While the tragic fate of Armenians in the World War I era has received a substantial amount of attention in news and documentary programming, the story of the Armenian Revolt -- the struggle against the Ottoman Empire to create a new Armenian nation -- has been almost completely overlooked. The Armenian Revolt: 1894-1920, tells the story of the Armenian revolutionary movement, and how it waged a civil war against the Ottoman Empire for 26 years. This program documents the historical facts of the Armenian Revolt, based on archival sources and commentary by Turkish, European and U.S. experts (including one Armenian scholar). The documentary will reveal how the Great Powers -- France, Britain and Russia -- bear a large historical responsibility in generating strife between Armenians and Muslims. These powers supplied money, arms and encouragement to the Armenian rebels in their struggle against the Ottoman Empire. However, the Great Powers "sold out" the Armenian nationalists at the Paris Peace Conference, and withdrew their support for a new Armenian homeland. This is compelling viewing on a subject that is still not resolved today. This documentary will shed light to reveal a balanced story in the challenge to find out the truth about this buried part of western history.
Prof Secil Karal Akgun, Aram Arkun, David Fromkin, Prof Justin McCarthy, Prof William Ochsenwald, Stanford Shaw, Prof Norman Stone
Apparently, every story has two sides
The documentary was very helpful for me to have a better idea on this popular issue. I have heard stories from Armenians and now it is good to hear the story of Turks. Recently, I was starting to suspect about the genocide due to inconsistent stories I was hearing from Armenians themselves and this documentary gave me a different perspective.
I share the pain of Armenians and it is really sad to hear about the number of people dead on those years. But this story and civil war seems more realistic. Otherwise why Turks would suddenly start killing Armenians out of nothing, especially when their nation was in such a bad shape and fighting many wars at a time. This story just makes more sense to me.
I often wonder how some members of the Armenian Diaspora sleep at night, knowing that their political game is based on deceit. - IMDb user comment
. .
Finally...historical context for a highly politicized subject
Most of us know nothing about the Armenian Revolt, which is why it is so easy for the Armenian Diaspora to convince people that their ancestors were the victims of genocide. While they are very effective in their advocacy, their approach is also unethical because they use "selective truth" to "prove" their point. They also know that most of us will jump on the bandwagon and sympathize with their claims. As for others who beg to differ, the Armenian Diaspora in the US, Australia and Europe denounce them as "genocide deniers."
How sad that such organizations such as the Armenian National Committee and other radicals must unjustly accuse an entire nation in order to preserve their fragile cultural identity. After all, what does it mean to be an Armenian, other than descended from victims of "genocide"? In the meantime, Armenians steer clear of the Armenian Revolt; many of them are ignorant on the subject and do not realize that the revolutionary Dashnak and Hinchak parties began to attack and kill innocent Muslims many years before Armenians were deported in 1915.
Our Congressmen have better things to do than pass resolutions about emotional, politicized claims that have never been substantiated by the historical record. But they don't have enough spine to stand up to their Armenian constituents and say, "Enough is enough. We sympathize with you, but this is a matter between Turkey and Armenia. Let them settle it."
This program on the Armenian Revolt is apparently the only one of its kind. Small wonder! It seriously undermines the genocide claim, and should be required viewing for any politician, teacher or journalist who has been co-opted by the Armenian Diaspora's arguments.
Yes, Armenians were tortured and massacred. But so were Muslims. If we are willing to call what happened to the Armenians a genocide, then what do we call what happened to the Muslims? - IMDb user comment
Comments
Robert
June 28, 2008
For some "unknown" reason, quite hard to find !!!
but I Managed to get the DVD 2 years ago…The story behind the making of this documentary is that Marty Callaghan was doing research for the documentary "Blood and Oil" - (The middle east in WWI) which focuses mainly on how the European countries were trying to dismember the Ottoman Empire. While researching in various countries’ archives, Mr. Callaghan found plenty of documents related to the involvement of the Armenians during the WWI period.http://www.civilwarweekly.com/products/consumer/bloodandoil/
http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Oil-Middle-East-World/dp/B000HEWH3CIt is worth getting the Blood & Oil documentary in order to better understand what was going on at that time.
2
nevber
June 28, 2008
Michael, thanks for this video. Very informative….
3
nevber
June 29, 2008
What happened here? Commentators like "John" have nothing to say? INTERESTING….
4
John
June 29, 2008
Here I am nevber, but I’m afraid I don’t have anything positive to say about this spectacle, which is pure propaganda, so logically and expectedly endorsed by Michal van der Galien.
To be honest with you I stopped watching this charade when a certain Mr. Asken claimed that ALL these attacks started by the Armenians, which is simply put, wrong. This kind of propaganda cannot stand any serious scrutiny by historians who know something about the Ottoman history.
It is so wonderful if not amusing to hear again, this massive transformation from "loyal Millet" to terrorists en masse, and why in the world the West took such an interest for the "wellbeing" of the Armenians if everything was fine and dandy as claimed by the honorable contributors of these production. The narrator somehow skips over those "minor" details.
Listen guys, there is nothing new in this video, it is part of the ongoing propaganda onslaught that the Turkish government is spending millions and millions of wasted dollars. But if it makes you feel good, go ahead it’s your money. Some people are fond of fiction, especially the fiction that the Ottoman Turk has done absolutely NOTHING wrong, and it is all the fault of the Armenian "al qaida" as the pitiful Halacoglu claims. Nothing short of comparison with, who else, but "al qaida" to try to make his propaganda stick!
This is a laughable product that sadly Turks are seen patting themselves on their shoulders., and for what? to convince whom? Why not instead invest on a real product that would actually accomplish something, why not talk about Armenian "revolts" AS WELL AS the Turkish oppression and persecution of the Armenians peasantry in Anatolia? Why not highlight the cruel usage of Kurdish tribes that were unleashed against the Armenians, tribes that were armed and bribed by the Sultan to silence the Armenians demands of NOT independence but REFORMS, have you heard about that other "minor" detail? Or are you so motivated by your own prejudices and yes, hatred, that you simply cannot bring yourselves to read and understand your own history?
But…in the mean time….
Get the popcorn ready, and raise your feet, the show continues.
5
Lucrèce
June 29, 2008
In complement to this documentary:
1) An article by Justin McCarthy:
www.eraren.org/index.php?Lisan=en&Page=DergiIcerik&IcerikNo=134
2) An article by Edward J. Erickson:
armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2008/04/2438-armenians-and-ottoman-military.html
6
Lucrèce
June 29, 2008
Listen guys, there is nothing new in this video, it is part of the ongoing propaganda onslaught that the Turkish government is spending millions and millions of wasted dollars. But if it makes you feel good, go ahead it’s your money.
Allegation without proof.
Why not highlight the cruel usage of Kurdish tribes that were unleashed against the Armenians, tribes that were armed and bribed by the Sultan to silence the Armenians demands
Not the Armenian demands, but the Armenian REVOLTS, uprisings, atrocities…
The violence of the Kurdish tribes was disproportionate and unjustifiable, but it was the vendetta, a tradition in Eastern Anatolia (as in Southern Italia): "you killed hundred members of my tribe, I kill five hundred members of your tribe". Provide additional arms to Kurdish tribes was not at all a good idea, but the provocation by the Hunchakists and the Dashnak is supported by valid evidence.
"One of the revolutionaries told Dr. Hamlin, the founder of Robert College, that the Hentchak bands would ‘watch their opportunity to kill Turks and Kurds, set fire to their villages, and then make their escape into the mountains. The enraged Moslems will then rise, and fall upon the defenceless Armenians and slaughter them with such barbarity that Russia will intervene in the name of humanity and Christian civilization.’ When the horrified missionary denounced the scheme as atrocious and infernal beyond anything ever known, he received this reply: ‘It appears so to you, no doubt; but we Armenians have determined to be free. Europe listened to the Bulgarian horrors and made Bulgaria free. She will listen to our cry when it goes up in the shrieks and blood of millions of women and children…. We are desperate. We shall do it’."
William L. Langer, The Diplomacy of Imperialism, New York, Knopf, 1960, p. 157-158.
Why could you invent against William L. Langer, one of the most respected American historians of the XXth century? Or against the strongly pro-Armenian Dr. Hamlin?
of NOT independence but REFORMS
Undoubtedly, there were, until 1912, notable Armenians who do not demanded independence, but the revolutionary committees wanted it.
"The immediate objective of the party was the political and national independence of Turkish Armenia. The conditions of the Armenians in Asiatic Turkey were described and the need to concentrate Hunchak activities in this area was explained. […]
The most opportune time to institute the general rebellion for carrying out the immediate objective was when Turkey was engaged in a war."
Louise Nalbandian, The Armenian Revolutionary Movement, Berkeley/Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1963, partially avaible online, in the Web site… of Hunchakian party: www.hunchak.org.au/aboutus/historical_nalbandian.html
7
Lucrèce
June 29, 2008
The testimony of General Mayewski, former Russian consul in Van and Erzurum during the 1890’s (reports published in 1916, under the title The Massacres in Armenia):
"In the Balkans people who have become famous with their self-sacrifice, courage and with the way they work, can be found. However, can such a person be found amongst the Armenians? No. Why?Because they have become used to living on the backs of the poor villagers and they are wild people playing the executioner role. Can this people be called saviors? No. because the guns in their hands were only used towards the weak people.And the unarmed Armenian villagers were forced to help the armed rebels at the cost of their blood.The Armenians came together in a known place in London to discuss this matter. Here, they decided that they needed to firstly stir up troubles, shed blood and attract the attention of the world.The rebellious committee was divided to three organizations: Dashnak, Hinchak and Armenia [=Armenakan, today Ramkavar/ADL].These organizations expanded everywhere in order to incite the villagers.They started with the teachers and with them they inoculated the young with the feelings of hatred and enmity towards Muslims. Thus, in a short time, like 3-4 years, many unconscious youngsters dedicated themselves to death."
English version of this publication:
louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Mayewsky.pdf
8
Lucrèce
June 29, 2008
Recollections of Muslims survivors:
www.tbmm.gov.tr/yayinlar/yayin1/7-Konukcu(143-154).pdf
www.karabakh-doc.azerall.info/ru/armyanstvo/arm12eng.htm#z2-1
9
nevber
June 29, 2008
John, my misguided friend….. I wish you would stop saying "Turkish Propaganda". If Turks are spending millions, Armenians are spending billions! And let us not forget the US/EU. They are also spending fair amount of money on this issue. So EVERY ONE is spending money…. Who ever is more convincing and louder will effect the media, infiltrate the conciseness of the masses and tell THEIR OWN side of the story. The reason you couldn’t finish the video was, now Armenian Diaspora is not the ONLY voice…. Your community is not the only side telling the story… WE ARE TOO… whether you like it or not… Yeah, and the popcorn was great bonus!!! See you on the next show….
10
Kemal
June 29, 2008
"why in the world the West took such an interest for the "wellbeing" of the Armenians if everything was fine and dandy"
They weren’t interested in the wellbeing of Armenians. They were interested in toppling the Ottoman Empire through the use of minority group rebellions, which were so effective in the Balkans.
Throughout the 19th Century the British were focused on protecting their interest in India, which they had colonized, and maintaining trade routes to India. The British feared that if Russia and the Ottoman Empire ever forged an alliance, that would create an axis of power that Europe could not counter effectively.
In an effort to weaken the Ottoman Empire and to ensure an alliance between the Ottomans and Russia would never be formed, the British began fomenting rebellion among Armenians, many of whom were also Russian subjects, thus ensuring that Russian interest in hostilities between the Ottoman regime and its ethnic Armenian minority would force Russia to take sides with its "Christian brethren", as opposed to the Ottomans. The British began this work in the mid-1800s.
The British and France incited and supported Ottoman Armenian violence against their state and their Muslim Ottoman neighbors throughout the 19th Century. And, as we all know, it came to a head during WWI when Russia, France and England armed, trained and worked in concert with Armenian militias to fight against and bring down the Ottoman regime.
And, it worked. The only problem is that Russia, to promote its own interests, planted a geogrpahic Armenia within its own territories by ethnically cleansing a segment of its own territory of all Muslims to fulfill its promise to Armenian revolutionary leaders to form a country for Armenians.
Armenians, however, wanted their country to stretch over vast lands encompassing the eastern third of Anatolia. Unfortunately for Armenian leaders, France, Britain and Russia didn’t have the stomache for the ethnic cleansing that would have required and dropped the "Armenian question" altogether– excluding them from the Paris Peace Conference and the discussions leading to the Lausanne Treaty.
No, Europe and Russia were definitely not interested in the "wellbeing" of Armenians. They were only interested in maintaining and increasing their own power over lands that were vital to the stability of their own economies and expansionist aims, so they used Armenians for their own benefit. And, when they no longer needed the Armenians to cause problems in Anatolia, they dropped them like a sack of potatos.
Rather than being rightfully angry with those that made promises and then didn’t deliver (i.e., France, Britain and Russia), Armenians focus the anger resulting from their frustrated political aims at Turks who rightfully and legally defended themselves and their lands.
19th Century Armenian leaders miscalculated and overestimated the support they would receive from the west and from Russia, as they still do today.
