|
REALITIES BEHIND THE RELOCATION
In a telegram sent from Nizip on 21 October 1915/3 November 1915, Þükrü Bey reported that the transfer was proceeding smoothly.[127]
Of the people included in resettlement but shown as remaining behind in the above list, those left in Adana were subsequently moved to areas of resettlement.[128] The number of the Armenians resettled in the south, thus, totaled 438,758 while those reaching the resettlement area numbered 382,148. So, there is a difference of 56,610 between those who set out and those who made it to their new homes.
This difference stems from the following events according to documents: 500 people were killed between Erzurum and Erzincan, 2,000 more were killed at Meskene between Urfa and Aleppo , and a further 2,000 were killed by bandits and Arab tribes near Mardin. Although no firm figures are available, it is estimated that a similar number, that is, about 5,000 or a little more, were killed in the Dersim area by bandits attacking groups of transiting deportees.[129] In the light of these data, it is estimated that about 9-10,000 Armenians were killed during their deportation. It is also understood from the documents that some others starved to death on the road.[130] Apart from these, another 25-30,000 deported are believed to have succumbed to such diseases as typhoid or dysentery,[131] raising the number of casualties to some 50,000. As for the rest, some are believed to be those put on the road but later settled at the city they reached when the deportation was suspended. For instance, on 26 April 1916 , instructions were cabled to the province of Konya that the Armenians on the roads within the provincial borders should not be sent on, but settled within the province.[132] Meanwhile, it is believed that some Armenians marked for deportation had been smuggled out of the country and taken to Russia , Western Europe and the United States . In the documents there are records that about 50,000 of the Armenians under arms had defected to the Russian Army and 50,000 others were trained in the U.S. Army for the past three or four years to fight the Turks. A letter sent by an Armenian living in the United States to Murad Muradyan, a lawyer in Mamuretülaziz, contains such information.[133] The letter explicitly states that some Armenians had been spirited into Russia and the United States , and about 50,000 American-trained soldiers were about to leave for the Caucasus . All these documents make clear that large numbers of Ottoman Armenians were dispersed to many countries, headed by the United States and Russia , before and during the war. For instance, in a letter he sent to General Security Directorate on 19 January 1915 , Artin Hotomyan, an Armenian on a trading visit to the United States , wrote that thousands of Armenians were being smuggled into America , and that they were living in hunger and misery.[134] The same letter informed the officials that an Ãstanbul-based network had been smuggling the Armenians in the Ottoman state into the United States in return for material gain. One member of the gang was identified as Aramoyis from Kayseri , the son of Karabet, a shoemaker. This man was hiding the clothes of deserting Armenian soldiers, and were helping them escape to America or other countries in return for five or ten lira, the informer wrote. At the end, Hotomyan wrote that the reason he supplied this information was not connected with any feeling of grudge or personal hatred, and asked it to be accepted as a humanitarian duty and a service to the country.
Such information show that there is no great discrepancy between the number of Armenians deported from Asian and European provinces of the domain, and the number of those who reached their destinations, and that there had been no deliberate and systematic murders on the road as alleged. Meanwhile, since the number of deported Armenians were about half a million, the total Armenian population of the Ottoman state appears to be somewhere between 600,000 and 800,000, including Catholic and Protestant Armenians, the Armenian community of Istanbul that was likewise exempted from deportation, and finally the Armenians living in provinces partly or fully occupied by the Russian Army, like Erzurum, Van and Kars. In fact, in a 1918 report he sent to Monsieur Gout, the representative of the French Foreign Ministry, Armenian Delegation Chief Boghos Nubar Paþa gave the breakdown of Armenians dispersed to various areas after the deportation as follows:
|
Caucasus
|
250,000
|
|
Iran
|
40,000
|
|
Syria-Pales tine
|
80,000
|
|
Mosul-Baghdad
|
20,000
|
The Armenian representative argued that the number of the deportees was not confined to this total of 390,000, but actually ran into 600-700,000 that he said, excluded the exiles dispersed to here and there in the deserts.[135] But it is clear from the figures supplied by Boghos Nubar Paþa, that 290,000 were those who left Ottoman territory without being exiled -since none were sent to Caucasia or Iran. So, if one subtracts 290,000 from the "600-700,000" deportee number given by the Armenian representative, then one arrives at the 400,000-plus total we have given, using authentic data taken from the government or police archives of the time. This also proves that the bulk of the deportees had safely reached their destinations, leaving no support for the claims of genocide. Indeed, following a meeting with Zenop Bezjian, the representative of Protestant Armenians, U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, has noted in his diary, his deep surprise over Bezjian´s remarks. In the following passage, Morgenthau describes his conversation with the Armenian dignitary:
"Zenop Bezjian, Vekil (Representative) of Armenian Protestants, called. Schmavonian introduced him; he was his schoolmate. He told me a great deal about conditions (in the interior). I was surprised to hear him report that Armenians at Zor were fairly well satisfied; that they have already settled down to business and are earning their livings; those were the first ones that were sent away and seem to have gotten there without being massacred. He gave me a list where the various camps are and he thinks that over one half million have been displaced. He was most solicitous that they should be helped before winter sets in".[136]
The passage above is illustrative in that it shows how the ambassador was taken aback on learning the contentment of the Armenians from the mouth of another Armenian.
As explained above, the decision on deportation had been taken after the Armenians, seeing the time as ripe for breathing life to the dream of an independent Armenia , stabbed their state in the back when it was occupied with the war. The documents reveal how the Russians deceived and instigated the Armenians.[137] Taken in by the Russian promises that the territories captured in war would be given to them and their independence would be recognized, Armenians have set up several revolutionary associations.[138] A verse written by the son of an Armenian named Murad shows the intentions of the Armenians without any room for doubt.[139] Having started their acts of terrorism before the deportation, they were seen to keep them up during the transit of deportees as well. The fact that they have collaborated with the enemy and engaged in massacres against the Muslim population, not only at the border areas, but also deep inside were borne out by Turkish as well as Russian documents.[140] There are documents showing that the Armenian atrocities continued even after the war. One example what were in store for the Muslims was displayed in 1920, when a 1200-strong unit entered Nakhechevan under the command of an Armenian named Hanov.[141] It is also clear from the cables dated 18 and 22 February 1336/3 and 7 March 1921 sent by Mümtaz Bey, the vice-governor of the Mamuretülaziz province, the Armenians who came under French protection were dreaming of an independent Armenia stretching from the Amanos Mountains to Adana .[142]
In the end, the Ottoman Government decided on publishing the documents of ´Armenian atrocities´ in a book, and sent instructions to all provinces for the collection and dispatch of such documents describing the Armenian acts of cruelty and the pictures of captured arms and bandits.[143] In the light of these documents, The Objectives and Revolutionary Activities of Armenian Committees Before and After the Proclamation of Constitutional Monarchy was published.[144]
Armenians after Resettlement
During its course, there were times when the deportation was halted due to congestion or climatic reasons. With instructions sent to the provinces after 12 November 1331/25 November 1915, the officials were informed that deportation was provisionally stopped because of winter.[145] On 21 February 1916 , all provinces were ordered to stop sending off deportees. But it was clarified that the order did not cover those engaged in anti-government activities, who would be immediately rounded up and sent to the sanjaq of Zor.[146] But just twenty days later, the Ottoman Government issued another general order on 2 March 1332/15 March 1916, announced that relocation was terminated "due to administrative and military reasons", and the provinces were told not to send away Armenians on any account.[147]
Meanwhile, because the Armenian population was largely sent to Syria and nearby provinces, the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul was abolished and moved to Jerusalem on 28 July 1332/10 August 1916. In a parallel move, Sis and Akdamar chapters were combined and likewise transferred to Jerusalem .[148] Sahak Efendi, the former Catholicos of Sis, was appointed as the head of the new patriarchate.[149]
The Decree for Return
After the end of World War I, the Ottoman Government issued a decree, announcing that the deported Armenians were free to return. In a letter to the Prime Minister´s Office dated 22 December 1334/4 January 1919, Interior Minister Mustafa Paþa informed that the necessary instructions were sent and preparations were made to arrange the transport of Armenian deportees who wished to return to their original places.[150] According to the government decree for return dated 18 December 1334/31 December 1918, (a) only those who wished to return would be sent, and no others would be touched; (b) necessary measures would be taken to ensure that those repatriated would not suffer on the roads and on their return would find shelter and livelihood; to prevent any surprises, returning deportees would be sent only after the officials of the place of return were contacted and necessary measures were completed; (c) those returning under these terms would be given back their homes and land; (d) any refugees settled in the homes of returning deportees would be evicted; (e) not to leave anyone without shelter, several families would be provisionally accommodated together if necessary; (f) buildings like churches or schools and their revenue-bringing assets would be returned to the community; (g) if so wished, the orphaned children would be given to foster parents or the community to be looked after; (h) those who had converted would be able to return to their former religion if they wished; (i) of the women converts, those married to Muslim men would be free to take up their former religion; if they return to their original faith, the wedlock with their husbands would automatically dissolve; matters pertaining to those who do not want to return to their original faith or part with their husbands would be settled by courts; (j) untouched Armenian property would be returned to their owners, while the return of the property turned over to the Treasury would be subject to the approval of the local estate officials; detailed guidelines would be published for such transactions; (k) the real estate sold to (Muslim) refugees would be handed back to the returnees; article 4 will be strictly implemented in this respect; (1) if the refugees had done repairs or extensions to the houses and shops in their possession to be returned to their former owners, officials would see to it that rights of both sides would be safeguarded; (m) the cost of transport and food for the needy returnees would be met from the War Ministry funds; (n) the Government would be told how many people were sent back, and with immediate effect would be sent regular reports on the 15th and the end of each month, showing the number and destinations of returnees sent back; (o) the Armenians who left the Ottoman country by themselves would not be allowed to return until further notice.
The articles of the above decree also applied to the returning Greek refugees.
Conclusions
One can conclude that the deportation of the Armenians who betrayed the Ottoman armies on the Caucasus front in World War I and assisted the Russian occupation of the Ottoman provinces of Van, Kars and Erzurum should be seen as legitimate self-defence to which every nation is entitled. The armed terrorism carried out by secret societies and armed bands of independence-seeking Armenians instigated by great powers such as Russia , Britain , France and Germany , bent on partitioning the Ottoman state, has resulted in the massacre of large numbers of defenceless Turks. The massacres carried out in the Kars , Van, Ãzmit, Erzurum , Bitlis and other Ottoman provinces assumed dimensions, which caused even the commanders of the Russian occupation forces to revolt.[151] Indeed, documents expose that in Kars and Ardahan alone, about 30,000 Muslims were murdered by the Armenians and Russians,[152] with the number going up to several hundred thousand when calculated for all Ottoman provinces.
As a precaution, the Ottoman state had to recourse to forced resettlement, starting with Armenians in the areas closest to the theatre of war. When the Armenian gangs kept up their atrocities and continued to supply information to the foreigners detrimental to the security interests of the country, the scope of the deportations was expanded to include all other Armenians, except the populations of Ãzmir and Ãstanbul, as well as the Protestants, Catholics, orphans, solitary women and the sick. The Armenians known to be loyal to the state were also excluded.
The deportation, of course, was painful. Displacing thousands of people suddenly and resettling them is not an easy task. Yet, advance planning of the routes and staging areas, wide use of railway stations as dispatch centers, the use of trains to transport the bulk of deportees, distribution of rations by the state, assignment of medical personnel and gendarmes to the departing parties, have turned the deportation into one of the most orderly population movement of the past century. Of course, during the deportation, moving groups occasionally came under attack from vengeful people and about 9-10,000 Armenians were massacred.
Besides, there had been deaths due to contagious diseases, which is normal in such massive population movements as seen during the immigration of European Turks to Anatolia . No doubt, none of these were things desired by those who gave the order for deportation. Indeed, the government continuously took measures against corruption, and those seen to have engaged in immoral behaviour were punished. With the end of the war, the decree permitting the return of deportees was issued.[153] Those who converted to avoid deportation were allowed to return to their original faith. Orphaned Armenian children kept by Muslim families were turned over to a commission set up by the Armenians;[154] the returnees received state rations for a while,[155] committees were set up to investigate complaints and identify those who have mistreated the Armenians,[156] their property were returned to those who came back,[157] travel expenses of the returnees were met,[158] they were exempted from certain taxes,[159] their belongings kept safe at public offices were returned,[160] and commissions were set up to look into matters concerning the return of property.
All these show, once again, that the Ottoman Government had no intention to subject the Armenians to genocide, that it resorted to deportation as a precaution for its security and implemented it only during the war, and that it allowed the Armenians to return after its end. In fact, large numbers of Armenians accompanied Russian, British and French forces that occupied Turkey at the end of the war, and again large numbers of Armenians left Turkey after the occupation forces withdrew. The decisions and measures mentioned above are not the ones that a state aiming at genocide would normally take. Secret documents, kept in the archives of the Cipher Office and Directorate of General Security attached to the Interior Ministry, do not contain even a single article that might be regarded as suggesting an intention of massacre or genocide. Documents show that deportation was closely monitored and photographed by many foreign observers and diplomats, particularly the U.S. consuls. Strangely, however, in Europe and in the United States , deportation has been presented to the public as genocide against the Armenians, with the claim largely based on the reports of the U.S. ambassador in Istanbul and some Western journalists. This hostile attitude may be attributed to the feeling of frustration when the Ottoman Government launched deportation as a means of disrupting the plans for the partition of the country.
Some historians of the countries that accuse Turkey of genocide have been studying the Ottoman archives for years. Researches of foreign scholars have been published in their respective countries and have made important contributions to the understanding of history. The archive documents made available to historians were referred to as first-hand sources in the books they published. That makes it difficult to understand how the Western critics can cast doubt on the authenticity of the documents concerning the Armenians in the Ottoman archives to which over 6,000 foreign scholars have attached great importance. It is surprising and saddening to see that books published by Turkish researchers are undermined with the same political bias that prevailed in 1915. I think it will be futile to propose a comprehensive joint research by American, European and Turkish scholars, extending from the outbreak of the first Armenian rebellions, to the end of the deportation; from the sources of Armenian arms, to the charges of genocide, with unrestricted access to the Ottoman, Russian, German, British, French and American archives, as it will be rejected just like the Ottoman proposal in 1919 for the appointment of a neutral commission to investigate the allegations. How else the blood-baths carried out by the French in Algeria , by the British in India and Africa , by the United States against the so-called "Indian" population, by Germans against the Jews, by Russia also against the Jews and later the Turks can be erased from public memories and guilty consciences?
Source:
The Armenians in the Late Ottoman Period
ABOUT the BOOK
The preparation of this book has been undertaken with the aim of providing a fresh look at Ottoman-Armenian relations in the period of the First World War and its immediate aftermath. It was necessitated by virtue of the fact that to date Western public opinion has been heavily saturated with what can be most generously described as a one-sided Armenian perpetrated view of what the present study shows to have been a complex relationship which can only be fully comprehended in the light of the surviving records compiled by the war-time Ottoman Government. As such, it is intended to introduce the reader to a more balanced and realistic view of Turco-Armenian relations, both in the period of 1915-1923, and in the centuries that preceded it.
It is necessitated by virtue of the fact that today, close to a century after the events in question, Armenian organisations in a variety of nations are actively pressuring the legislatures of their adopted homelands to enact legislation proclaiming the Armenians to have been the victims of a war-time `genocide´ in the Ottoman Empire. This is a view, which the present study shows is unsustainable in the light of objective scholarship.
The Grand National Assembly of Turkey undertook the sponsorship of the publication of this work in an effort to introduce parliamentary colleagues around the world, and others interested in the issue, to a more balanced view of the relations between Turks and Armenians throughout history.
There has been no attempt whatsoever to influence the individual Turkish and foreign scholars who have contributed essays to the book. The views expressed are theirs and theirs alone. Nor do their views always concur with each other as to the details of the events they describe. This establishes the degree of independence, which marks each contribution and illustrates the extent to which a consensus has yet to be reached by the scholarly community at large.
The preparation of this book has been undertaken with the aim of providing a fresh look at Ottoman-Armenian relations in the period of the First World War and its immediate aftermath. It was necessitated by virtue of the fact that to date Western public opinion has been heavily saturated with what can be most generously described as a one-sided Armenian perpetrated view of what the present study shows to have been a complex relationship which can only be fully comprehended in the light of the surviving records compiled by the war-time Ottoman Government. As such, it is intended to introduce the reader to a more balanced and realistic view of Turco-Armenian relations, both in the period of 1915-1923, and in the centuries that preceded it.
It is necessitated by virtue of the fact that today, close to a century after the events in question, Armenian organisations in a variety of nations are actively pressuring the legislatures of their adopted homelands to enact legislation proclaiming the Armenians to have been the victims of a war-time `genocide´ in the Ottoman Empire. This is a view, which the present study shows is unsustainable in the light of objective scholarship.
The Grand National Assembly of Turkey undertook the sponsorship of the publication of this work in an effort to introduce parliamentary colleagues around the world, and others interested in the issue, to a more balanced view of the relations between Turks and Armenians throughout history.
There has been no attempt whatsoever to influence the individual Turkish and foreign scholars who have contributed essays to the book. The views expressed are theirs and theirs alone. Nor do their views always concur with each other as to the details of the events they describe. This establishes the degree of independence, which marks each contribution and illustrates the extent to which a consensus has yet to be reached by the scholarly community at large.
|
