3719) Armenian Revenge Against Turks. Todays Hatred .. Canberra Times, 18 Dec 1980

Armenian Revenge:
Todays Hatred .. Canberra Times, 18 Dec 1980

. . . .

Read Full Post !

3448) 1915 Armenian Genocide In The Turkish Empire & Tendentious Criticism - Sarafian Vs Adalian

Under Review
Armenian National Institute
The 1915 Armenian Genocide
in the Turkish Empire
Washington D.C. 1998 by Ara Sarafian
Reviews Armenian Forum . . .

Icons and Scholarship

Zadig Khanzadian’s map, Rapport sur l’unité géographique de l’Armenié: Atlas historique (Paris, 1920), has become a central icon of the Armenian Genocide. It was the first attempt to map out the losses of the Geno-cide, the principal deportation and transit routes, and locations where mass killings had taken place between 1915 and 1917. It illustrated losses in red circles that var-ied in size according to the populations in question. Given that Khanzadian’s map was printed in 1920, immediately after the cataclysm of 1915, and under very trying circumstances, it is not surprising that many details were left ambiguous, pre-sumably because of a lack of information. 1 Despite its imperfections, the 1920 work was of pioneering significance and remains a milestone in the historiography of the Armenian Genocide.

Some eighty years after the publication of Khanzadian’s work, the Armenian Na-tional Institute (ANI) has also produced a map of the Armenian Genocide. This new map purports to be the “latest research” on the Armenian Genocide, and an ex-ample of the ANI’s commitment to the “promotion of scholarship.” 2 Though the ANI could have drawn on a great deal of new scholarship for such a map, their “latest research” is simply an English ver-sion of Khanzadian’s 1920 work, com-bined with a more recent publication by Raymond Kévorkian, “Axes de déportation . . .

Tendentious Criticism

The Gomidas Institute’s Armenian Forum 2, no. 3, published a lengthy and illustrated review, “Icons and Scholarship,” by Mr. Ara Sarafian, also editor of the journal, re-garding the map of the Armenian Geno-cide issued by the Armenian National Institute (ANI). The review levels mali-cious charges against the Armenian Na-tional Institute and the map is subjected to tendentious criticism, none of which are sustainable.

The review begins with the accusation that ANI engaged in an unscholarly prac-tice in producing a map on the Armenian Genocide because it lacked footnotes.

There is no established practice or require-ment that a map be footnoted and its derivation sketched out in some geo-genealogical chart. There are entire librar-ies of maps without footnotes.

Read Full Post !

3264) How Ara Sarafian Excavates Words & Figures Through His Own Imagination From Ambiguous Notes

Gomidas Institute
© 2011 Ara Sarafian

CONTENTS
Introduction by Ara Sarafian
Map
TALAAT PASHA’S 1917 REPORT
Opening Summary Page: Data and Calculations
WESTERN PROVINCES (MAP)
Constantinople
Edirne vilayet
Chatalja mutasarriflik
Izmit mutasarriflik
Hudavendigar (Bursa) vilayet
Karesi mutasarriflik 28
Kala-i Sultaniye (Chanakkale) mutasarriflik
Eskishehir vilayet
Aydin vilayet
Kutahya mutasarriflik
Afyon Karahisar mutasarriflik
Konia vilayet
Menteshe mutasarriflik
Teke (Antalya) mutasarriflik
CENTRAL PROVINCES (MAP)
Ankara (Angora) vilayet
Bolu mutasarriflik
Kastamonu vilayet 40
Janik (Samsun) mutasarriflik
Nigde mutasarriflik
Kayseri mutasarriflik
Adana vilayet
Ichil mutasarriflik
EASTERN PROVINCES (MAP)
Sivas vilayet
Erzerum vilayet
Bitlis vilayet
Van vilayet
Trebizond vilayet
Mamuretulaziz (Elazig) vilayet
SOUTH EASTERN PROVINCES AND RESETTLEMENT ZONE (MAP)
Marash mutasarriflik
Aleppo (Halep) vilayet
Urfa mutasarriflik
Diyarbekir vilayet
Syria vilayet
Zor mutasarriflik
Mosul vilayet
Beirut vilayet
Jerusalem (Kudus-i Sherif) vilayet
Appendix 1: A Report from the Turkish Military Archives
Appendix 2: Talaat’s “Black Booklet”
Map 1: Destruction of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915-17
Map 2: Surviving Armenian Deportees in the Ottoman Empire, 1917

Read Full Post !

2977) Adana Incidents Distorted by Sarafian at a California College

Sarafian Speaks On Massacre

By Michael Hamlin Jr. | October 14, 2009, Brianna Campbell / The Collegian -

Ara Sarafian, an archival historian who specializes in late Ottoman history, presented information to California State University, Fresno students Monday night about the Adana massacre of Armenian’s in the Ottoman Empire. . .

The year 2009 marks the 100 year anniversary of the state led massacre that killed at least 20,000 Armenians in 1909. The massacre was entrenched in political, economical and religious differences.

In his presentation entitled ‘Remembering Adana’, Sarafian illustrated the destruction the massacre caused through the use of vivid pictures and hauntingly descriptive text that described the devastation and tragedy that occurred in Adana.

“The massacre was completely out of the blue,” Sarafian said during his presentation. “The devastation is breathtaking; the pictures bring the damage to life. I like to show them because if I did not, you would think I was lying or telling a story.”

Fresno State student and audience member Lauren Beal believes Fresno State students can learn many things from Sarafian’s presentation.

“Students can learn a lot about Armenian history,” Beal said. “If you can learn from history, it most likely will not be repeated.”
Barlow Der Mugrdechian, director for the center for Armenian studies, agrees that history can teach many things.

“History tells us a lot about ourselves,” Mugrdechian said after Sarafian’s lecture had concluded. “It [history] can happen again, we have to be careful of that fact and learn from our past mistakes.”

The Turkish government disputes the history of the events in Adana in 1909. The government contends that the Adana Massacre was an Armenian attack on the Muslim majority.

Sarafian addressed this issue while speaking about the importance of writing the correct history of the past. He said there is no place for lies or inaccuracies.
“The Turkish government said the Armenians were rebels [speaking about the Adana massacre of 1909]. That is a flat-out lie,” said Sarafian, founding director of the Gomidas Institute in London, a leading research center which republishes English translations of Armenian texts about the Armenian Genocide. “Historical writing is up to you. History does not write itself, states do not write history, people do.”

As well as speaking about the Adana massacre, Sarafian also had a message for Fresno State students.

“Students should have awareness for prejudice,” Sarafian said. “We are the guardians of our own freedom. We need to take a moral stance. Maybe the real question we should ask is how to stop the violence.”

On Oct. 10, the countries of Turkey and Armenia signed an agreement to establish diplomatic relations and open their border after one century of hostility towards each other. The issue of whether or not the killings of Armenians during the end of the Ottoman Empire is only hinted at, but none the less, the peace treaty was still signed.

Sarafian also put a positive perspective on the tragic massacre of 1909.

“History doesn’t always have to be negative, it can bring people together,” Sarafian said. “The legacy of Adana may not be to divide people, but to bring them together.”

http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2009/10/14/sarafian-speaks-on-massacre/comment-page-1/#comment-39516

---

Comments posted by Ergun KIRLIKOVALI:

Salahi Sonyel’s book “The Great War and the Tragedy of Anatolia”, TTK, Ankara, 2001, has an entire chapter on Adana; “Chapter 3: The Counter-Revolution” whose four sub-chapters are:

“The Events of 13 April 1909 (31 Mart Val’asi), pages 48-52

“The Adana Incidents”, pages 52-60

“Who was responsible for the Adana Incidents”, pages 61-64

“The Commission of Inquiry into the Adana Incidents”, pages 65-70.

All of these findings squarely refute Sarafian's claims. Here is one excerpt from page 66 where one of the most experienced American missionaries in Anatolia, Rev. Dr. Christie, gives an account to of the very origin of the Adana incident to the American diplomatic representative who, in turn, furnishes it to British ambassador in Istanbul (Lowther):

"... that the young Armenians of Adana were nearly all revolutionaries, that arms and ammunition were on sale for months, and that both sides had been laying in store of them. He also attributed a large share in the (Adana) events to the 'evil counsels' of the Armenian bishop, whom (Dr. Christie) described as 'a very bad man'..."

These comments of Dr. Christie refute Sarafian's claims and show that the idea of a revolutionary plot did in fact exist among many Armenians headed by their 'evil' bishop. The Armenians were well armed and supplied, motivated, even arrogant, and quite aggressive; attributes in stark contradiction with the Sarafian misrepresentation of innocent, unarmed Armenians.

There is much more in this book and elsewhere to clearly demonstrate to truth-seekers that one-sided accounts of historic controversies, such as that by Sarafian of Adana incidents, do not help promote scholarship, truth, peace, or closure.

Dr. Gwynne Dyer, a London-based independent journalist, may have put it best in1976 after all:

“… The deafening drumbeat of the propaganda, and the sheer lack of sophistication in argument which comes from preaching decade after decade to a convinced and emotionally committed audience, are the major handicaps of Armenian historiography of the Diaspora today…”

---

Note to members of the Turkish-American community:

The above was also posted in the "ACTION ALERT" at www.mediawatchnow.com . Are you "action alert" yet?

An Armenian scholar (Sarafian) travels all the way from London, England, to brainwash your kids here in a California college. Did you lift your finger to help combat this anti-Turkish propaganda in your own backyard yet?

Or would you kindly rather “the protocols” do it for you as you cannot be bothered?

You can come out of your self-isolation now, register with www.mediawatchnow.com and start speaking up. We need you more than ever today…

Tell a friend!

Ergun.

Read Full Post !

2788) Talaat Pasha’s Black Book Documents His Campaign Of Race Extermination By Ara Sarafian and Counter Comments By Sukru Aya

Talaat Pasha’s Black Book Documents His Campaign Of Race Extermination, 1915–17, By Ara Sarafian March 13, 2009

The proportion of the Armenian population deported and missing in 1917 according to Interior Minister Talaat Pashas Black Book is shown in black. © 2009 Ara Sarafian, Armenian Reporter (International)

Reader’s Counter Comments By Sukru Aya (Bold & Blue) . .

"[Talaat stated that]... they had already disposed of three quarters of them [Armenians], that there were none left in Bitlis, Van, Erzeroum, and that the hatred was so intense now that they have to finish it. He said they would take care of the Armenians at Zor and elsewhere but they did not want them in Anatolia. I told him three times that they were making a serious mistake and would regret it. He said, We know we have made mistakes, but we never regret."

8 August 1915 diary entry of conversations between Talaat Pasha and U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, United States Diplomacy on the Bosphorus: The Diaries of Ambassador Morgenthau, 1913-1916, comp., ed., and intro. Ara Sarafian (Princeton and London: Gomidas Institute, 2004)

Mr. Sarafian is employed by Gomidas, and despite the fact that he is well informed on many subjects, has been in the Turkish Archives, has my book “The Genocide of Truth” and the facts referred there-in, his concern is not to relay the truths, but to distort them to reconfirm the Genocide myth. In doing so, Sarafian, unscholarly skips the information in other sources; he uses whatever suits him, and adds something from his own, twisting facts. Mr. Morgenthau may be did speak to Talat on that day, but he did not have a tape recorder in his pocket and the in-between interpreter was A. Schimovanian! They had no way to remember verbatim when the book was ghost written by Mr. Hendrick three years later, what and how it was said ! Mr. Sarafian should have quoted verbatim the following conversation as well, noted in the same diary, if he was to be a neutral scholar. (see (P.269 – The Genocide of Truth)

"Zenop Bezjian, vekil of the Armenian protestants called! schimavonian introduced him, he was his schoolmate. he told me a great deal about the 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 500.000 have been displaced. he was most solicitous that they should be helped before winter set."

Mr. Sarafian omits this conversation when claiming that the number of persons displaced as per notes of Talaat were indeed killed. What an intentional fabrication, or sloppy job!

A handwritten black book that belonged to Mehmet Talaat Pasha, the Ottoman minister of interior in 1915, was published in facsimile form in the end of 2008. It is probably the single most important document ever uncovered describing the destruction of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire in 1915-17. The Black Book draws on Ottoman sources no longer available to answer many questions about what those sources showed.

Why is Mr. Sarafian surprised? This is a hand written “unofficial personal note book” the contents of which should be taken into consideration alongside with other Ottoman, or Relief-Consular-Memorandum etc. figures. By now, we have to at least admit that owing to the discrepancies between different sources, we can only make an estimate of numbers and for which we should count a +- 10% error margin.

Looking through the Sifre Kalemi or cipher telegram collection at the Prime Ministry Archives in Istanbul some years ago, I was struck by the number of telegrams in 1915 from Talaat ordering the deportation of individual communities, inquiring about the state of convoys, giving instructions for further deportations. What emerged was a picture of a ruler obsessed with the progress of his signature program. Much of the responses to Talaat's inquiries were not available. What the Black Book does is to summarize the data he collected.

Mr. Sarafian contradicts himself, when making negative scenarios and writing history on assumptions. For me, these telegrams show that Talaat was following all movements as best as he could when his country was at war on five fronts, he was short of soldiers, money, food and everything. He makes further assessments, that there were not enough replies to Talaat, forgetting that the only communication line was limited telegram used by all, mainly army.

Ottoman archives

Turkish state intellectuals in recent years have insisted that the 1915 deportations of Ottoman Armenians were not part of a genocidal exercise, but an orderly population transfer and resettlement. They have insisted that Ottoman archives in Turkey today support their contention. Yet, between them, they have only managed to cite an amalgam of official deportation and resettlement regulations, certain reports related to deportations, and no substantial account of what actually happened to deportees.

Indeed, no historian working in Turkish archives has managed to present a coherent picture of the deportation and resettlement of Armenians from any region in the Ottoman Empire based on Ottoman records. This is because Ottoman records do not support the official Turkish thesis on the Armenian Genocide.

The Ottoman records are good, given war conditions, first time experience of such a vast relocation and shortage of all necessary means. Differences or discrepancies exist also in the various reports and official documents, presented by diverse parties involved in this period or movement. All we can do, is to make an estimate between different figures, considering the dependability or error margins. I am asking, if all Armenian-British-American-French records have the same consistencies? So, why blame Ottoman records only, when they had so many problems?

While there is broad agreement between Turkish archives and other sources that thousands of Armenians were removed from their homes in 1915, there is no solid account of what happened to these deportees in Ottoman records. However, foreign archives, such as the consular records of the United States, give a better qualitative assessment of actual developments than the available Ottoman documentation.

Yusuf Halacoglu, gave a fairly good list of the arrivals and settlements for a portion of the relocations. Mr. Sarafian is demanding too much, overlooking the conditions, shortages and priorities of the hard days! Chapters 14-15 of my book gives quite an extensive analysis from different sources, and there is nowhere any evidence of mass killings or large losses of people, other than the scattered ones due to deprivations, epidemics, starvation. The deaths reported in bilateral banditry according to reports are not even twenty thousand on all sides.

This absence of Ottoman records could seem perplexing, because according to Ottoman regulations, Ottoman officials had to keep detailed records of the deportation of Armenians, as well as an inventory of their properties, as well as details of the final settlement of the people concerned. The total absence of such registers in Turkish archives today is therefore remarkable.

Oh Mr. Sarafian, aren’t you asking-expecting too much in the country side under war and live-or-die conditions?

A Handwritten Book

The recent facsimile publication of Talaat Pasha's Black Book may well answer many questions with the authority of Ottoman records. At 77 pages, the book includes a substantial section on the deportation of Armenians in 1915-17. The book and its content were never disclosed in Talaat's lifetime, including in his posthumous memoirs published in 1921. After his assassination in 1921, the book was kept by his widow and given to the Turkish historian Murat Bardakci in 1982. Mr. Bardakci made parts of the booklet public in Hürriyet newspaper in 2005. The full account was not published until the end of 2008.

Mr. Sarafian, could have at least clarified that Talaat was murdered by a young gunman Tehlerian, and who was acquitted by the German kangaroo court, as if Talaat “deserved to be killed”. Even Generals Sanders and Schellenderdoff, were not called by the court or their affidavits required!

The significance of the Black Book lies in the authority of the owner, the fact that its content was drawn from Ottoman administrative records no longer available to historians in Turkey, and the actual data that it gives about the deportation of Armenians. Neither the book nor the data it yields bear clear dates, though Mr. Bardakci thinks that the figures refer to 19151916 though I think that could be the end of 1916 or even the beginning of 1917.

Messrs Sarafian and Bardakci, admit that there are no dates! Hence, supposing that everything was correctly reported to Talaat by lower officials, we do not know when and if more than one relocation of the same people happened, which is highly probably, because some Armenians went to Russia and came back, some of them sent to Mousual-Aleppo zones, had to be dispersed in smaller settlements later. Under the circumstances, we have to depend on other detailed consular or Relief records and WE DO HAVE THESE, and these do not show a large paradox with the figures of Bardakci.

The state perspective

The data presented in this book can be considered to be a view of the Armenian Genocide from the perspective of the state. This state perspective still needs to be evaluated critically, which I am doing in a separate study. The purpose of this article is to introduce the core data that informed Talaat Pasha about the actual state of Armenians.

Mr. Sarafian is misusing this two page displacement list, to suit his perspective, adding his own core to it!

The statistics regarding the destruction of Armenians in the Black Book are enumerated in four categories covering 29 regions (vilayets and sanjaks) of the Ottoman Empire.

These statistics are supposed to reflect:
The Armenian population in each region in 1914
Armenians who were not deported (presumably 191516)
Armenians who were deported and living elsewhere (1917)
Armenians who were originally from outside the province they were living in (1917)

From these statistics, we can also have an idea of the number of Armenians who were deported but not accounted for in 1917. Some of these missing Armenians undoubtedly fled the Ottoman Empire, such as those in the province of Van (where there was fierce resistance) or parts of Erzurum (which fell under Russian occupation after the Ottoman offensive collapsed in the east). However, very few Armenians were able to flee in such a manner, and for our discussion today, we will assume that the vast majority of the "missing Armenians" in 1917 were killed or died during deportations.

I do have the referred book and I cannot see how the writer can draw above conclusions from page 77, giving the total number of persons (924.158) sent out from their original or secondary homes. Page 109 gives a list of transferred and remaining persons per province, evidencing that no one was sent out from certain West coast cities.

The list concludes that total population inclusive Syrian Provinces was around 1.3 millions with about 300-400.000 Armenians living partly in the cities from where deportations were made. We must bear in mind that Catholics and Protestants were exempted at the end of August 1915 and some families should have returned back to their homes.

Questions answered

The figures from Talaat Pasha's Black Book answer some fundamental questions about the Armenian Genocide. Two such questions concern the nature of the actual deportations of 1915, and the specific fate of those deportees as they were pushed into the deserts of Der Zor, one of the main areas identified for resettlement.

Mr. Sarafian regrettably continues his slanders or blunders. He alleges the word of “genocide” and implies that they were pushed into the “deserts of Der Zor to perish”. Mr. Sarafian knows by looking into the maps, that Der Zor was no desert but rarely populated farmable land on the banks of Euphrates River. I am surprised that Mr. Sarafian is unaware of the part of Morgenthau’s diary about his conversation with Zenop Bezjian, quoted verbatim above!

Talaat Pasha's information contradicts the official Turkish thesis that deportations were an orderly affair governed by Ottoman laws and regulations, or that deportees were actually successfully settled in Der Zor. Interestingly, Talaat's Black Book also shows the number of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire to have been were much higher than supposed by official figures.

No Turkish authority or person claimed that the deportees were successfully settled! They were settled “within the best available and capable means”. As a neutral scholar, he could have added that not even a sack of flour was given by Relief Organizations to Camp Kitchens, which in rare cases even served yogurt to typhus patients, and that the ports were all blockaded by the Allied Navy to starve the enemy the Ottoman people…including the Armenians to which they distributed directly relief supplies, guarded by famished Turkish soldiers.

Talaat’s figures (1.3 millions) are in compliance with the dependable figures on Page 303 of my book and in particular report dated March 1, 1914 by Armenian-French land distribution committee asserting total population 1.280.000 and those in 6-vilayets to benefit from land distribution as 542.421. I hope Mr. Sarafian cannot claim that this report is untrue!

Talaat Pasha's figures confirm that most Ottoman Armenians outside Constantinople were indeed deported, and most of these deportees had disappeared by 1917. On average, 90 percent of provincial Armenians were deported, and 90 percent of those deported were killed. The number of people who went missing was over 95 percent for such provinces as Trabzon, Erzurum, Urfa, Diyarbekir, Mamuret-ul-Aziz, and Sivas. These figures clearly show that deportations were tantamount to a death sentence, and they give credence to United States consular reports that said as much, especially for those deported from the eastern provinces.

Mr. Sarafian, again makes a gigantic slander, which does not become his reputation, by saying that 90% of those who were relocated (924.158) were killed, without submitting any evidence whatsoever!

The numbers of survivors are enlisted on pages 307-308 of my book, and Mr. Sarafian must explain why all of these documents are wrong but his imagination is correct! According to new documents that surfaced after printing of my book, the joint US Congress-Senate report of April 22, 1922 gives a total number of 1.414.000 Armenians alive at the end of 1921; Boghos Numbar officially declared at Paris Conference on Dec.11.1918, that 6 to 700.000 were deported and out of these 390.000 needed urgent help! Report by US High Commissioner in Istanbul addressed to Secretary of State on March 1,1921 gave a detailed list of Armenians distributed over the old Ottoman Empire soil totaling to 624.900, excluding those living in the Republic of Armenia, estimated 850.000 by Lalaian and Katchaznuni, 400-500.000 of which were emigrants that came from Anatolia!

The Der Zor massacres of 1916

The data at hand also tells us about the scale of the Der Zor massacres of 1916. There is general agreement that hundreds of thousands of deportees were sent into this desert region in 191516, the main resettlement zone according to Ottoman decrees. Ottoman sources yield little information on what happened to these deportees. Survivor accounts and sources outside Turkey (such as those in United States archives) attest to the fact that deportees in the Der Zor region mostly wasted away.

The diary and hand note of Morgenthau plus above report of commissioner totally belies this slander. Mr. Sarafian, unless lying, must produce valid archival document, to discard above referred evidences!

By 1917, even those Armenians who had been able to settle in this area, mainly because of the efforts of the provincial governor Ali Suad Bey, were taken away and massacred after a new governor, one of Talaat Pasha's henchmen, was sent. Deniers of the Armenian Genocide who do not have adequate records from Turkish archives cite United States records to argue that up to 300,000 people were sent into this area omitting the fact that practically none of them survived to 1917. Talaat Pasha's records show 6,778 Armenians in this province in 1917.

Mr. Sarafian speaks in general accusations without producing any evidence and hides behind cheap slanders such as deniers! Mr. Sarafian himself is either a DENIER or LIAR of above referred USA-Armenian records!

Population totals

The Black Book also gives interesting insights into the number of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire circa 1914. While these figures are still smaller than some statistics cited outside Turkey, Talaat Pasha's dataset contradict the figures cited by deniers of the Armenian Genocide, who minimize the number of Ottoman Armenians as part of their strategy.

These again are simple unscholarly cheap talk. I give written records, he writes in general personal opinion.

The Black Book cites official figures from the 1914 Ottoman population survey, with a note explaining that this figure, like the figures for Armenians registered in 1917, should be increased by a factor of 30 percent to account for undercounting.

Mr. Sarafian is distorting or lying again. What Talaat indicated in the footnote on page 109 of his book was: he noted that 80.000 Armenians were living in Istanbul plus another 97.247 in the Anatolian provinces at that time! (1915-1916?) This adds to 177.247. Then, he counts another 106.910 living in the other cities of Anatolia and arrives at the figure of 284.157. He states that this total can be increase by a margin of 30% (85.247) which would mean that about 370.000 persons should be counted alive for that section only!

The note thus increases the main Apostolic (or Gregorian) Armenian community from 1,187,818 to 1,500,000 people before deportations. The note also mentions the figure for Catholic Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as 63,967 (which could also be revised upward to 83,157). There is no figure given for Protestant Armenians. These figures bring the number of Ottoman Armenians, based on official figures, close to 1,700,000 people. According to these figures, the total number of Armenians who were missing in 1917 was around 1,000,000 people. If one discounts those who might have fled to Russia, the number of missing Armenians was still in the region of 800,000 to 900,000 people.

Mr. Sarafian is again jumping into conclusions by his imagination, disregarding solid figures of survivors by 1918-1919-1921 and 1922! Why he prefers not to see the solid numbers referred in my book, plus new ones referred above? Or is this part of his oriented scholarship. A decent scholar does not have the liberty to be selective in sources! Mr. Sarafian, does not see the written ones, and he make his own dreaming. In fact, the number of Protestants and Catholics within the Armenian community has not been separated and is not too important for the argument. It can be found with some additional research but generally speaking, the Protestants should be around 10% or say 130.000 and Catholics around 5% or 65.000, subject to written data and errors. My estimate of the incurred total Armenian losses is a minimum of 300.000 for the period 1914-1918, plus another 180.000 or 200.000 under the Armenian Republic 1918-1921 due to starvation in Armenia. The Armenians which went to Turkey with Russian and French armies, had to go back again to Caucasus and Syria etc. when these armies pulled back. Mr. Sarafian’s imagination is not supported by simple arithmetic and existing irrefutable records!.

Talaat Pasha's Black Book gives us invaluable insights into the type of bureaucratic control Ottoman officials wielded over Armenians and the type of information they gathered as a matter of course. The existence of such information in Talaat Pasha's Black Book again raises the question of what happened to the archival trail that underpinned his data. The Black Book also provides actual details about the apparent destruction of Armenians in 1915-16, and it dismisses the official Turkish assertion that deportations were an orderly affair in moving and resettling people between 1915 and 1916. Indeed, the image painted by the Black Book validates the more impressionistic or passing accounts of atrocities against Armenians reported throughout the Ottoman Empire by foreign observers and survivors between 1915 and 1916.

The two pages of figures given in the book, apparently has given very large intuition and excuse to the writer, to distort-reverse figures and facts. No one said that “deportations were orderly” but the book displays a sincere effort of best trial, without a single word of atrocity or ill treatment. Mr. Sarafian should have seen in the Turkish archives during his studies, that even “scolding, insulting of Armenian deportees” was punishable by order dated July 30,1915 of 3rd Army Commander Mahmut Kamil Pasha.

Conclusion: This article and its objective, to use any available excuse to slander Turks and invent another evidence for Genocide mythomania shows that Ara Sarafian too, (like Taner Akcam, Muge Gocek and Dadrian school) are continuing their propaganda to avoid any rapprochements between the people of Armenia and Turkey, because such pacification will make the existence of institutes such as Zorian, Gomitas and others, as well hate museums and monuments, totally unnecessary, and in which case these trouble mongers will go out of their business! Mr. Sarafian knows that all the damage done to the relatively well doing Armenians living in Turkey, was imposed by Hunchak and Dashnak etc. outside Revolutionists who came to “save their compatriots” but caused all these calamities, and they all ran away. The same game is being played today by the Genocide pipe blowers outside of Armenia keeping the hate fire aflame, on which they roast their stakes in USA or France-Britain, but no loaf of bread or comfort to those living in Armenia! Sad indeed! Compliments for being able to brainwash people with such distortions.

Clarification: I am no “fake scholar” or historian. I am a trying to be a “decent reader” because many shallow historians-writers-politicians take their readers to be “dupe” (Reno Evening Gazette, Oct.15,1915) and I wrote the truths I have found from several sources, not using the Turkish ones which genocide addicts would immediately disqualify as denialist! I imagine there will be a flood of counter comments and bad mouth against this commentary of mine. Before such youngsters (half or quarter of my age) start throwing their mud, I invite them to have the courage to first look into the given references and clarify which Armenian historian-or authority or American official document etc. they find as untrue! If you say “I know them all”, sorry but you have been taught the wrong. If you are right, then teach me my wrong, or else stay quiet!

Sukru S. Aya - Istanbul 25.3.09

---

This response has been emailed to Mr Ara Sarafian as well as published in Armenia Cafe as a response to Ara Sarafian and no counter comments have been made by Mr Sarafian or received by us.

---

-----------------

Anonymous

IP Address 193.254.155.48
Country Germany
ISP T-mobile Deutschland Gmbh
Visit Length 1 hour 31 mins

Dear Sukru S. Aya:

I am not an expert or historian but I know what genocide is!

Dear Mr. Anonymous,

When speaking on "serious" matters, there is no room for "sentiments, feelings, assumptions" etc. Bare documents do speak. I have no idea about your age, but it looks that you have been brainwashed to believe in it, like you believe in your religion, which you make references and comparisons. When we are speaking "science-bare knowledge" I am sorry that we have "no room for holy books (derived from old pagan stories)". It seems that "you have only read my comment on posting 2788 in reply to Ara Sarafian, and nothing more than that. If you want to discuss matters with me, you have to "pinpoint by documents" where I have talked wrong. For a start I would suggest that you read my essay :

http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2008/03/2399-to-find-genocide-of-truth-letter.html

and other essays of Ara Baliozian and mine (over 250). Sir, unless yo read these 50.000 or more pages of diversified sources and knowledge, how can you arrive to conclusions with your simple logic?

Let us ASSUME, Armenians were the “Christian Chechens” seeking real reforms, autonomy or even independence in 1915. Could all these be a reason to “deportee” and annihilate at least 1 million Armenian within a period of two years, using different pre-texts?

I am not sure if "Turkis" knows what "genocide" is and nothing can justify genocide. As I wrote - for a better understanding what “genocide” means- we like to call/"rename" these “rebel and deported Armenian women, men and children” for Turkish nationalist/Genocide denier just “Christian Chechens or Christina Dagestani or Christian Kosovars”- to have a better understanding , what genocide means

In scholarly arguments, "we do not assume" but we base our arguments on "several authentic documents" and arrive to a conclusion, until such time that new evidence, proves that our earlier dependence was wrong. Speaking of "Christian Chechens, Moslem Kosovars" are dangerous distortions which brings no light to what has happened and what we are trying to discover. And please do not teach me the meaning of "genocide" a word that was never used even by Armenian diaspora, until they started to launch their ASALA attacks and fabricated this excuse, which still runs good!

Sukru S. Aya : How comes that after the "deportation” of Armenians always everything become all of sudden “Turkish”? What happened to “Turkish Armenia”? What happened to more than 2500 Armenian churches - ("Culture heritage ad Russian spies too?" ) Just as an example?

Sir, this is not a way to discuss history and I cannot teach you in a few lines, what I learned in several years. You have no right to occupy my time. To the best of my knowledge, I have no clue whatsoever that a staggering figure of 2500 Armenian churches ever existed (not even so many villages existed in those days) and what kind of dependable reference you give for that figure. The answer to your question is the number of Mosques that remained in present Armenia and Caucasus. In 1850 about 60-70% of the population of Erivan were Moslem. What happened to them, what happened to their mosques ?

Armenian population

First the ottoman statistic of Armenian population was falsified for political purpose after „Berliner Congress“.

Turkish historian do not make an mention about the number of “ethnic Turks” (instead Turkish is using the term “Muslims”- Is this not funny – While the same Turkish historians use to divide Armenians in at least three different groups (Gregorian’s, Catholics, Protestants) . Catholic and protestant Armenians were subject to genocide too!

Sir, you are speaking based on hearsay, rumors and ask explanations "blaming the Monster" for what happened. The POPULATION figures are detailed in a chart in Chapter 15 of my book with an explanation of movements, arrivals, deaths etc. If you do nor read and can tell me WHICH ARMENIAN - FRENCH - AMERICAN - LEAGUE OF NATIONS documents and indicating are lie, we can go nowhere. For a start you may write to the US Congress and ask them "how dare they declare 1.414.000 alive" in Russia-Syria-Anatolia on 31.12.1921. If you get a satisfactory answer supporting your view, send it to me so that I can publicly apologize. Make your choice from the various figures but give me PROOF, such as the Land Distribution French-Armenian Committee report dated 1.3.1914 (1.280.000) GIVE ME DOCUMENT, stop empty words!

Armenian Patriarchate Statistics is more trustworthy!

Could you please provide number of “ethnic Turks” (“not Turkish speaking people” but “ethnic Turks”!) for each Ottoman Vilâyet in 1914, by taking in account the non stop flew of “newcomers” to “Anatolia” a and in 6 “Armenian Vilâyets”- West Armenia ?

There is a huge difference in your standards of evaluation of history and mine, I do not think that we are communicating on the same frequency of knowledge, objective and your "racial-religious-national" and similar "fabricated strong faiths" which is your strong belief, no less than your belief in Christ, God and the Heaven which awaits you. I used to think like you up to the last twenty years...Now I no longer believe in these discriminatory nonsense, splitting the people so that the clergy classes can always make a good living, by simply selling "hope and sights in heaven".

Dear Mr Anonymous, I suggest that you at least read Ara Baliozian and "start questioning". You cannot learn anything, if you do not DOUBT what you know, if you DO NOT QUESTION and if YOU ARE UNWILLING TO LEARN AND CHANGE FOR YOUR OWN intelligence and logic.

If you have any questions, they must be based on my previous "excerpts taken from anti-Turkish sources" and must be proven by you to be wrong.

Best of luck Mr. Anonymous, learn for yourself, I will not write you again Good luck, stay happy with what you believe in...

S.S. Aya

-----------------

Site Admin Note:

We allow anonymous comments on first occasions only:

If the anonymous responders want to carry on the discussion, we would like them to identify themselves with full name and contactable phone numbers emailed to us for us to verify the details

Kind Regards

---

Read Full Post !

2691) Hacking History: The Museum of Kars by Ara Sarafian

Ara Sarafian / © 2008 Gomidas Institute

Kars - I am always amazed when I see the desolation of Kars plain with its vast expanses of emptiness dotted by a few villages here and there. And then, there is the city of Kars, built at the base of a height, shadowed by a citadel on top. Like other parts of eastern Turkey, this area nurtured Armenian civilization, along the great trade routes between east and west, with the ancient city of Ani nearby.. . Today Kars is being groomed as the future gateway to Armenia, with a border crossing nearby, as well as an old railway line to Gyumri, Armenia. There is every expectation that the opening of the border will bring prosperity to this poor backwater of Turkey. Now there are shops crammed with cheap goods: plastic pails, fishing rods, bars of soap, children's toys, plates, piles of clothes, all made in China or western Turkey.

As one enters the city of Kars, one cannot avoid seeing a new monument that is being built opposite the old fortress above the city. This is supposed to be a peace monument, symbolizing friendship among the people of this region, notably Turks and Armenians. At the base of the monument is a pool, in the shape of an eye, with a teardrop breaking away. Is this a tear of joy or sorrow? I ask myself. Perhaps it is both.

The Museum of Kars is within the city limits. It looks like a modest building from the outside, but inside it is quite something else: well lit, spacious, built of marble, covering two floors, I am impressed at first sight. It is not huge, but big enough and welcoming.

In the grounds of the museum, there are some 16th-century Turkish steles; so they have been marked, but I could not miss the tombstones with Armenian writing on them. They are probably from the turn of the 20th century, and they are also inscribed in modern Armenian.

A bullying message

Inside, once more, as in Erzurum and Van, there are exhibitions from the Urartian, Greek, and Roman periods to the Byzantine, Seljuk, Ottoman, and Turkish. There is the familiar absence of Armenians as well, though there are references to the Bagratids in Kars and Ani - without mentioning Armenians except twice, in passing, in Turkish. Yet Ani was the jewel of medieval Armenian art, architecture, and culture.

There is an exhibit that identifies 10-12 century "Christian coins" and a glass cage of crosses from the "Christian era". It is not clear what period that is. Some of these crosses are clearly Russian, and some are clearly Armenian, though no mention is made of either. Armenians remain invisible.

Then there is a rather bizarre exhibit, towering over onlookers. These are two huge church doors, with unmistakable Armenian crosses carved on them, plus a dedication in Armenian. The exhibit is simply identified as a church door from Kars. There is no additional explanation, such as the name or denomination of the church. Why would museum officials bother to put these doors on display, and purposefully say nothing of any substance about them? Surely the museum is aware of the message this display conveys. It is a bullying message to Armenians: your absence in this museum is on purpose.

Some of the walls also include pictures of nearby ruined churches, but there is no additional explanation, except their names in Turkish.

The upper floor of the museum has an ethnographic section, with the standard Turkish nationalist narrative of an Islamic-Turkish past, and no mention of other cultures, such as Armenians, Russians, Kurds, or Georgians - all distinct in their own right.

A paradox

As one leaves the museum, one is left with the paradox of reconciling the monument of peace towering above the town, and the silent, hostile message of the Museum of Kars. Should one simply accept Turkey as a land of contradictions that is going through a period of adjustment? Should one hope that these contradictions will be resolved for the better one day? Or are the contradictions more permanent? Perhaps they are not contradictions at all: perhaps the combined message of the museum and monument are complimentary, that the Turkish peace offered to Armenians today is contingent on Armenians accepting the dictates of Turkish power. Those dictates include accepting a Turkish narrative of history that denigrates or denies the existence of Armenians.

So, how should I summarize my visit to Turkish museums? When I planned my proposed trip to Turkish museums in October 2008, I expected an "Armenian-friendly" experience. After all, I knew that the Museum of Van had been closed down for a long time and I expected it to reopen without the "Armenian Genocide of Turks" section. I also knew that Aghtamar had been renovated. I even had an idea that a Turkish artist was building a peace monument in Kars. Because of these indicators, I expected to see complimentary changes in the content of the museums I planned to visit. Obviously I was being too optimistic. By no means has Turkey turned the corner as the museums, among many other examples, still represent some of the worst aspects of "old Turkey" in terms of intolerance, prejudice, and aggression.

Before I left Kars, I visited the construction workers at the peace monument. They were a jovial bunch of people, from different parts of Turkey. They asked me why I came to visit Kars. I told them I was Armenian and that I came to visit the museum as well as the old mosque that used to be an Armenian church (Holy Apostles Cathedral).

One of the workers, a simple man, interjected and raised his voice. "I am a Muslim! I am a Muslim! And I say as a Muslim that they should turn that mosque back into a church. It is shameful to keep it as a mosque!" As he spoke up, his fellow workers listened. I was surprised and moved by the sincerity of his words.

But why was I surprised? I shouldn't have been. This was a simple, honorable man speaking his mind. He was not asking for anything, and he did not expect anything in return. His words were the high point of my visit to Turkey.

---

Ara Sarafian / © 2008 Gomidas Institute

---

"This article was commissioned by the Armenian Reporter and appeared in the January 09, 2009 edition of the newspaper and on its website, www.reporter.am" Vincent Lima

---

---

Reader’s Comment

---

Much that I want to visualize Mr. Sarafian (who knows more than most diaspora Armenians the truths) on a more balanced mission to restore the Armeno-Turkish relations, I regret that he cannot become as objective and sharp as Ara Baliozian, and he “must exhibit his dedication to the Gomitas Institute” who pays him for his criticism, rather than his pacification efforts, which surfaces now and then. Turkish historians have some hope that he is a person “you can talk to”! Above essay of Ara Sarafian can be evaluated as another good intended effort.

However, my young friend, again tells only one side of the story and I have to point out how he has “gone around the tree”!

- Sarafian says in his paradox, that the relations between Turkey and Armenia do not improve because “dictates include a Turkish narrative of history that denigrades or denies existence of Armenians”.

Mr. Sarafian has my signed book “The Genocide of Truth”, which exclusively narrates history from anti-Turkish sources, mainly Armenian official documentation and the whereabouts of the Armenians in the area are well explained in too many excerpts. Mr. Sarafian knows by heart but fails to mention that the main road blocks are:

a- Armenia does not respect present borders and have a request of land and compensation from Turkey, disregarding existing treaties or the fact that all claims between USA and Turkey were settled back in 1934 and no indemnity claims can be made. As long as the young state of Armenia maintains these extravagant claims in their Constitution, normalization is not possible.

b- Armenia has occupied by force Nogorno Karabagh and about 20% of the Azeri land, exiling about a million souls now living in railway cars etc., after the Hodjali massacres.

Mr. Sarafian than complains that the Turkish Museum of Kars, does not include “sufficient Armenian” identities! Well my dear Sarafian, have you seen any museums of genocide or massacres in Turkey propagating the other page of the dirty history? (to reciprocate Armenia or diaspora)

Mr. Sarafian also gives an example about the feelings of a simple Turkish worker, who had disapproved that an Armenian church was converted into a mosque. Sentimentally, I share the same approach but it is an undeniable fact that: It was an old habit to convert pagan temples (or use the stones) into Churches and some of them into Mosques by the victors. Whether we like it or not, this is the past. Mr. Sarafian must also answer “why there is not a single mosque” (except a tiny Iranian one in Erivan) of Muslims in an area where they were 70% of the living population? Is there but ONE muslim family left? On the other hand, a multitude of Armenian churches (some restored with Turkish tax money) is fully active in Istanbul and other cities of Turkey. Next time Mr. Sarafian comes to Istanbul, I would like to take him to the “Surp Pirgic” hospital (which I frequently visit) and foster home!

Dear Sarafian is “hacking himself the history”, by “being selective in observations and reporting”. Dear Sir, since you are known to be a “scholar” and “historian”, let me remind you as an elderly man, that you do not have the liberty of reporting only one side of the story that suits you and scrap or “hack” the rest! This was done long time ago, in the Blue Book, Morgenthau’s Story etc. They brought illusion and devastations for not telling the truth.

Turkish philosopher Mevlana, in one of his poems says:

Yesterday is gone my dear, with all that was said! Let’s have something new and fresh for today! And I add, “Dear Sarafian, let’s get over the past and see what we can do for a better tomorrow! If you are truly concerned about the welfare of the State of Armenia and Armenians living in there and Turkey, you “must be constructive”. If you have to defend the “genocide fanfare of the diaspora” making an earning on a past drama, I am sorry to say that “by now you know that you are not rightful” and exerting such outside pressures on Turkey will keep in business only those who build monuments of hatred or museums showing the human bestiality! ANCA just sent another letter pointing out “Dangers of Forgetting” which means the true danger that they may have no cause left to collect money and milk their rich diaspora community!

Sukru S. Aya

---

Read Full Post !

2678) "Study Armenian Genocide With Confidence " by Sarafian / "Darling Of Denialist Turkish Media: Sarafian" By Jabarian

1. "Study The Armenian Genocide With Confidence" by Ara Sarafian
2. Sarafian: Focus On The Diaspora
3. "Ara Sarafian: The Darling Of Denialist Turkish Media" By Appo Jabarian

---

Study The Armenian Genocide With Confidence by Ara Sarafian, December 18, 2008

Sir:
On November 26, 2008, Hurriyet Daily News published an article based on an interview titled, "Sarafian: Focus on the Diaspora." This interview followed a conference I participated in organized by the International Hrant Dink Foundation at Bosphorus University, Istanbul, on Adana in the late Ottoman period.

The Hurriyet Daily News article caused anxiety in some Armenian circles because of the apparent harshness of my statements as they had been rendered in the Turkish press. The most forceful response came from my detractors in Internet chat . . groups.

Given the interest created by the Hurriyet Daily News article in some Armenian circles, I would like to disclose the substance of my interview for your information. Below are the key points:

1. Context: Turkey today

Turkey is going through a period of change. It is true that many of the old anti-Armenian voices are still around, and one can still see restrictions on free speech in Turkey. However, there are also significant alternative voices being heard from academics, journalists, lawyers, diplomats, and ordinary people. This multiplicity of voices seems to be part of the democratization process of Turkey.

Twenty years ago Turkish state intellectuals were denying the Armenian Genocide by saying that nothing happened in 1915; if there were killings, they were Turks killed by Armenians; that Armenian Genocide allegations were the product of Armenian terrorism or a Soviet conspiracy to destabilize Turkey. The official Turkish thesis on the Armenian Genocide was prescribed by the state with no alternative voices or dissent allowed.

Today, the Armenian Genocide debate has already shifted inside Turkey. It is now quite normal to hear that "terrible things happened to Armenians in 1915", that Armenians were poorly treated, that there were massacres, etc. Turkish citizens are also more and more aware of the contribution of Armenians to Ottoman-Turkish identity and culture. Most of the protagonists making a case for the gradual rehabilitation of Armenians are Turkish liberal intellectuals. This change has been part of a process that is still in progress.

Armenian intellectuals can play a positive role in engaging Turkish-Armenian debates as they open up by setting the tone for better understanding of a shared past, including practical ways to address the legacy of 1915. A sensitive Armenian approach can foster a positive outcome in Turkey, while a coarse response will close minds and play into the hands of Turkish chauvinists.

2. Diaspora-Armenia scholarship

Over the past 25 years, practically all cutting-edge scholarship on the Armenian Genocide has taken place outside of Armenia. A good part of this work was done by diaspora Armenians, and many non-Armenians were nurtured or benefited by the efforts of diaspora Armenians. The diaspora is at the core of the Armenian Genocide debate. If Prime Minister Erdogan's government is looking for an engaging strategy to resolve the Armenian Genocide issue, it has to address the diaspora as much as the Armenian government.

3. Partisan scholarship, prosecutorial approach

Our understanding of the Armenian Genocide has been influenced by partisan scholarship because a number of academic institutions and political parties in Armenian communities, such as in the United States or Great Britain, have nurtured a prosecutorial approach to the subject. Consequently, some important elements of the events of 1915 have been distorted. The main thrust of the prosecutorial approach has been the assertion that the genocide of Armenians was executed with the thoroughness of the Nazi Holocaust, and that all Turks and Kurds were involved in the genocidal process. This approach is best exemplified by Vahakn Dadrian's The History of the Armenian Genocide: Ethnic Conflict from the Balkans to Anatolia to the Caucasus.

4. The Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust

The Armenian Genocide is not the same as the Holocaust. The Young Turks did not have the apparatus to carry out a genocide on par with the Holocaust. It is also a fact that many Ottoman officials, including governors, sub-governors, military personnel, police chiefs, and gendarmes saved thousands of Armenians during the Genocide. Most Armenians from the province of Adana, for example, were not killed. This very basic fact is elided in the works of prominent Armenian historians. There are other examples too. The "Holocaust model" of the Armenian Genocide is fundamentally flawed.

5. Archives

Key "Armenian archives" on the Armenian Genocide remain closed to critical scholars. This matter concerns all scholars and should be subject to scrutiny. The most important examples are the archives of the Jerusalem Patriarchate, which include materials from Ottoman Turkey related to the Genocide. Partisan scholars have used these archives in their work, though their assertions can not be checked. In the 1980s the Zoryan Institute collected the private papers of individuals in the diaspora, yet the materials have remained under lock and key. Such standards should not be acceptable within our communities. We should object to them as we object to any manipulation of Ottoman archives in Turkey today.

6. Diaspora and Turkey

As Turkey continues to examine various taboos, more and more Turks are discovering their human, material, and historical ties to Armenians. If Turkey continues to develop in this direction, with freedom of thought and expression, there is no reason why diaspora Armenians cannot be brought into public and academic debates in Turkey. The Armenian diaspora is historically rooted in Turkey.

7. Playing the victims of the Armenian Genocide

The present generation of Armenians cannot assume the victim role when discussing Turkish-Armenian relations. Given the seriousness of the subject, academics and community activists should be expected to be well informed about their subject matter and give fair consideration to all parties. The Genocide issue is not a simple question of justice for Armenians, but a case of justice for everyone. This attitude is essential for the peaceful resolution of past differences. There is no room for ignorance and bigotry.

8. Freedom of thought, freedom of expression in Armenia

Recent events have shown once more that freedom of expression is not something that is universally respected in Armenia. In the past weeks we have heard of the brutal beating of Edik Baghdasaryan, chief editor of Hetq and the president of the Investigative Journalists' Association of Armenia. His beating was preceded by attempts to harass and intimidate him with impunity. This is not the first time that people have been intimidated and beaten for their critical views in Armenia. In my opinion this lack of freedom has restricted critical research in Armenia on the Armenian Genocide.

9. Joint commission

Prime Minister Erdogan has suggested that a commission of historians should be formed by the Turkish and Armenian governments to examine the events of 1915. I would propose an alternative as follows: (1) Relevant archives in Turkey should be open to researchers, with special procedures to allow them ready access to records; (2) Independent groups of specialists from different disciplines should be funded to collaborate on specific projects related to 1915; (3) The work of such groups should be open to the scrutiny of third parties; (4) Academic excellence should be the governing criteria in putting research teams together, not ethnicity, citizenship, or horse-trading among Turkish and Armenian bureaucrats; (5) The examination of archival records should not be limited to Ottoman records but include other archives outside of Turkey.

Very truly yours,
Ara Sarafian
London

(c) 2008 Armenian Reporter

---

Sarafian: Focus On The Diaspora By Vercihan Ziflioğlu
ISTANBUL - Multilateral efforts to improve relations between Armenia and Turkey is the wrong way to resolve the Armenian issue, says respected historian Ara Sarafian, arguing that the solution lies in the huge and influential diaspora.

Sarafian: Focus on the diaspora Sarafian, the head of the London-based Gomidas Institute, said Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s offer to Armenia to establish a commission of historians to resolve the Armenian issue was positive, but Armenia was the wrong address.

Armenians argue that the death of hundreds of thousands of Armenians in 1915 constituted genocide while Turkey says many Turks also died in the wartime circumstances and denies there was a state-enforced policy to kill Armenians.

Sarafian was invited to Turkey by the Boğaziçi, Bilkent and Sabancı Universities and the Hrant Dink Foundation to attend a history conference in the Mediterranean province of Adana.

Sarafian said there were two problems that would arise out of any effort to improve relations with Armenians through closer ties with Armenia. "Freedom of expression for historians in Armenia is limited and the genocide issue has become a political tool," he said.

He said Turkey should continue with its plan to form a commission of historians who would discuss the matter, but suggested Turkish historians to meet with moderate Armenian historians in the diaspora rather than Armenia. "The solution should start from the diaspora," he said.

"The members of the diaspora who still have Anatolia in their hearts should not be ignored," he said, adding that the diaspora was not part of Armenia but part of Anatolia. He also said Turkey needed to fund the commission of independent historians. "I believe Turkey is not how it used to be. It has a modern perception and wants solutions to the problems," said Sarafian.

Armenian archives
Prime Minister Erdoğan’s suggestion to form a commission also involves the opening of the state archives of both Armenia and Turkey. Sarafian said the archives in Armenia were inadequate. "The real documents on the genocide are in the Zoryan archives in Boston and the Armenian Patriarchy archives in Jerusalem," he said.

He said the most important question was whether Armenians wanted to overcome this chronic problem. He asked, "Will we be able to free ourselves from this instinct of revenge and share our grief?" Armenians should stop seeing themselves as the victims, said the historian.

"We cannot compare the Armenian genocide with the Holocaust. Those who were banished from their land suffered a lot but survived," he said.

He also said Turkish society could not be blamed for what happened in the past. "No one can deny the genocide but the entire Turkish nation cannot be held responsible. Moreover, many Turks rescued Armenians from death," he said.

The lobbies had turned the issue into a political tool, said Sarafian. "They want to control everything and fear historians opening a brand new page," he said. He said a language of peace should be created between Turks and Armenians.

He still had to be careful when he undertook research in Turkey and added, "I, as a historian, try not to display a wrong stance and create tension. I know I need to be objective. Additionally, Turkey is being constructive and it would be wrong to miss this chance."

He said the restoration of the Armenian Akdamar Church in the recent past could have created an environment of dialogue but had become a missed chance. "Armenians did not want to take that chance because it did not suit their interests," he said.

The Armenian response, both from the diaspora and Armenia, to Turkish calls to work together was complete silence, he said. "The diaspora boycotted any cooperation with Turkey because it only wants to blame and lay accusations against Turkey. Unfortunately, radical groups within the diaspora have turned a sensitive issue, like genocide, into a political tool.

He said it was important for future generations to free themselves from the victim psychology, concluding his remarks by saying, "We need to ensure our children live in peace. The revenge instinct will do no one any good."

© Copyright 2008 Hürriyet

---

Ara Sarafian: The Darling Of Denialist Turkish Media By Appo Jabarian
Noyan Tapan, Dec 15, 2008

Ara Sarafian, the head of the London-based Gomidas Institute, has become the darling of the denialist Turkish media. The November 24 issue of Hurriyet ("Liberty"), a Turkish secular, conservative-nationalist broadsheet daily newspaper, and notorious for its Armenian genocide denialism, has made a headline of Mr. Sarafian's anti-Armenian comment: "We cannot compare the Armenian genocide with the Holocaust. Those who were banished from their land suffered a lot but survived."

Mr. Sarafian sounds more like a denialist than an Armenian that is devoted to the pursuit of justice for his people. In reality, the Armenian Genocide does differ from the Jewish Holocaust. While Jews were killed en masse in foreign lands -- Germany and Vichy France --Armenians were systematically annihilated in their ancestral lands in Western Armenia and Cilicia. But sadly, that's not what Mr. Sarafian is pointing out. He is effectively saying that no Genocide occured in Turkish-occupied Western Armenia and Cilicia.

If this is the result of his numerous Ankara-funded trips to the Turkish archives, one can tell what's in store for Armenians through the Turkish-promoted joint commission of Armenian and Turkish historians that Sarafian, a self-proclaimed reconciliator, so enthusiastically proposes in the Hurriyet article.

Mr. Sarrafian and his likes need to be reminded that Ankara has long been willing to recognize the Armenian Genocide provided that the Armenians in Armenia and the Diaspora do not demand the return of the Turkish-occupied Armenian territories.

By "offering" to form a "joint commission" of historians, Turkey is effectively plotting to undermine the political gains achieved in the Diaspora and to reduce the international recognition of the genocide to "he said, she said" type of political dead-end which can reverse all the achievements by the Diaspora to the benefit of denialist Ankara. And I am sorry to remark that Sarafian seems to be all too willing to become a tool in the hands of these denialists.

Sarafian also said Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's offer to Armenia to establish a commission of historians to resolve the Armenian issue was positive, but Armenia was the wrong address. The solution should start from the diaspora.

Denialist Turkish Officialdom knew that, but what they didn't know and were pleasantly surprised to know that there is a member of that "huge and influential diaspora" who would be willing to sell out his people's Cause.

For some time, Ankara has been working diligently to recruit certain elements of the diaspora that are willing to trade their own lands for a 'horse.'

A few days ago, just before I left for France, I visited with an Armenian beef jerky ("abukhd" or "basturma") manufacturer in Hollywood, California.

The " abukhd" ("basturma") maker joyfully said how proud he was because the Consul General of Turkey in Los Angeles had visited his store and bought some beef jerkys and "kissed" his hand. I told him: "If things continue the way they've been evolving in the diaspora, and the Armenians continue to consolidate their political and economic power, he would one day kiss other parts of your body as well. "

It seems like Ara Sarafian has already become one of the few Diaspora recipients of these "kisses."

In contrast to Sarafian's and his denialist handlers' actions, just recently, notable Turkish conservative historians and other professors have publicly apologized for the Armenian genocide of 1915 but have fallen short of calling on the state to do the same.

Even then, righteous historian Ayse Hur said apologizing is the duty of those who were responsible for the act or for those who share their arguments. "It seems that a very elite group discussed that petition, because I learnt about this petition from the media and I was surprised, ...

I approach these types of events as a scientist, as a historian, not as a member of the Turkish nation. For me, all these events were the fault of Turkish nationalism flourishing at that time, and personally, I don't identify with it, so I do not feel the need to apologize personally." (Daily Zaman, Dec 9).

She also pointed out that the petitioners are concentrating only on 1915; however, she says there were events after and before. "There is a state tradition which legitimizes all these events and prevents any discussion about them. Firstly, the state has to ensure a suitable atmosphere to discuss all these things; then it has to apologize on behalf of the perpetrators and for itself, because it has legitimized their actions through the years."

That is why, first and foremost, Turkey needs to form a joint Turkish-Turkish commission formed by Turkish academicians who already recognize the genocide and by those that deny it. It is after the Turks come to a consensus on the genocide that an Armenian-Turkish joint commission becomes warranted in order to formulate various settlement options regarding the reparation for the immense real and personal losses inflicted on the victims and the return of the lands of Western Armenia by Turkey in compliance with the Treaty of Sevres.

---

Read Full Post !

2675) Armenian Genocide and Turkey: Interview with Ara Sarafian

Q: On April 24th 2008 you went to Istanbul to participate in a conference on the genocide of Armenians. Was this the first time you participated in this kind of meeting in Turkey with Turkish historians? .

A: The April 24th meeting was a commemorative event organized by the Istanbul branch of the Turkish Human Rights' association. This was not the first time I have worked with the Turkish Human Rights Association.

Q: The Turkish speakers who participated in this meeting organized by the Human Rights Association in Turkey were, it seem, honest researchers. But that still was not the case. What is the utility of participating in meetings alongside notorious deniers such as Justin McCarthy.

A: There were no deniers on the panel. All were outspoken proponents for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, the democratization of Turkey, and upholding the human rights of all social groups in Turkey. None of the speakers shirked from talking about the Armenian Genocide in explicit terms. The speakers included Eren Keskin and Ragip Zarakoglu, who have over a dozen court cases against them because of their opinions.

Q: Do you believe that it is worth speaking with deniers?

A: As a historian I have to look at what deniers say and sometimes I have to address what they say as part of my work. Denialist historiography has currency in Turkey and it has some impact in the English speaking world. So I do not ignore it as a matter of course. For example, I worked on Ottoman archives regarding the Armenian issue in the 1990s. I found that these archives did not support the Turkish thesis on the Genocide, but supported the consensus that the events of 1915 constituted genocide.

I published my findings in Armenian Forum, and my findings have been used by others. Now Taner Akçam has even produced a book on the same materials. Last year I challenged Turkish historians (deniers) to undertake a case study on the Harput plain, where they would produce details of deportations from the Harput plain and state where the deportees were resettled according to the Ottoman deportation decrees and regulations (cited by Turkish historians at face value). Yusuf Halacoglu, having accepted to undertake the case study, stated that the records in question did not exist. Dr. Halacoglu never explained why the records did not exist, though people can draw their own conclusions: his disclosure had an immediate impact in Turkey as people asked why such Ottoman records did not exist (or remain inaccessible) if the deportations were supposed to be an orderly event.

Similarly, when Turkish historians and parliamentarians denied the integrity of the 1916 British parliamentary blue book, I decided to respond to their position with a critical edition of the blue book, where the denial of the Armenian Genocide was the main focus. I decided to engage them on this occasion because of the prominence of the deniers (practically the whole Turkish political establishment) and because all of the relevant materials on the blue book were in western archives and could not be manipulated.

So, the answer to your question is that I do engage deniers of the Armenian Genocide as part of my work.

Q: What about Turkish research on the issue of the genocide? Is there any evolution about it, a change on the approach and the conclusions? What are today the various kinds of Turkish historians?

A: Turkey today is a more open society and there is a lot more critical interest in the events if 1915. Some historians there are also doing worthwhile, even groundbreaking, work related to the Genocide. At the same time, there is more pressure on professional deniers to make a better case for the Turkish nationalist position. While the starting point of professional deniers is the same, some argue the same nationalist themes in a more slick manner, while others try to make the Turkish position stronger by making some concessions (eg. `During the deportations of 1915 there were some massacres but it was not genocide.') Such concessions are forced, but they are significant.

Q: What about the Armenian position on the Genocide?

A: I personally think that there is a need to always appraise and reappraise the so-called `Armenian position.' The current Armenian position is somewhat reactionary and shaped by the denial issue, with a fixation to "prove" the genocide over and over again. Lobbyists have made the situation much more rigid. However, as historians and intellectuals we have to maintain a critical perspective and keep asking the hard questions, many of which have been elided. Our conviction as academics has to be based on research and open debate and not the manipulation or restriction of research agendas. For example, we have to explain why over 100,000 Armenians were sent to western Syria and not massacred; why there were no more major massacres in Der Zor after 1916; why were some people not killed in exile, such as Aram Andonian or Yervant Odian? Is it possible that the CUP was not as powerful and omnipresent as sometimes thought? Is it possible that there was more opposition to the CUP than previously thought or admitted? Is it possible that even Jemal Pasha did not share the anti-Armenian zeal of Talaat Pasha or Behaeddin Shakir?

Q: Do you feel an evolution amongst Turkish people regarding the Armenian Genocide?

A: Yes, it is possible to talk about the Armenian issue in Turkey today, and there is a lot more sympathy for Armenians. Even if the word "genocide" is not used, there is a recognition that Armenians were cleansed from their ancestral homelands in Turkey today. I would even say that deniers, that is those people who only castigate Armenians, are a minority in Turkey. That is why much of the denialist efforts today are geared towards Turkish audiences, and that is why Armenians would do well in addressing Turkish audiences in a more sympathetic manner - unless their only objective is to hurt Turks, which I find is the case in some quarters.

Q: Are the Turkish archives open to all researchers including Armenian?

A: Turkish archives are open and present interesting records. However, they are compromised and need to be evaluated in an appropriate professional manner. Where there are difficulties, they need to be addressed, also in an appropriate manner.

I worked in such archives in the 1990s, I had some difficulties in gaining access to the catalogued materials, then I was banned for several years, and I was recently told that I was readmitted and should not have any problems.

Some of the rules to gain access need to be changed, such as restrictions of the number of documents one can examine. Sometimes these documents only contain a few lines and should be given out in batches rather than sheets (eg in the case of telegrams). However, such problems can be solved over time. Right now the main restrictions to the use of Ottoman records are appropriate training and funding. After the early 1990s I was practically bankrupted and could not continue with my work in Turkey. I hope future historians will not face the same problems.

Q: Do you feel that these archives were falsified?

A: I have no evidence that the records in these archives were falsified, and I have not heard anyone else make the same claim. However, the available records are not complete and we need to investigate why this is the case. [Perhaps an example would be the deportation and resettlement records Yusuf Halaçoglu stated did not exist around Harput and elsewhere].

Q: Are there still any documents in these archives which attest the existence of the Armenian Genocide?

A: In my opinion, the answer is yes, especially in conjunction with other records.

The Ottoman records show that the central authorities, and Talaat Pasha personally, had complete control over the deportation process. They issued orders and supervised the implementation of these orders on a daily basis through the telegraph. The state had both custody and control over the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. However, the available Ottoman records do not account for what ultimately happened to these deported people.

That is why the voices of survivors, as well as western archives, are so important.

Q: Turkish officials, based on these archives, deny the genocide and defend the thesis of the deportation, without criminal intention. Erdogan had stated, that the Ottoman officials in 1915 gave money to the Armenian people during the deportation. What can we think about it?

A: It is up to us to argue well against deniers. For example, if Prime Minister Erdogan has mentioned that Armenian deportees were given pocket money in 1915, we could tell him that such state support was rarely given to deportees and often Armenian recipients were subsequently killed. A concrete example to make such a case would be the fate of the 24 April 1915 deportees from Constantinople. We know from Armenian sources that they were given a sum by the authorities and most of these deportees were subsequently killed. So, Erdogan's statement can be used as an occasion to engage him in a critical manner, to set the agenda, perhaps by pointing out that Turkish official historians have never stated what happened to the April 24th deportees. Why not? If they are not able to account for the fate of these people, or to substantiate the charges against them, then what can we say about the Turkish nationalist thesis and its sources? To stress once again, it is up to us to engage the issues that arise in a meaningful manner.

Q: Are Armenian archives open to all researchers, including the Turks?

A: I can not answer that question in a definitive manner, though I know that some "Armenian archives" in the diaspora are not open to researchers for a variety of reasons. The most important ones are the Jerusalem Patriarchate archives. I have tried to access them twice and turned away. The other archives are the Zoryan Institute archives, composed of the private papers of Armenian survivors, whose families deposited their records with the Zoryan Institute in the 1980s. A far as I know, these materials are still not catalogued and accessible to scholars. I understand that the ARF archives in Boston have been catalogued up to 1925, while the AGBU Nubarian Library archives in Paris have been open for at least a decade.

Q: Do we still have anything to prove on the reality of the Armenian Genocide?

A: The fact of the Armenian Genocide is a given. There are no more Armenians left to speak of in modern Turkey, where most Armenians lived before WWI. They were forced out with much bloodletting and never allowed to return. Their properties were confiscated by the Ottoman state in 1915, and the record of Armenians in Turkey was erased over the past 90 years.

However, historically there is still a lot we can learn about the events of 1915, and there is a lot more that can be said about the Armenian Genocide conceptually, in terms of the contemporary context of the diaspora, Armenia, Turkey and even further afield.

Q: What kind of department of research the Armenians should concentrate their studies to stop denial effectively?

A: As a historian, I would still stress the importance to study the Armenian Genocide in all of its details and complexities, the way Jews have studied the Holocaust. It is important that Armenian themselves are in a position to represent themselves.

However, the denial of the Armenian Genocide is a political exercise, rooted in an authoritarian Turkish state. The democratization of Turkey today is thus an essential element in countering the denial of the Armenian Genocide, by allowing both Turks and Armenians to examine the past in a critical manner. Most Turks will probably be open to a critical examination of the past, including the fact and the denial of the Armenian Genocide over the past decades.

But I should say that there is an ethical dimension to resolving the issue. My fear is that we might be entering into a new phase of treating the Genocide as an ideological instrument - whether it is to render the recognition of the Genocide a meaningless gesture, or to seek to dispossess Turkish peasants from their lands in eastern Turkey.

Q: What do you think about the Erdogan proposition to create a mixed Turkish Armenian historian commission regarding the events of 1915? And what is your reaction, after Sarkissian's recent answer, which is strongly different from Kotcharian's position?

A: My understanding is that Kotcharyan's position was that we already know what happened in 1915, and such issues should be discussed in a broader manner, with open borders and diplomatic relations between Turkey and Armenia.

Sarkissyan has said much the same thing, but he seems to have accepted in principle that a mixed commission from Turkey and Armenia could look at the events of 1915.

I think both Kotcharyan's and Sarkissyan's answers have merit (and pitfalls ahead of them). The current Sarkissyan position is a higher risk strategy that could open new doors and yield dividends. However, Sarkissyan should have a more explicit offer of what would constitute a meaningful mixed commission in terms of approach, scope, access, material resources and work schedule. Perhaps Sarkissyan should ask for specific materials to be produced, such as Ottoman deportation and resettlement records, or the indictment records for the 1919 trials. If the offer is a reasonable one, Erdogan may have to accept it, and let Turkish nationalists fight their own corner.

---

Gomidas Institute, www.gomidas.org
Sep 2008 Nouvelles d'Armenie

---

---

# 2675 Commentary for Mr. Sarafian, 16.12.2008

---

I have read your above posting, and I am not surprised at the tone and reasoning of Mr. Ara Sarafian, in a parody type pre-set interview, between a parrot style correspondent, and a repetition of slanderous cursing of
“denialist” which would make any reader sea-sick for the type of defense by defaming others who don’t agree!.

Mr. Sarafian “claims to be a historian or scholar”, but he could not escape from his Armenian identity, which he is paid to defend in all cases and propagate the “hatred mission” under mantles of scholarship, human rights and similar empty words, used to favor only those who are fed by such institutes and have benefits in parrot speaking.

I have attended the subject meeting on April 24th, 2008 and it was the “first time that I was accepted” in a hostile environment claiming to “defend human rights” by disrespecting ordinary humans, old enough to be their fathers or even grand fathers, and in my home country. You know Mr. Sarafian, that was a “free comedy play” so easily staged in Turkey for some persons who boast for being anti-Turkish, anti-law, anti-nation but not anti-Armenian!

Regarding Mr. Sarafian and acting correspondent, I need not to take any of the empty words, for any serious value, because they stand on such strong evidence like ”The fact of the Armenian Genocide is given”! Whose fact is this? Which authorized legal court took any such decision? Mr. Sarafian, has my book full of some 1600 excerpts plus some 400 verbatim documents, and unless he proves that, the evidence I have submitted in this book compiled from Armenian and pro-Armenian scholars and sources, he must restrain his lectures! I have not received a single question or objection on any part of it by any authority, or G-screamers and or their cheer-teamsters! I hereby invite all historians, propagating a lie as if true (and make a living by marketing this huge fallacy) to prove that the evidence given in my book is WRONG or DOCTORED or LIE!

To make things easier for parties I herewith submit my three-slice essay “GENOCIDE LIES NEED NO ARCHIVES” part 1-2-3 postings 2610-2635. These are less than 10 pages. I have read the boring interview, and Mr. Sarafian is a true scholar, he MUST READ THESE ARMENIAN and AMERICAN (not Turkish or denialist etc.) documents and explain to me which part is not true! These are your own OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS and any decent CANNOT SAY I DON’T WANT TO READ OR KNOW THESE, because they don’t suit my aim!

I think that Mr. Sarafian is taking advantage of the Turkish courtesy and hospitality by twisting facts and, bypassing realities! If he is a true scholar as claimed he has no option to be selective he can be a hypocrite. For how many more years you think your G-musicians will be able to cheat the world and keep on making “collections for the holy cause”! As I have openly said, you either prove that what I have given as proof is wrong, or else SHUT UP! The “outside saviors” have brought nothing but calamities to the Turkish Armenians, and I am doing my best (with some Armenian and other friends) to prevent any new explosions when so many joggle around with explosive remarks and fire matches! Mevlana had said “Either appear as you are, or be as you appear”! I am afraid that Mr. Sarafian, does not fit in this simple sentence, with present behaviors!

---

Sukru S. Aya

---

---

Read Full Post !

2674) Hacking History: Archaeological Museum of Van by Ara Sarafian

Van, Turkey - The Archaeological Museum of Van is a small, two-story provincial museum. It became notorious in the 1980s when its upper floor housed an overtly anti-Armenian . . exhibition of human remains, bullets, and spent cartridges, all of which, the museum explained, was evidence of a genocide committed by Armenians against Turks during the First World War.

This exhibition was the only reference to Armenians in the entire museum. As far as the museum was concerned, Armenians had no other presence in this area and there certainly was no genocide of Armenians in 1915.

Many local Kurds mocked the museum, and some guidebooks to Turkey even ridiculed it for its anti-Armenian exhibition.

When the Turkish government announced the renovation of Holy Cross Cathedral on Aghtamar Island near Van in 2005, I was interested to see how Turkish authorities were going to explain the presence of the 10th-century Armenian church without making any reference to Armenia or Armenian history in the museum of Van. This renovation was a high-profile event and was packaged as a peace offering for better relations with Armenians at a time when Turkey was making renewed efforts to join the European Union.

If hundreds of foreign dignitaries and journalists were going to come to the opening ceremonies in 2007, how would the Turkish authorities avoid the embarrassment of this museum?

When I visited Van in June 2006, the museum was closed. The word on the street was that the government objected to the anti-Armenian exhibit and wanted to remove it, while the military insisted that it stay. Given this impasse, the government simply closed down the museum "for renovations" until earlier this year.

The museum thus remained closed when Holy Cross Cathedral was officially opened as a museum in 2007. Turkish and foreign dignitaries were thus saved the embarrassment of observing the discrepancy between the denial of Armenian history in the museum of Van and the praise Turkish authorities elicited from commentators for their work at Aghtamar Island.
After the renovation

Now that the museum is open, we can make our own assessment of the renovation it underwent between 2006 and 2008.

The ground floor remains very much the same, with wonderful Urartian artifacts that include pottery, metalwork, jewelry, and furniture. There isn't a great deal, but what one can see is both fascinating and beautiful.

The "Armenian atrocities" section on the upper floor is removed. It is replaced with more Urartian artifacts, as well as ethnographic materials, such as kilims, period costumes, Ottoman swords, rifles, and revolvers, as well as household items and Korans.

Considering all the effort that has gone into the removal of the "Armenian atrocities" section of the museum, and all the thought that must have gone into the content of the newly designed upper floor, one is disappointed to see that Armenians have been made invisible in this new museum: there is nothing that refers to Armenia or Armenians anywhere. Although there is a map of the region showing a number of churches and monasteries, they are not identified as Armenian churches or monasteries, nor is there any explanation anywhere in the museum that mentions either Armenia or Armenians in a historical context.

The state has the power

How might one interpret these apparent contradictions about the official Turkish attitude to Armenians? While Turkish authorities maintain their wish for better Turkish-Armenian relations and insist on their positive sentiments behind the renovation of Holy Cross Cathedral, the museum of Van reflects a more sinister attitude that is not lost on Armenian visitors: the Turkish state has the power to do whatever it wants, including writing people in or out of history. This sinister message is in evidence even within 20 miles of Aghtamar, where more than a dozen Armenian churches and monasteries have been devastated.

After my visit, I introduced myself to some museum officials. Once again they were courteous, even pleasant. They were also quite knowledgeable and perhaps a little embarrassed. They were quite cognizant of Armenian history. When talking about Armenian artifacts, they made reference to beautiful Armenian khachkars in the province and the need to preserve them "in situ," in their natural environment. "One should not drag them to museums" was a comment, though they were aware that these khachkars were almost always smashed or desecrated.

"Some of this damage is done by Armenians, from Armenia" I was told.

"You have to understand that we can not protect everything. There is so much of it" was another comment. "Even mosques are damaged by people." Indeed, I have personally seen some abandoned mosques in the old city of Van, surrounded by beer bottles and covered with graffiti (in Turkish). I have also seen the example of the Seljuk cemetery in Gevash, on the way to Aghtamar, which is well protected and preserved behind walls. It has a beautiful kumbet-mausoleum that has been renovated. But no such care has been taken of anything Armenian, except for the recent renovation of Holy Cross Cathedral on Aghtamar Island. The fact remains that everything Armenian has been damaged, and most of it completely destroyed.

Buried gold

"Part of the problem is that people are ignorant and think Armenians buried gold everywhere, so it is quite common to go grave-robbing." Indeed, grave robbing is a major problem, but the government has allowed it to continue for decades. It complements the destruction of the churches and monasteries in the province, such as the monasteries around Gevash (within minutes of the Seljuk cemetery), or the complete demolition of the entire monastic complex at Nareg.

"Is there nothing else Armenian that could be placed in the museum?" I asked. The answer was no, nothing that we're aware of. Did they not find other artifacts related to Armenians? The answer was no.

"How about putting some Bibles alongside the Korans in the ethnographic section? After all, Armenians were Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire." That was an interesting idea, they said.

I then asked the obvious question, "Whose decision is it to include or not to include such materials?"

One person pointed a finger upward, and said, "The Ministry" of Culture and Tourism.

So, from what I understood, for all the professionalism of the museum staff, the decision as to what museums can include or exclude in Turkey, or what museums can say or not say, rests on the government in Ankara. It is significantly a political or ideological question, not a professional one left to specialists. This should not have been a surprising answer, given what I had already seen in Ankara and Erzurum, but it was still a disappointment. This is an official attitude that can only be described as arrogant, chauvinistic, and literally offensive toward Armenians and other minorities - not the image the Turkish state wants to project abroad.

I was told that there would be a new museum in Van sometime soon. I hope by the time the new museum is built, there is also a new and more enlightened attitude from the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism.

---

Ara Sarafian / © 2008 Gomidas Institute

---

" This article was commissioned by the Armenian Reporter and appeared in the Dec. 11, 2008 edition of the newspaper and on its website, www.reporter.am " Vincent Lima

---

---

# 2674 Commentary for Mr. Sarafian

---

I have read the article by Ara Sarafian with interest, since I have been through the places he refers to.

Ara Sarafian, as head of the Gomidas Institute, has a job and mission to accomplish for which he is paid, and normalization of relations or dropping of the “G” screams, is not within his goals. Actually, every time Sarafian wanted to “communicate at civilized levels with Turkish counterparts”, he was instantly intercepted by ANCA and the ruling governments in Erivan.

I want to believe that Ara Sarafian, is one of the “reasonable persons” to “discover truths” instead of pushing dogmas. I attended the Conference this spring in Istanbul where Sarafian made a presentation about the 235 Armenian leaders who were arrested on April 24th, 1915. Actually, I and my two friends of same ages were the only three Turks within the hall of about 150 guests, listening to fiery speeches against Turks, favoring Kurds and Armenians only! I gave Ara Sarafian my signed book, had a short conversation. My short commentary and reaction to antagonist comments and need of “humane pacification” could not be wooed but was neither applauded. I estimate Sarafian’s feelings, his solitude and the paradoxes between “what he learned based on documents, and what he is expected to say to remain in business”!

Since I am no scholar, I am not employed or paid by any party, I have the “liberty of being selective in what I use as a source or give a presentation”. Scholars do not have such rights or comfort and I may say that compared to many biased and ignorant Turkish scholars, Sarafian is more lenient, polite and balanced. This attitude also appears in his article, to which I want to bring the following clarifications and counter comments:

a. I had visited the Van Museum with some Turkish Armenian friends about five years ago. I did not feel the need to go up and see photos of butcheries, competing with so many others in Armenian genocide museums or publications. I already have more than enough which only tells me “humans are beastly equivalent”. I am also pleased to learn that Van Museum removed these pictures and proofs of savagery. Yet, I would have expected Sarafian to make a similar suggestion for “Armenian museums” in reciprocation.

b. Despite many other priorities for a country with plenty monuments but shortage of cash, and after having seen the unique stone arts of the Akhtamar Church, I am glad that at least one among many hundreds was saved from future damage. Yet, Sarafian did not mention that the rock quarry on the other side of the Arax river is only 1-2 kilometers from the damaged buildings in Ani, and every time (so many in a day) the dynamite blows in the quarry, everything on the opposite side shakes because of resonance and shock! Armenia is full of nothing but rocks and at least as a goodwill gesture to protect their own ancient city, they could move this quarry elsewhere!

c. Other than the very rightful “search of buried gold damaging many places”, I am somewhat amazed at the suggestion of Sarafian to have Armenian artifacts displayed in the Van Museum! What Turkish artifact is on display in any Armenian exhibit or genocide museums spreading everywhere? In 1850, half of the people of present Armenia were Muslims! Is there any mosque or Moslem cemetery left (but one Iranian mosque without mass as showpiece)? I do not think that the present minorities (Armenians, Jews or whatever Greeks are left) have any serious reason to complaint for any discrimination. Their schools, churches, newspapers, social activities are in full progress in harmony which the “outsiders try to disrupt” and murk the clear waters.

Speaking of Armenians of Van, let me refresh some memories with below excerpts. One dominant feature of the Hunchakist-Dashnakist Armenians is to “demand more and more every time” and seldom to be content.

* Turkey governed very well, as governments went, in the first centuries of her rule, and the Armenians were not unhappy. They were not admitted to the Army but paid a head tax instead; but many of their man cleverer than the Turk in finance, became advisers to royalty. The Armenians formed the body of industrious farmers in Asia Minor and were useful business men in the coast cities, where they won respect and envy. [1]

* There is little, if any racial antagonism between Armenians and Turks. Had religion and politics never come to antagonize them, they could live together in essential harmony. [2]

* (Photos) Part of the Boyish Company of Volunteers who tramped from Artemid to Van : Armenia. The oldest of these boys was twelve….Two privates in the Artemid Army of Small Boys. [3]

* Armenian Children in Military Training. Soldiery Game or a Killer’s Fame (Photo and article) [4]

* For photos of Armenian soldiers posing next to Turkish guns in April 1915 at Van, please see “Why Armenia Should be Free” by Garekin Pastirmadjian.

Last word and Question: Which one of the above references, would you have liked to see in the Van Museum as a memory of Armenians of Van, Mr. Sarafian?

Sukru Server Aya – Istanbul

[1] & [2] National Geographic, October 1915, pages 347 – 348

[3] National Geographic, August 1919, pages 182-183

[4] Armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2007/04/1637-media-scanner-readers-letters-to.html

---

---

Read Full Post !