The part that i was refering is related how mass murders or genocides perpetrated. That's why i write "it was not systematic" together with whole society stuff. Of course if some part of society contributes it is still genocide. The issue with genocides, mass murders and mass tortures (the Holocaust, Rwanda Genocide, Bosnian Genocide, Abu Ghraib prison tortures etc.) it happens through systematic processes of constant dehumanization towards a certain group, in the case of genocide it's ethnicity, in others it may differ. After dehumanization, violence comes. Violence does not just harm the groups but further fuels the act, glorifies it. Until whole society completely segregated or the groups is eliminated by the other process circles around itself through this process.
The point is there is no such dehumanization in the case of Armenian Genocide. The whole event is occured out of revolts in the Eastern Part of country which is caused by both Armenian and Turkish gangs. Those gangs fueled the terror in the area together with possible Russian invasion of the area. The government at that time consisted of CUP members(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_of_Union_and_Progress) who gained power through coup d'etat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1913_Ottoman_coup_d'état) which enforced deportation of citizens to other areas in country to prevent further terror and revolts in the area. Main argument of those who states that it is a genocide is that Enver Pasha who has xenophobic sentiments towards minorities and other pashas decided to kill those people using the failure in the Eastern Campaign as a justification and deportations were just a mask to hide the truth. The problem with that is, even we consider CUP members were nationalistic, there was no real evidence to prove that indeed it was the case because simply it was a coup government. Either the documents who has information about events were destroyed or they never existed in the first place. But in the sense that gangs in the area and revolt possibility together with indifference towards local population (since the people who deported in the area were not just Armenians but also Turks) might led them to just move the people without sufficient security and supplies since it was WWI and the situation was not the best for the coup government. Even if you think they were just bunch of fascists or they were indifferent towards population, they were the people that came into power through coup. When the deportations take place they were in government for 3 years at most. And during this process or even before that, there was no propaganda or dehumanization of Armenian people involved since country itself consisted of many different ethnical groups and there were even Armenian people that worked in the government positions. Tanzimat itself referred the rights of minorities years ago, there was no such dehumanization process before and during the events. Unless you assume Turks are just naturally capable of dehumanizing other ethnicities by their nature, which is the ethical leverage that people in the West used for years now.
Whether you think CUP was a fascist group that killed millions of people for the sake of i don't know whatever that is or they were indifferent towards the sufferings of local population, they were the people who came into power through coup and they have nothing to do with Turkey Republic itself nor the people who formed it. The remoteness of the events itself is main cause why we don't really know what happened during those years in the area. If you think being indifferent towards the deaths was enough for the people to be guilty about it, well it was not the best time both democracy and mass media. Today in Turkey only racist bunch have sympathy for Enver, CUP and the coup itself. There was the one thing i did not get for a long time in my life is that, many people in the West assumes that Turkish people have historical tendencies to hate other ethnicities once lived through the Ottoman Empire. Even during the Armenian Genocide only groups that involved violence were gangs, other than CUP if you consider them as fascists. Turkish people neither had power to prevent those events or were aware of what's happening in the area. In fact until 1919, there was not even a group of people that can lead people other than CUP.
Don't get me wrong, a case being not a genocide but a massacre of masses does not make it somewhat better but the ethical leverage towards Turkish people itself is enough reason for both West and Armenian Government to use the case. It does not have to cause a political consequence in the sense that Turkey may pay compensation but whenever some political issue happened to take Turkey as a subject, the case will be stated again and again and again even though Turkish people neither contributed the violence itself or had power to prevent it.
Also there is no solid evidence that states those deportations were indeed happaned to eradicate an ethnical group which is why i still don't consider the event as a genocide until satisfactory evidence is presented, which makes the issue open to debate in my sense.
The post become a long one, i hope i managed to state my arguments without misspellings.
Edit: There was a Sweden example in a post, i did not cover. Turkey is not a succesor to the Ottoman Empire in the sense that it is a continuation of a prior country. In fact it's quite the opposite in the early years of republic. Turkish National Movement in Independence War acted against Ottoman government itself. Only recent government and a minority group in Turkey act like "We should make Great Ottoman wet dream real again!". I don't think you can find many people today in Turkey that feel compassion towards Ottoman government after CUP's coup other than that group.
Last edited:
