Turkish academics break genocide taboo
Aljazeera
Features
Turkish academics break genocide taboo
By Jonathan Gorvett in Istanbul
Tuesday 27 September 2005, 15:21 Makka Time, 12:21 GMT
The recent conference in Istanbul on the controversial killing of Ottoman
Armenians in the closing stages of first world war has been widely lauded as
a breakthrough event which could strengthen accession talks with the
European Union.
“It was a major shift in the understanding here of the importance of freedom
of expression,” Ferai Tinc, a leading columnist with the Turkish daily
Hurriyet, told Aljazeera.net. “It showed a transformation in mentality.”
Others see it as a major step too on Turkey’s rocky road to European Union
membership, with talks on this due to start in just one week’s time.
The conference – held on 24 September amid cries of treachery from hardline
Turkish nationalists and resounding applause from academics, politicians and
pundits – was the first ever in Turkey to see an open discussion on the
events of 1915.
At the turn of the 20th century, Turkey’s predecessor, the Ottoman Empire,
was allied with Germany and Austria (part of the Austro-Hungarian empire)
against Britain, France and Russia.
Genocide debate
The Ottoman government, many historians say, then organised what amounted to
genocide of its ethnic Armenian population, which was considered pro-Russian
and disloyal.
But Turkish authorities have in the past 90 years denied this version of
events, saying that both Turks and Armenians were killed in chaotic
fighting.
While Ankara does concede that the Ottoman government ordered the
deportation of its ethnic Armenian population to the southeast of the
country, it insists this did not constitute genocide.
This controversy has led to heated and often violent disputes, with the
official Turkish line fiercely defended within the country, effectively
preventing public discussion of alternative points of view.
Yet this month, academics met to do just that – and were pelted with eggs
and tomatoes by hardline Turkish nationalists, who accused the professors of
betraying the country.
The conference had already been cancelled in May after the country’s justice
minister described it as a “stab in the back” by Turkish academics who were
willing to consider claims of a genocide.
Reset for September 23, at the last minute, hardline Turkish nationalists
obtained a court injunction preventing the event from being held at its
original venue.
Yet this ban was successfully got round by another Istanbul university
offering its premises – a move also seen by many as deeply significant.
Important step
“This was Turkey’s academic community asserting its independence,” says
Razmik Panossian, a leading Armenian academic and director of programmes at
the Canadian Rights and Democracy pressure group.
“They were saying ‘We’ll go ahead with this even if people are against us’.
This was a very important step to take.”
For many then, both in Turkey and elsewhere, the significance of the
weekend’s conference, which saw mainly Turkish scholars debate the record,
was not 1915, but 2005.
“The conference was not just about the Armenian issue,” says Ekyen
Mahcupyan, the ethnic Armenian director of Turkish think-tank TESEV’s
democratisation programme. “It was about Turkey showing itself and the world
that it can discuss issues like who we are and what kind of world we want to
live in.”
The conference was also taking place at a crucial time in Turkey’s bid to
become a member of the European Union.
On 3 October, accession negotiations are scheduled to begin, with Brussels
pushing Turkey to further democratise – and taking a dim view of the
controversy over the conference.
Support received
Turkish Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan and his foreign minister,
Abdullah Gul, both gave their support for the event and reacted strongly
against the court order cancelling it.
“It is obvious that Europe will be influenced in a positive way by how
things turned out,” adds Mahcupyan. “As soon as the court halted the
conference, everyone reacted – many people came forward to condemn the court
and support the event and free speech.”
The message here, many Turks believe, is that the recent democratic reforms
the current government has introduced are taking hold.
“After the reforms were introduced, there was a lot of questioning in the EU
over whether they would be implemented,” says Tinc.
“Now, the ability to hold this conference shows how the mentality has
changed, enabling the implementation of reform.”
The issue also has wider strategic implications for Turkey’s EU accession
bid. Turkey borders Armenia, yet the frontier remains closed, with no
diplomatic relations between the two.
Frozen relations
The claims over genocide are a key factor in these frozen relations –
although there is one other major issue at stake.
“Relations are being held hostage by the Nagorno Kharabakh conflict,” says
Panossian. Since war between Armenia and Turkish ally Azerbaijan resulted in
the occupation of some Azeri territory by the Armenians, Turkey has shut off
its links with its Armenian neighbour.
“Yet, from the moment the EU accession talks start, the Armenian issue will
keep coming up,” says international relations professor Gareth Winrow of
Istanbul’s Bilgi University – where the conference was eventually held.
“All EU states must have good relations with their neighbours and Turkey
must therefore find a formula for normalising its relations with Armenia.
Perhaps the hope of some Turks in the conference was to begin that process.”
That being said, the conference’s reception has not been entirely popular in
Turkey. Some see the Europeans in particular not as pushing democratic
reform along, but as trying to use the issue against Turkey.
Pressuring Turkey
“People in France and Germany and some other countries encourage the
Armenians to attack Turkey,” says Sedat Laciner , director of the
International Strategic Research Organisation in Ankara.
“They can’t find any other reason to keep Turkey out of the EU so they use
this. Western countries always used the Armenians – in World War I they did
the same thing, encouraging them to rise up against the Ottomans.”
It is a view not too dissimilar from Panossian’s. “European capitals will
use Armenia to put pressure on Ankara,” he says.
“This has been a convenient way for them to set up hurdles for Turkey ever
since the 19th century.”
Meanwhile, ordinary Turks seem largely divided on the issue.
“I don’t think it should have been allowed,” says shop worker Mert Aslan.
“There was no such genocide – it was the Turks who suffered. Nobody ever
talks about that, and to think that Turkish professors are supporting the
Armenians is a shame for us.”
By contrast, student Dicile Atacam said: “I think it’s a very good thing.
If we can’t talk freely about the past, then how can we ever understand each
other today, in the present?”
