Dear Historians who recognize 1915 incidents as a genocide,
I am not a historian , only an ordinary Turkish citizen.
All my life , I always condemned massacres, killings, seizure or torture of civilians, innocent people regardless of their religion, sect or ethnicity etc.
Therefore, I deeply regret the way my (some) forefathers’ treated innocent, civilian Armenians who were Ottoman citizens and most of them were children, women or old people. They persecuted, killed, seized their properties during 1915 fateful months. I personally believe that “this was a crime ”
There are no possible excuses to commit such acts against innocent people…
It should be appreciated that some Turkish governors, imams, citizens resisted and defied the government’s orders and tried to save innocent Armenian people.
I also have some questions that I want to raise with you, before accusing me of being a “denialist”. I am quite prepared to accept all criticisms , providing that it is reasonable and in good faith.
First of all, I am not a denialist.
As I said before Ottoman Armenians were persecuted, deported and killed, their properties seized during 1915 fateful months. I accept that Turkish goverments have tried to ignore such criminal acts , and refuse to face off her past so far…
You use the term “genocide” while describing these events.
“Genocide” is a “legal” term introduced after the Second World War…
You say that Raphael Lempkin, who was of a Polonian Jews origin advocate offered the term “genocide” to describe the “Holocaust” events in 1948 after he took an example from Ottoman Armenians Deportation.
You don’t question why did he select only one example…
Therefore, “Armenian Genocide” is a unquestionable term for you.
And you insist that Turkey must recognize “genocide”
I don’t want to mention that Bulgarian or Serbs committed massacres against Muslim populations during the Balkan Wars or Russian Army’s with Armenian bands killed, persecuted many innocent muslims in the First World War. You don’t take into account this event because you argue that this events are not consistent with “Genocide” term.
I wonder why you use a legal term for the 1915 events, you don’t mark as “genocide” the nearly same events took place at the same decades, at the beginning of 20th century…
You don’t name Germany’s treating Namibians in 1910 as a “Genocide”. Furthermore, Germany refused a simply “apology”
You don’t say Belgium Kingdom was responsible for massacres in Congo in 1905 , and committed “Genocide”
I have been asking these questions at different times but nobody, explained what the differences are. Why and how do these events differ?
Recently , on twitter I tried to discuss this matter with Prof. Peter Stanley , famous Australian historian and had lots of books, articles on Anzacs and The First World War including Gallipoli. He refused to answer and despised me. Most of ( Especiallly ) American Armenian historians language against Turks are abusive, insulting
You seem to forget that one of Britain and France’s main ally was the Russia, it was a far more authoritarian and brutal regime than the Kaiser’s Germany as historians Richard Evans stated last year.1 You avoid saying “genocide” for Tsarist Russia’s treating millions her “own” citizens, Jews , who lived in Eastern Europa during the First World War. Russian Easten European Jews were persecuted, deported ,killed by Tsarist Russia . The heinous act that took place nearly at the same time Ottoman Armenians Deportation.
Could you tell me what is the main difference among the nearly same events are?
I am looking forward to your explanation of how similar events are recognzied differently.
If we use a “legal terminology” we can not be “selective” on what applies to it, its definition should be set.
But It seems that , as historians, you use “legal terminology” and you use it for the past and you are selective.
It is unfair, unjust act against Turkey