,
ambassadors and political party leaders are all involved in the
debate. For some, this campaign is a sign of democracy and free
thinking in Turkey. For others, it is clear treason.

The early start of this debate is actually a good development. Indeed,
this year’s picture in Washington is different. In April, Barack
Obama, who promised to recognize the genocide during his election
campaign, will be residing in the White House. Moreover, the Democrats
dominate both houses of Congress. This debate may serve as an occasion
for us to start to think about what possible measures we can take
against the passage of a genocide bill, which was prevented by the US
administration at the last moment last year.

But, there is another point that these discussions have revealed. As
is known, the most progressive proposal made by Turkey against the
genocide claims until now was to suggest that a joint historical
committee should be established to investigate these claims. Three
years ago, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan sent a letter to
then-Armenian President Robert Kocharyan, officially proposing the
establishment of a joint commission to investigate into the
developments and incidents of 1915. Erdogan’s historic letter stressed
that "Turkish and Armenian peoples, which have shared a common history
and neighbouring geography in a sensitive region, have lived together
peacefully for many years, but have disagreements and different
assessments about a certain part of their common history." In other
words, the problem was that Turks and Armenians have different views
about the incidents of 1915. In order to eliminate this difference,
historians from both countries would come together and find out what
really happened in 1915.

This proposal was not only supported by the government or the ruling
Justice and Development Party (AK Party). Holding a special session to
discuss the genocide claims on April 13, 2005, Parliament issued a
unanimously adopted declaration. Supportive of this historical
committee proposal, this declaration suggested, "The proposal for
setting up a joint committee of historians from Turkey and Armenia
should be taken into consideration."

However, the "apology" campaign, which has gathered support from many
respected intellectuals, and the reactions to it have shown that there
are disagreements not only between Turks and Armenians, but also among
Turks concerning the incidents of 1915. There are distinguished
figures both in the supporters and opponents of this campaign. If we
have a sneak preview of more than 10,000 supporters: Ali Bayramoglu,
Ihsan Dagi, Cengiz Candar, Atilla Eralp, Enis Batur, Omer Laciner,
Omer Marda, Leyla Ipekci, Huseyin Hatemi, Oral Calislar, Hasan Cemal
and the list goes on. So many people cannot be just labelled as
traitors or terrorists and ignored. A number of columnists who
criticize the campaign’s wording or timing refrain from being
disrespectful towards these people.

Moreover, the difference of opinion is not limited to
intellectuals. There is also a big difference between President Gul’s
perspective of the campaign and that of Prime Minister
Erdogan. Retired Ambassador Temel Iskit supports the campaign while
retired ambassadors Sukru Elekdag and Korkmaz Haktanir have signed a
counter declaration.

When people start to personally label each other as traitors,
terrorists, enemies of freedom or fascists, this leads to a dangerous
division. The apology petition may be criticized for many respects. We
may say that it fails to mention the attacks conducted by Armenians
against Turkey in the past or that it does not touch on the Armenian
atrocities in Nagorno-Karabakh or Hocali or that it ignored the part
Western countries played in pitting Armenians and Turks against each
other or that in the same period, millions of Turks were expelled from
the Caucasus or the Balkans or that the thawing of ice that started
with the initiative of two presidents will be risked. But, it is
dubious whether these will help us eliminate confusion of the mind or
change others’ perceptions about it.

In my opinion, the best way to solve both problems is to immediately
establish the joint committee of historians that was approved by
Parliament. Halil Inalcik, Sukru Hanioglu, Ilber Ortayli and other
respected Turkish historians will join this committee to which
distinguished historians of the world will be invited. Another call is
made to the Armenian side, but even if they do not send historians to
the committee, the committee will start to work and produce a report
whose credibility cannot be disputed by anyone. This move will not
only evidence our sincerity and courage in the international arena,
but also prevent this heartrending and dangerous division among
ourselves.