"ARMENIANS HAVE THINGS TO HIDE"

Yet another attempt to generate debate in the US Congress on official recognition of the fictitious genocide of Armenians during the Ottoman Empire has failed.  Draft Resolution 252 on the fictitious "Armenian genocide," proposed by House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was not on the agenda of the House's plenary session.

CNN Turk reports that the Turkish Government and the Turkish community in the United States worked closely with the Obama administration and congressmen to thwart this attempt.  As a result, US State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said in a news briefing that the State Department was categorically against the move and had openly informed Congress of its position.

In the mean time, it is obvious that the Armenian diaspora will continue to promote the mythical genocide at official level, at the same time obstructing attempts to study Armenian archives for impartial research by historians.

Professor Kemal Cicek, head of the Armenian studies section of the Historical Society, argues that from a historical and legal point of view, the Armenian position is very weak and this is why they cannot muster the confidence to send the issue to the International Court in The Hague for discussion there.  This is why they address the issue from an angle favourable to them in the political arena.  In his interview with our magazine, Prof. Cicek disclosed interesting details about this case.

- Professor, you have said that there is no evidence or facts to prove an Armenian genocide.  If this is so, why, then, are the Armenians so persistent in demanding that the "genocide" be officially recognized? And what do they hope will happen?

- The Armenians have no proof of genocide.  They only have sources which are based on rumours that so many Armenians were killed or that so many soldiers killed so many ethnic Armenians.  None of these documents is based on real evidence.

Armenians want to present facts concerning deportation as instances of genocide, but the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide has no such provision.

My position is that the Armenians are trying to politicize the issue because they are not confident of their position.  If they are so confident about their archives, why do they obstruct the creation of a joint commission of historians?

Another important factor to which I would draw attention is that Armenians have spread a great deal of false information all over the world, which, unfortunately, is often used in scientific research.

For example, no evidence was found to support rumours that the Ottoman military attacked and killed Armenians on orders from the centre.  On the contrary, there are documents among recently discovered archive materials which prove that soldiers who killed Armenians were sentenced and executed.

Second, Armenians claim that the convoys of deportees were not protected by the state and even had no food supplies.  However, it is evident that these claims are unfounded.  The Ottoman government charted the routes of the convoys and built rest areas along those routes which included hospitals, dining facilities and orphanages.

Foreign humanitarian organizations were allowed to work in those areas.  These and other facts have already been made available to the general public.

- Have you invited Armenian historians to discussions?

- Of course we have.  In Turkey, my colleagues and I continually invite Armenians to study our common history within joint research projects.

The fact that the international community yields to lop-sided, exaggerated and fictitious propaganda about the 1915 events was confirmed as early as 1921 by the US High Commissioner in Turkey, Admiral Mark Bristol.

In 1919, the Ottoman Empire appealed to neutral states to create a commission on the events of this period but, under pressure from the British, countries like Denmark and Spain refused to respond to the appeal.

In other words, the only way to establish the truth is to create a joint commission.

- In which of the world's archives have you conducted research?  Can you tell us please about the results?

- I have studied the Armenia issue in the archives of Britain, Switzerland and, especially, the United States.  I have collected tens of thousands of documents, categorized them, and am now writing a book and an article on the issue.

In the US archives, there are very important documents on the "Armenian genocide" because, during World War I, diplomatic ties with the Triple Alliance member states were severed and only US diplomats, missionaries and representatives of humanitarian missions remained in the country.  In their dispatches, these people supplied the Western public with news on the situation on the front and on the "Armenian problem."

They presented the Armenians as a chosen Christian people and opposed their resettlement, describing the situation in a biased manner.  Intentionally exaggerating and depicting the Armenians as a "deprived people," they sought to increase donations.

In my book, The Forced Migration of Armenians, which was published in 2005, I supply comprehensive information on how lopsided, unfounded and gossip-ridden these reports were.

As is known, many writers claim that these reports are original sources.  However, I have proved that only a small number of these dispatches are based on real facts, and the majority were based on rumour and had nothing to do with the realities of the period.

- Are there foreign archives to which you have not been given access?  In other words, are there any restrictions on using them?  And if these exist, why?

- Indeed, there are such archives.  Despite our requests, we have not been given access to Dashnaktsutyun archives in Boston.  The archives of the Armenian Patriarchate in Jerusalem also remain closed to researchers.

It is also very difficult to get permission to study documents in the Boghos Nubar archive in Paris, and getting copies of documents from that archive is even more difficult. These artificial obstacles prove that Armenians have something to hide.

Personally, I would like to see documents from the bureaus which were created by Dashnak party members in Sofia and Bucharest, from which information was supplied to the Western public during the war.  They are not shown to anyone.  I am certain that all the documents which were eventually presented as diplomatic cables and eyewitness reports were redacted there.

- Have you discovered in foreign sources facts which prove that, on the contrary, Armenians themselves pursued a policy of genocide against Turks?

- My studies focused mainly on US archives, and such evidence is frequently found there.

By and large, Armenian writers take as a basis not the archive materials themselves, but books based on selected archive materials.

For example, they are respectful of the book which was based on reports from the former US ambassador to Istanbul, Henry Morgenthau, Ambassador Morgenthau's Story.  However, the original reports are in the archives, and they are easily accessible.  In fairness, it must be mentioned than an Armenian called Ara Samaryan did publish some of the diplomatic telegrams, but not all of them.  For example, he did not publish the documents sent by the US consul in Aleppo, J. Jackson.  And as for Navy correspondence, only a small number of researchers, including myself, have looked at that.  These documents had never been compared before.  I compare them and see more and more evidence of doctoring of documents on the Armenian issue.

- In the early 20th century, Azerbaijanis were also repeatedly victims of massacres perpetrated by Armenians.  In your studies of archive materials, have you encountered evidence of genocide against Azerbaijanis?

- Important documents are kept in US archives which describe Armenian atrocities in Naxcivan.  Admiral Mark Bristol also produced many reports on the mass killings of Azerbaijanis by Armenians from 1917-1918. These documents say that Armenians killed every living creature in Azerbaijani villages, even chickens.

- In 1992, Azerbaijan again encountered manifestations of Armenian fascism.  Armenians wiped the city of Xocali off the face of the Earth and killed hundreds of its residents.  What has to be done to obtain official international condemnation of the genocide in Xocali?

- The events which were confirmed to have taken place in Xocali fit definitions in the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide.  Azerbaijan may file a suit for a crime, in particular genocide, to its own legal institutions and thereby achieve condemnation of the Armenians in absentia, and then progress the issue to international courts.

Also, a list of the Armenians who perpetrated that crime should be disseminated.  Another important detail is that the ethnic Azerbaijani population of Karabakh has been driven out of their land, and monuments of cultural and material heritage have been destroyed.  These crimes constitute cultural genocide.

Armenia is now doing its best to destroy every trace of an Azerbaijani presence in the occupied territories.  This is a crime against humanity and genocide.  Armenians must open the territory they annexed for an immediate return of refugees.

- The "Armenian genocide" is used as a lever to pressurise Turkey.  Can we say that this serves the interests, not only of Armenians, but also of other states?

- As I have already said, the Armenian issue is politicized. The events of 1915 are no longer in the domain of history; they are a purely political issue. As a result, today's US senators and European parliamentarians, who have no idea about what happened then, vote for motions to recognize this "genocide."

However, this situation stems largely from the policies pursued by those nations with respect to Turkey.  These states will revise their pro-Armenian policies as soon as they realize that they will not secure easy concessions from Ankara in this way, or when Turkey's strategic and economic might becomes more important to them.

- Let us assume that the "Armenian genocide" is recognized as the Armenians wish.  What consequences would this have for Turkey?

- Perhaps the Armenians would achieve a moral success, but they would still not get the compensation they seek.  This is impossible from a legal point of view.