One night in 1914 in Edirne, Turkey, there was a knock at the door. It was midnight. The Turkish police burst through the doors of my grandfather’s home and shot and killed his older brother. Upon learning a different brother was in the Turkish army, the police spared the lives of the rest of the family and left the house, but not before stealing all the money they found and forcing my grandfather and his mother on a train into the desert. Eating orange peels tossed out the windows of the train when it stopped, my grandfather survived the Armenian genocide.
For almost a full century, Turkey has vehemently denied that genocide ever occurred in the killing of more than a million Armenians. Turkey’s denial comes in large part from the economic reparations it would be required to make to survivors as stipulated under international law. Meanwhile, Armenia has been demanding that Turkey recognize the genocide, apologize for it and provide restitution.
Talk in Armenia today swarms around the possibility of opening a border with Turkey in what would be a new era of Turkish-Armenian relations. Opening this crucial border that Turkey has kept closed for the last 16 years would mean trade, energy and transportation opportunities for both countries. A deal of limitless benefits, it would have particular significance for Armenia, a small, Christian country in the Middle East characterized by endless government and military corruption, and dependent for two-thirds of its economy on Armenians abroad. Turkey will only agree to the deal if talks of an Armenian genocide are silenced once and for all.
Armenia has always struggled between outrage at Turkey’s denial and desperate economic dependence along with shared cultural traditions with its neighbor. Armenia is now at a crossroads, caught between economic desperation and moral justice.
In Turkey, the “G” word has long been hushed. The government has used Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, which makes it illegal to “insult the Turkish nation,” to prosecute more than 60 people, some for simply mentioning the existence of an Armenian genocide. When speech is restricted and has threatening consequences, can Turks ever come to a consensus and reconciliation about what their ancestors did to Armenians?
I went to Turkey on a study abroad trip last winter session, after vowing to my parents I would tell no one I am Armenian. In Istanbul, I met a Turkish student, Mehmet. During the first week, Mehmet and his friends took students on our trip to Araf, a nightclub that means “purgatory” in Turkish. When Mehmet mentioned some Greek friends of his, I told him I thought Turks and Greeks didn’t get along. He chuckled and said the younger generations have no problems with each other. When I asked if it’s the same way with young Turks and Armenians, the chuckle I expected never came. His boyish face turned to stone. He said he is not friends with Armenians because they are liars.
In 1914, Mehmet said, Armenians were trying to take Ottoman land and naturally, the Ottoman army, called the Young Turks Army, fought back in self-defense. Armenians attacked and killed the soldiers and some Armenians had died in the mess. He said Armenians today lie and say Turkey perpetrated genocide against them. I suddenly realized the reason his voice was raised was no longer so that I could hear him over the noise of the band. I avoided his cold eyes so he wouldn’t see the hurt in mine.
For almost the entire month of the study abroad trip I had kept my secret, telling no one of my true heritage. During the last week, I had dinner with another Turkish student, Veysi, who was one of Mehmet’s close friends. Sitting in close proximity at a small table in the back of the restaurant, Veysi lowered his voice and told me he thinks what happened in 1914 was definitely genocide. In almost a whisper, he said that a year earlier when a prominent Armenian journalist was killed for writing about the genocide, he marched in a large protest on a main street in Istanbul. With thousands, he had chanted, “Today, we are Armenians.”
Many professors and students I met in Turkey told us, in careful language, they do not share their government’s stance on what happened almost a century ago. While they dispute their dark history, the two countries cannot escape the intertwining of their cultures. The genocide has virtually paralyzed Turkish-Armenian relations to date, but the opening of this border could mean miraculous recovery.
Indeed, genocide has legal ramifications, but it seems a unique deal is in order. Armenians should absolutely demand Turkey admit to genocide in the slaughter of over a million of their ancestors, but should relinquish restitution demands. An open border with Turkey could pave the way for vast economic prospects for Armenia’s future, which Armenians should consider restitution in another form.
Let us not stand on ceremony and be our own worst enemy, hanging our hats on a restitution unlikely to materialize. Armenia must insist on hearing the word “genocide,” but release its stubborn hold on the demand for formal restitution. Through the open-border deal, economic benefits likely will flow in restitution’s place. Armenia can feel morally victorious and economically pragmatic.
Without a restitution requirement, Turkey is more likely to admit to genocide. Turkey must deliver its guilty plea, in honor of the Armenians deported to concentration camps to be slaughtered, and in honor of survivors and their families. Turkey must admit to genocide and allow Armenian hearts to heal and the future of both countries to prosper.
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our feed
Contact us through email
4 comments
The relocation orders only enforced their beliefs in the rumors, even though it was a standard procedure by all European nations at the time to put down rebellions quickly during war-time.
Hence, today we ask who should apologize? The Turks who were fighting for their survival in World War I and whose government tried their best to keep a multi-ethnic society together and stop an Armenian rebellion at the same time? The Armenians who voluntarily rebelled and the Armenians who were forced to rebel by the rebels (they killed their own people and church leaders who opposed rebellion)? What about the Allied powers whose diplomats and leaders encouraged Armenian rebellions while at the same time demanding more rights for Armenians from the Ottoman leaders?
The reality was this was a war. Massacres were common (on all sides). Disease was common. Food shortages rampant. Disease abundant. Survival of the fittest was the only thing that mattered during these times, if you were alone you were robbed or killed for the few pieces of clothes on your back. It was a troubling tragic time, and it all could have been avoided if someone hadn't killed the Archduke.
The fact is, no one needs to apologize, they simply need to move on. Sure you can blame the British for encouraging Arab and Armenian rebellions, you can blame the Russians for killing the Jews, you can blame the Armenians for killing the Turks, and you can blame the Turks for killing the Armenians, you can blame the Austrians for starting wars, you can blame the Serbs for assassinating Austrians.
In none of the extensive studies relying on the historical archives, any authentic documentation indicating intent to destroy the Armenians has been unearthed. Ottoman archives in Turkey are open for any historian for research. By contrast, Armenian archives still are not. Furthermore, the Turkish Government has formally called for a joint commission of Turkish, Armenian and independent researchers to go through the Ottoman, Armenian, and third country archives to conduct an independent research for the tragic events of 1914-1916. The Europeans and Americans understood this blame game, hence why they let it go and stopped thinking about it.
Though when they did seek revenge and punishment, the Versailles Treaty, well that just created World War II! Hence, before you start World War III, stop blaming each other for the past and move on. Before you cry out "genocide", understand that the Holocaust was a very unique case and that no two wars are the same and genocide is a blanket term that can be applied to any war where innocent people died (which is every war)!