Do you think Turkey will recognize Armenian Genocide?

Question

you think turkey will recognize Armenian Genocide? if yes why and if no why not.

Answer 1

NEVER:

The Armenians cheated the Turks. They killed thousands of Turks, Azeris and Kurds with the trust to the power of Russia. When Ottoman Empire kicked out the Russians then it was the time to take revenge of this poor and sneaky armenians. By kicking out of the lands of the Ottoman Empire, this bloody armenians died on road. Who killed them? The people whos children, whos mothers, whos wifes, whos brothers or sisters were killed by armenians.

Is it massacre? or is it genocide?

Man, I say "IT IS JUSTİCE"

Answer 2

They shouldn't recognize anything. I made research for my thesis on this issue. Unfortunately this is a big LIE of the Armenians.

The Armenians cheated the Turks at the WWI and this time I think the entire world has been cheated by them again. The Turks are very nice people.

Answer 3

No. Because they got away with it. France and England absolved Turkey of any political or material compensation for the surviving Armenians in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne. During WWI they taxed,starved and mistreated the Armenians again without any consequences.... France shouldn't act shocked,

Answer 4

The claimed Genocide was carried out by Armenians. I have many Turkish friends, whos grandparents were killed by armenians. They did this to all families in the Eastern Cities of Turkey for a piece of land.

DO NOT TRUST TO THESE LIES OF ARMENIANS.

YOU SHAME ON YOU. YOU SHOULD STOP WITH THIS LIES.

DONT CORRUPT THE WORLD ANYMORE.

Answer 5

I tought Azerbaijan become a northern iranian province till 1918 whilst Stalin carry to the turks lands interior the Caucasus lots greater to north. If the turkish government. become diverse at that factor why to disclaim it so? The numbers I heard is around one and a nil.5 million, 2 hundreds of thousands with greeks and assyrians. i do no longer understand lots approximately Armenia, yet as i understand they have the comparable wealth of different countryes in that area, and is largely a splash area of the occupied historic armenia. thank you for all of the replyes.

Answer 6

No.

If you want to learn the truth and see the dramatic pictures of the children, who were killed by armenians, you should see the albums at the website below:

http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr

Answer 7

There have been wars of thirty or one hundred years throughout the history of mankind., the first and second World Wars caused millions of people to lose their lives and to be injured. Nations or governments on opposite sides looked for re-establishing normal relationships after the war had ended and they achieved this target in a short period of time.

They tried to forget all negativity, pains and loss experienced by people during the war years, and new projects were developed to improve relationships. However Armenian views of Turkey have not changed since the beginning of the 20th century, on the contrary their views of hostility towards Turks have increased. This has resulted from the fact that the hostility towards Turks has been the basis in the formation of Armenian national identity.

Armenians, who have been Turkish citizens for hundreds of years , have lived quite comfortably and free of problems. But Armenians who had turned out to be a serious problem for the Ottoman Empire since the end of the 19th or the beginning of the 20th century, became a threat for the security of Ottoman Empire by cooperating with the Russian Army in Caucasian Front in World War 1. This situation led Ottoman government in 1915 to take Armenians out of the front region and make them immigrate to the interior regions. For about 90 years Armenians have been trying to convince the whole world that the deportation of 1915 was an act of genocide performed against Armenians. This point of view reflecting an other-oriented, mystic-orientalist mentality provokes the revenge psychology.

The Republic of Armenia which declared its independence in 1991, brought about the issue of genocide in the 11th section of the Declaration of Independence. Armenians claim their right on the land of Azerbayjan, Turkey, Georgia(in the Caucasus), Iran who are their neighbours and -despite having no connection through land- of Russia to put their project of "Tsviç tsov Hayastan" (Armenia from Sea to Sea) into practice as envisaged by their national Hay Dat Doctrine. Armenia has invaded 20 percent of the land of Azerbayjan within the framework of Hay Dat Doctrine.

Despite Turkey's attempts with good intentions to establish economic and diplomatic relationships with Armenia after his independence, Armenia has not put an end to his propaganda of the so-called genocide, he did not respect Turkey's unity of land and has been continuing his propaganda for cancellation of Kars Agreement.

Due to Armenia's insistence on his propaganda of genocide, not respecting Turkey's unity of land and his not making a borderline agreement , Turkey had to close Akyaka Borderline Entrance in 1993. Both Armenians living outside the mother land and the Armenian government, by asking for the cooperation of civilian public organizations , demand for Turkey's opening the borderline entrance.Demanding this, they lay stress on the economic problems of Turkey's eastern cities , which they accept as the Western Armenia rather than on the economic problems of Armenia and they claim that Kars and other eastern cities will make a serious progress in economic terms if the borderline entrance is opened. Sometimes this issue is brought into the Turkish and Armenian agenda by the press. Also some of Turkey's npress and broadcast organizations become the mouthpiece of Armenia in this issue. It can be said that Armenians who live in Turkey and whose number is estimated to be about 50-70 thousand have a serious effort in this period.. Though they are small in number, Armenians have a serious potential of being organized. This responsibility of being organized is taken by the Armenian Patriarchate. The Patriarchate does not only respond to the religious needs of the Armenians, but it also plays an important role in the protection of Armenian national identity., traditions and customs and in the establishment of relationships with Armenia which they define as the mother land.

Armenians can easily make some media organizations publish news and essays -written through their own perspective – abut the necessity of the opening of the borderline entrance . Some essay writers in Turkey also try to affect Turkish public opinion in this subject with essays supporting the ideas of Armenians. Meanwhile media organizations also reflect the ideas of the Council of Turkish – Armenian Business Development.

Mehmet Altan , in his essay named “Is newspaper sold in Kars?” which was published in an internet newspaper –www.gazetem.net.-on July 2004 , tried to maintain that 56 thousand citizens in Kars, which had a population of 325 thousand collected signatures for the opening of borderline entrance with Armeniaand he also expressed his worry and disturbance, due to its not being brought into the agenda by the Turkish press and he even made some economic calculations to prove the fact that the opening of the borderline entrance was necessary.

Actually some eastern cities of Turkey have developed less when compared to other regions. However the opening of the borderline entrance wiith Armenia will not be effective in terms ofthe development of these cities.If Turkey’s neighbour in the East were a more developed country than Armenia , Kars would perhaps be able to experience a serious economic development in a short period of time. But if the fact thatthe minimum monthly wage in Armenia is 9 dollars, monthly pension is 7,5 dollars and the medium wages are 38 dollars but that the monthly expenditure of a family is 66-70 dollars is considered, it can easily be seen that it is impossible for the Armenian economy to contribute to the economy of Kars. If Armenia had a developed economy, fifty percent of the population would not leave the country and an estimated total of 50-60 thousand Armenians would not come to Turkeyn each year to work as a seasonal worker. Considering the fact that Gümrü and Talin which have a borderline with Kars are engaged with agriculture and stock raising, it is easy to estimate that opening the borderline entrance will give great harm to the economy of Kars.

A comment of Hrant Brink , the general publishing manager of a newspaper called Agos, about the opening of the borderline entrance was published in Birgün ( a newspaper published in Turkey) on 15 July 2004 under the name “Let Medzamor be closed, let the borderline entrance be opened”. Brink by decreasing the problems between Armenia and Turkey to the level Metzamor Nuclear Power Plant and the borderline entrance , by making people unrealize the real problems such as the genocide propaganda, Armenia’s disrespecting Turkey’s unity of land and his propaganda for the cancellation of 1921 Kars Agreement ,tries to affect Turkish public opinion. Metsamor is the weak side of Armenia whose insecurity has been registered.

Some romantic, touristic opportunities are given to certain circles, groups in Turkey who are engaged with the issue of the opening of the borderline entrance and in this way- in case that the Armenians bring it up to the agenda-Turkish people are made to create certain diplomatic issues which have the potential of causing problems and disadvantages in Caucasia as if these were the desire of Turkish intellectuals and Turkish nation.

Turkey should be able to explain what the opening of the borderline entrance means withthe statements he makes. As Armenia defines this region of Turkey as the West Armenia , what they want is not opening the borderline entrance between Turkey and Armenia, but opening the entrance , belonging to Armenians and which is prevented from making way between the two sides of Armenia by being occupied.

Answer 8

ARMENIAN PROPAGANDA

We can easily say that the weakest point of Turks is propaganda. The situation was the same in the Ottoman State, as well; and it has been the same in the Republic of Turkey. For Turks propaganda meant responding the articles and false claims. That is, nothing but a passive effort aiming at self-defence. This approach provided the comfort and freedom of activity for the other side to lay the blame on Turkey.

The most intensive period, when the propaganda against Turkey and the Turks occurred in America, was the year 1923. Powell writes about its reasons as follows:

“The reasons for the deep-rooted hostility against the Turks can be cited like that: The oppression policy against the Christian minority and especially the Armenians; secondly, religious prejudices and political propaganda. It is hard to say where the former ends and the latter one starts. Thirdly, the worry and the disappointment because of the re-emergence of a country, which we considered as defeated and disintegrated; and finally, the insistent rejection of the Turks to defend themselves.”

Powell writes about the last reason in the page 32 of his book and in his article in 1922, he reports the conversation he had with Sultan Vahdettin, in Yildiz Palace and the statements of the Sultan as follows:

“Your newspapers and the magazines would not publish it, if we sent an article written by a Turk. If it was published, your people would not read this; if they read it they would not believe in it. Even if we sent an expert, who can express the Turkish opinion in your own language to America, can this person find unbiased masses of listeners?”

Perhaps the words of the Sultan are right. Therefore, again in page 10 of the same book, it is said that one of the esteemed religious people of New England, whose name is not stated, says as follows: “I do not want to hear the truth concerning Turks. I have already changed my opinion about them.” This is because Turks were silent all the time and its opponents propagated against them and the religious and political considerations made an impression. Besides this, the mentality like “somehow or other it would not be published; even if it was published people would not read; even if it was read people would not believe”, was an associate element which caused the development of an approach against Turkey and production of an easy and quick result of contrary propaganda. Generally, almost in every country there is tendency to believe that the article in a newspaper gives facts.

It is obvious how the religion factor and political considerations have an associate role in the development and adoption of a disadvantageous ambience against Turkey. When the wise propaganda is involved the situation becomes worse. The reality in the reflected news diminishes or is totally lost, let alone reflect unilateral news. In the book the statements given prove this thesis:

“Events of violence were greatly exaggerated. Some of the violence supposed to have happened recently did not even occur. One of the local press representatives (Istanbul) of the American relief organisation told his friends frankly that he could only send the news against the Turks; because it was what earned him money.”

“The fact that they did not want to publish the report is not incomprehensible. Additionally, M. Venizelos laid all his weight. He objected to the publication of the incidents when the names of the witnesses were concealed and which were established without the presence of the Greek representative. It was rightful to behave like this not within the framework of the western commission but the local Greek authorities. The people, who unveiled the information against Greece lived in the regions under the Greek occupation and they could not be exposed to Greek retaliation. The same legal concerns were valid for the Bryce Report, which was about the treatment of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and the German brutality in Belgium. Despite the same reasons, the allied governments did not hesitate to publish the above mentioned reports.”

The Bryce Report, that Toynbee mentioned, is the Blue Book of the British, of which he was the editor.

However, the opposite occasions seldom occurred. The British had to evacuate Baku on 18 September 1918. When the newspapers published this news, they mentioned the disloyalty of the Armenians. The British propaganda services seriously became anxious about it and tried to remove the effect of the news. The below mentioned lines of a memorandum, which was prepared with this objective, are very important:

“To discredit the Armenians means to weaken the struggle for Turkish hostility. It was difficult to eliminate the conviction that the Turkish people who were trying to with disasters continuously, are noble people. This news will revive this conviction and will harm the prestige of the Zionists and the prestige of Arabs. (...) The Turkish treatment towards the Armenians is the greatest leverage of the Government of the Majesty to provide the acceptance of the radical solution for the Turkish issue at home and abroad.”

It is useful to have a look at what kind of organisation the British established in order to take measures for the propaganda:

“The first thing that I heard concerning the propaganda department was that on August 1914 in Walton Health Golf Club, on Sunday, following a lunch, Mr. T.P. O’Connor told Lloyd George that it was necessary to respond to the propaganda, which was launched by the German in America by distributing brochures in the streets, and giving them to the passengers getting of the ships. Upon this, Lloyd George said, see this issue, what can Charlie do, consider this. Masterman accepted it.”

Mr. Masterman was an old Member of Parliament, and a member of the House of Commons. After this date, Mr. Masterman established the propaganda bureau and became the head of it. The presence of the bureau was concealed. Mr. Masterman resigned his post in the National Health Insurance Commission and he transformed the working place of this Commission “Wellington House”, into the headquarters of the bureau and it was recorded as “Wellington House” in the documents.

The activity domain of the “Wellington House” is described as follows:

“To disseminate the incidents like the struggle of the Allies; the efforts of the British; the things done by the Navy, Army and the merchant Marine; the economic and military capacities of the Empire, the reasons and the goals of the war; the crimes and the brutality of Germany and its allies; the struggle of Belgium, the incidents which prove the non-humanistic side of the submarine war. The means, which are used are books, brochures, magazines, diagrams, maps, posters, postcards, pictures, photographs and exhibitions.”

It was stated that only in Britain, the department published 17 million copies.

At the end of the 3rd report of 118 pages concerning the activities of Masterman's Bureau, there is the list of the published brochures and the books. At the end of the second half of 1916, the number of the published brochures and books is 182. We come across the names of writers like Max Aitken, William Archer, Balfour, James Bryce, E. T. Cook, Conan Doyle, Alexander Gray, Archibald Hurd, Rudyard Kipling, A. Lowenstein, C. F. G. Masterman, A. J. Toynbee, H. G. Wells. One of the three books of Toynbee is “ The Tyrannies on Armenians”.

All the references in the “Blue Book”, which was published by the Masterman’s Bureau and re-published by an Armenian publishing house in America, are the Armenian newspapers like “Horizon” published in Tiblisi, “Armenia” published in Marseilles, “Ararat” published in London, “Gotchnag” published in New York, and the Committee of Armenian Tyranny in America, which reflected the information that was collected from the missionaries. It is evident what kind of book it would be, which was based on these sources. In the meantime, it is useful to note that although the Armenians in Istanbul and Izmir were not replaced, in the map given in this book it looks as if they have been replaced.

After the explanation on how the Blue Book was written, it is necessary to quote from two writers who studied these issues and how the propaganda materials was collected. The first writer is Arthur Ponsoby and the name of his book is “The Lies In the War Time”. Ponsoby was a member of the Liberal Party in the House of Commons as from 1910 until 1918. Later on, he was joined to the Labour Party. He was a person, who was against war. He published his book in 1928. The interesting parts which tell about the methods of propaganda are as follows:

“The War-Office issued a circular and invited the Officers to report on the war incidents about the enemy and had added that the incidents did no have to be real, a normal probability was enough.” (Page 20)

“Lies about brutality are one the most satisfactory ones: Especially in this country (Britain) and America, no war can be without them. To discredit the enemy can be considered as patriotism.” (Page 22)

“Even in ordinary incidents, of no importance, the witnessing of people would not create absolute confidence. At a moment when prejudices, enthusiasm, ambition and patriotism are mixed with sentiments, the statements made by a person has no value. It is impossible to block the dissemination of brutal stories. They were reiterated with brochures, posters, letters and speeches for many days. Popular figures, who would avoid to sentence their mortal enemies because of lack of evidence, did not hesitate be the leaders who accuse a nation of all kinds of brutalities and unnatural murders.”(Page 129)

“A photograph, taken by a camera has a great effect on the people because it is reliable. There is nothing more authentic than an instantaneous photograph. Nobody would think of doubting the authenticity of a photograph. Because of this, if it is false, it takes time to reveal it. During the war, the photograph assemblage became an industry. All the states did this; but the experts were the French.” (Page 135)

This expression may seem vague. Therefore it is appropriate to give some examples:

“In Europe, soon after the news was realised about the storming of Ottoman Bank by Armenians and attacks on the Armenians, some of the artists from illustrated newspapers were sent to Istanbul to draw the pictures of brutal incidents. One of the well-known war correspondents, Mr. Melton Prior was among them. He was a man of energetic and determined nature. He had an independent character. He told me that he was in a very delicate position because of his special task. People in his country heard about brutal and violent incidents and were eager to see pictures about them. Since the deceased Armenians were buried, the women and children were not harmed and none of the Armenian churches were attacked, providing these pictures was a problem. Being an honest man who appreciated the Turks, he refused to contrive false pictures of scenes he had not witnessed. However, the others were not as honest as he was. Consequently, I saw, in an Italian illustrated newspaper, horrible pictures, which showed the massacred women and children.”

“One of the up-front names, that was mentioned on the occasion of the so-called brutal correctional measures, was Musir Sakir Pasha, who was sent to Anatolia to make reforms. It was rumoured all over the world that while the Field Marshall was in Erzurum on October 1895 that is during Armenian Revolt, his chain watch in his hands, he was instructing the soldiers to kill the Armenians for one and a half hours more- two hours in some of the versions-... Taking into account the objective of our trip, we visited the British Consul, Mr. Graves; the Governor, Mehmet ªerif Rauf Pasha; The French Consul M. Roqueferrier and the Russian Consul, M. V. A. Maximov. We asked these people whether they believed the rumors about ªakir Pasha. M. Roqueferrier told us that these were ridiculous stories, that were made up for fun and he added some words of appreciation for Sakir Pasha.”

“Russian Consul, M. Maximov said: It is not my responsibility to contradict these stories. What I can tell you about ªakir Pasha is that it is true that he is very brave and kindhearted. I have known him for long years. He is my friend. The British Consul, Mr. Graves said I was not there. I did not talk to him concerning this subject. However the Governor said that this is not true. This is sufficient for me because I believe what Rauf Pasha says without any hesitation.”

“I asked Mr. Graves, “Do you suppose that any massacre would occur, if the Armenian rebels did not encourage the Armenian for the rebellion.” He replied, “certainly not. Not a single would have been killed.”

Nevertheless, this information never published in the western press. As it is stated in these words:

“At the end of October (1922), the representative of the Near East Relief Organisation, late Miss Annie T. Allen and Miss Florence Billings sent a report to the headquarters of the organisation in Istanbul. The report, consisted of the condition of the Turkish villages, which the Greeks set on fire while they were retreating. The organisation never published the report, as Lloyd George did not publish the Bristol Report concerning the catastrophe in Izmir caused by the Greeks.”

Truly, Lloyd George did not publish the Bristol Report.

“During the massacres in 1905, many photographs were taken in Russia. These photographs belonged to a group of corpses, surrounded by a crowd. One of these photographs was published in “Le Mirroir” on 14 June 1915 under the headline of "the murders in Poland by the German gangs". Similar pictures, were published in many other newspapers.” (Page 136)

The second writer is Allen Lane and the name of the book is “Evdeki Atesi Yanik Tutun” (Keep the Firs at Home on). The first page of the book gives, the speech given by the US. President Coolidge on the occasion of Journalists Association. The President says the following: “The propaganda tries to reflect some parts of the incidents; block the relations between one and another and come to conclusions, which are impossible to attain if the series of the incidents are examined thoroughly.”

Some of the passages from the book are as follows:

“The objective of the propaganda is to simplify. It creates a way of thinking, which will vindicate the fights, with the continuous reiterations for a long time. It does this through the methods which the organisations responsible for propaganda and the news agencies will accept. The propagandist will create simple and believable descriptions and fiction because these will fit the beliefs which the people are actually invited to believe. As Gobel said in the successive war, “propaganda is to submit evidences, which people cannot find and verify by themselves, to naive people the issues, they think over and have wished for. (Page 3)

“In the time of war, this is, above all, to create the expected outlook and behaviour of the enemy in accordance with the prejudices about their behaviour. This necessitates concealing of the news that will make the enemy look and the submission of the news in a way, that will always arouse hatred for the enemy.”(Page 3)

“The brutal stories appear in every war. The goal is to create an image which is inspired by war and which will arouse fear on it.”(Page 3)

“War is presented to the people by means of universal and simple ideals on which nobody can oppose and which are known by everybody. These ideals are the symbols of the national virtues such as freedom, justice, democracy, and Christianity.” (Page 4)

“Characteristic brutal stories have come from the correspondents, who are far from the operation area. Unchangeably, these are told by some of the refugees whose identities were concealed. More than after these stories give second-hand information” (Page 84).

The subject of propaganda can be summarised by the words of C.F. Dixon Johnson:

“The emergence of the stories concerning the massacre of the masses is disadvantageous for Turkey at the final vindication. We do not hesitate to reiterate that this is the evident objective of the direction of the British Government’s policy. The nation, with which we have close alliance ties and which is co-religionist of millions of our citizens, is accused of committing horrible crimes against humanity by relying on the evidences, which are exaggerated considerably and shamelessly. There is no need to apologise for trying to accuse it honourably.”