Why is there dispute about whether Armenians were the victims of genocide by Turkey they were killed or not?

Answer 1

Because Turkey has consistantly denied it. ts not really disputed by anyone but Turkey.

Answer 2

I don't really think there is any dispute about how many Armenians died. The dispute is about whether it can be termed genocide. Under international law if it was accepted as genocide then there were (under the Geneva Convention) parties guilty of serious war crimes.
From the Armenian point of view they wish to see an atrocity recognised in history and possibly some kind of compensation for the surviving families. For Turkey it's a matter of national honour (especially at a time when they are trying to join the EU), international reputation and the cost of reparations that may have to be made if proved.

Answer 3

The 1915-17 massacre of the Armenians was an attempt at genocide by the Ataturk government. The Turkish govt today still denies its role in organising the genocide as it was a foundational policy by the post-Ottoman state. Hitler studied the Armenian genocide hard concluding that States could wipe out entire peoples without consequence - as he put it "who remembers the Armenians now?" So don't forget the genocide organised by the Turks - it was the first of the modern holocausts and set the pattern for the rest.

Answer 4

It's a very good question. For most of the world, there is no dispute. But from the perspective of Turkey, and specifically during that time, the Turks reportedly perceived the Armenians to be something like this:

"In 1915 the government of the Ottoman Empire, caught up in the Great War against Czarist Russia and the Allied powers, saw the Armenians as an untrustworthy minority that might align with their cousins across the Russian border." (quoted from web site below)

Please note that I am only using this to answer your question. The answer is that from the view of the Turkish government at that time; this was not viewed as "genocide" but as a way to allegedly protect their nation.

The website continues later on to define genocide as
" a premeditated attempt to annihilate an entire group of people."

The website then provides the following quotes to explain which I am quoting below from the website in the source quoted in the source area:

Bonnie Joy Kaslan, honorary consul general for the Republic of Turkey, leans back on a Middle East-motif sofa in her house in an upscale neighborhood of Oakland. A bronze samovar, prayer rug and other family heirlooms grace the living room.

"People of conscience worldwide are very saddened by the loss of innocent lives that occurred,'' Kaslan begins cautiously.

"The Turkish government doesn't deny the tragedies happened. But if the Armenians want us to say there was a genocide, they won't get that. For the simple reason that the evidence does not substantiate the claim that the massacres were genocide.

"The events of that era can best be described as a civil war within a global war. Because the empire faced a threat to its very survival, there was a deportation order given. Armenians in the eastern provinces were moved out. There was a rebellion. Armenians in the area launched an effort to ally with Russia, the historic enemy of the Turks, to launch an independent state.

"It's a terrible thing to say, but they bet on the wrong horse. They separated themselves from their own country in which they were citizens. Wars have been won and lost on alliances and misalliances

In answer to your question, it is the perception of what happened that is the source of dispute. NOT ALL Turkish people agree with what I just quoted. It is only the view of certain people. And it is the difference between the view of those people, and the view of others, that is the source of the dispute.

It is with great sadness that I answer your question, because any loss of life, and particularly innocent life, is very sad.

Answer 5

There is dispute about the Armenian Genocide because the Turks deny that it ever happened. If the Armenians don't get their justice for this tragic event 91 years ago (April 24, 1915) then history will be doomed to repeat itself. The Turkish government denies that they murdered and massacred the one and a half million Armenians who died that day, and they don't want other countries to recognize this event as a genocide.

Answer 6

Good question. It has always been disputed. Not the massacre itself, but how many were killed. People only bring it up because they want to undermine Turkey(a Muslim country). Point is the Iraqi invasion could be called genocide too but there is a dispute about figures also. People with vested interest like France always bring this up but France, like GB were great players in this field in Africa.Namely Kenya and Algeria.

Answer 7

it centers around Turkeys application 4 EU membership
bearing in mind the access/aid with the Iraq invasion.
Turkey expects it's pay-off without facing up 2 the Genocide and any compensation.

c link below.

Answer 8

islam is a peacefull religion, therefore these claims are false, it simply could not have happened, proof or no proof