"I told the Armenians: Let's dig your alleged mass graves wherever the Turks supposedly committed genocide to you and get the recovered bones forensically analyzed in international laboratories. But they have not yet shown any mass graves since 2003.
Despite all this they alleged at the Swedish parliament that there is a mass grave in Mardin. I insisted on this matter and a member of parliament with Armenian roots from Sweden came here and a Syriac Christian was accompanying him. We went to Mardin . . .
1.6.15
3554) I Told The Armenians: Let's Dig Your Alleged Mass Graves
Labels: Yusuf Halacoglu
23.3.10
3032) Halacoglu Is Responding to Taner Akcam

by TruckTurkey
TARAF 29th of May,2008 - [Click for Turkish]
Yusuf Halacoglu Responding
Dikran M. KHALIGIAN from Armenian National Committee indicated in a . . .
6.5.07
1663) International Symposium On The Development Of Turkish-Armenian Relations And The Events Of 1915
Gazi University, Ataturk Research and Application Center, Ankara, Turkey, 23-25 November 2005
A three day symposium, dubbed by some as an alternate to the controversial Sept 24-25 Armenian Conference held at Bilgi University in Istanbul, ended today where over 50 presentations were made during 11 sessions by speakers from 7 countries, including Russia and the USA. However there were no speakers from France or the United Kingdom, countries repeatedly mentioned during the conference as having a direct responsibility in the creation of the Armenian issue, or from Armenia and the Armenians in Turkey or the Armenian Patriarchate either. The Armenian Patriarch of Kandilli attended the Istanbul Marmara Hotel conference, “The Loyal Nation of Armenians” Nov 19-20, 2005, organized by the Federation to Fight Against the Unfounded Armenian Allegations (ASEF). . .
As the presenters and the participants started coming in, the beautiful grounds of the Gazi University, where a huge mural with many likeness of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk greets the newcomers, was filled with police, 500 to 600 according to a female police, who was holding her rifle in her hand, in addition to the regular university security forces, which was a surprise. The number of police forces were increased on the last day when Dogu Perincek was scheduled to attend the conference, to prevent the occurrence of protests that took place last year, as stated by another policeman, although there were no incidents during the entire three day period.
Following the opening speech by Prof. Dr. Hale Sivgin, the chief organizer, who even made reference to the famous Orhan Pamuk comment on the Armenian issue, Prof Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu, the President of the Turkish Historical Society (1) made a speech on the long Turkish-Armenian relations. He stated that the tragedy should be studied by scholars with different views by setting up a commission and having all archives of the involved countries and organizations active during the period opened for their use. A tall order that will probably go to deaf ears on the Armenian side who do not want to hear the Turkish views, as has been proven in the past many times, and will not sit at the same table with Turks, whom they have now labelled as “genocide deniers” and keep their archives closed.
Deputy Parliament Speaker Sadik Yakut also made a presentation and said that the Armenian issue was a national problem which needs to be solved. Speaking on behalf of the Grand National Assembly and himself, Sadik Yakut stated that explaining to the world that the issue was not only related to the Armenians was the Turkish Parliament’s mission. It would have been fitting to hear AKPD Deputy Turhan Comez who has been involved with the Armenian issue, visited Armenia recently and written about his trip and also provided suggestions on improving the Turkish – Armenian relations.
Gazi University Rector Prof. Dr. Kadri Yamac, welcoming well over a thousand participants including many university professors and students, stated that history could not be written by the resolutions passed in parliaments and city councils, as it is being done now. Using a strong language, Prof. Yamac said that those who would like to see the Parliamentary Resolutions be accepted are either Armenians or their agents. During an earlier press conference, Prof Yamac stated that all the participants of the Bilgi Univesrsity Armenian conference were also invited, but that only Prof. Dr. Baskin Oran and Prof. Dr. Fikret Adanir agreed to make presentations.
The first session was chaired by Prof. Dr. Hikmet Ozdemir where Prof. Dr. Norman Stone spoke on “Historian of Armenian Questions” and made interesting comments that the fast growing Turkey is not wanted in the region and that the Armenian issue was being kept current not by the Armenians but by those who want to weaken Turkey. On the Armenain diaspora, prof. Stone remarked that the Armenian issue was being romanticized in order to keep it alive. A good example of this would be the play that was recently staged in NYC, “The Beast on the Moon.”
A presentation by Alexander Dugin “Eurasian Response to the Greater Middle East project” was very interesting, carrying the issue of a hundred years to current times, with reference to the role of the United States in the region . Other spekares included Prof. Dr. Resat Genc of Gazi University on “The Early Period of Turkish Armenian Relations and the Gegorian Kipchacks”, Prof. Dr. Temucin Faik Ertan of Ankara university on “Armenians in Ottoman State Cadres”, and Asst. Prof. Haluk Sevi of Sakarya university on “Activities of Armenian Bands 1900-1918”. However, there were no presentations on the relations with the Armenians who live in and call Turkey home.
The second session was moderated by Ambassador (Ret.) and a deputy from CHP, Sukru Elekdag, where Prof Dr. Hikmet Ozdemir spoke on “Clashes with the Armenian Militia from the Declaration of Mobilization to the Russian Occupation” and gave a detailed summary of the rebellions and clashes across the southern and eastern regions of Anatolia, identifying the time and the location of each rebellion and uprising, including those in Zeytoon, Adana, Sassoon. Prof. Ozdemir emphasized that he was presenting his paper on behalf of the “Military History and Strategic Research department of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.”
The presentation by Ast. Prof. Kalerya A. Belova of Moscow State University, “The interest of the Combatants at the Caucasian Front During WWI” was controversial and raised several questions which was elaborated on by participants from Azerbeycan and Prof. Ozdemir. Prof Belova repeated essentially what she had stated during yet another conference in 2002. Evidently she has not shown an interest in learning and speaking the truth about the Russian involvement in the Armenian issue, or simply she is not telling the truth.
One of the most famous speakers was Prof. Guenther Lewy, who travelled from the US at age 82 and made a presentation on, “What We Know and What We Don’t Know About the Events of 1915.” During his presentation, Lewy stated that 40% of pre-war Armenians were either killed or perished which translates roughly to 600,000. When he was asked on what he thought about Prof Halacoglu statement that only around 60,000 died and the validity of the 1.5 million figure used by the Armenians, he first stated that 1.5 million number was wrong and that Halacoglu number was not correct either. After the session was over , Lewy was asked about Ambassador Morgentahu book, which he referred to during his presentation as if he was concerned about the death of Turks, referring to a section where the Ambassador wrote about the terrible conditions that the Turks were in, he agreed that it was debatable (2).
Hasan Kundakci, (Lt. general, Rtd.) spoke about “The Law of Relocation: Its Causes and Execution.” The third session was moderated by Gunduz Aktan, who was at Edinburg, UK, early in November, speaking to the City Council members against the proposed Armenian Resolution together with Prof. Norman Stone. (Resolution was adopted by 29 in favour, 16 against votes, which is unjust and sad.) The speakers included Prof. Dr. Sina Aksin of Ankara University, Prof. Dr. Baskin Oran of Ankara university, Asst. Prof Inanc Atilgan of TOBB University, Omer E. Lutem of ASAM (Amb. Rtd.) and Prof Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu.
The fourth session was moderated by Mr. Halil Sivgin where Ass. Prof. Yusuf Sarinay (Director General of State Archives) spoke about “Armenian Relocation and Tribunals, 1915-1916. Dr. N. Bilal Simsir spoke about “Armenian Allegations and the Malta Deportees”, followed by a presentation by Ass. Prof. Feridun Ata of Selcuk University, “Can the Court Martial Tribunals Constitute Evidence for the Armenian Allegations.”
Sukru Elekdag spoke about “The Evaluation of Armenian Allegations From the Perspective of International Law.” Amb. Sukru Elekdag stated that “those who advocate Armenian thesis cannot prove their allegations within the context of the United Nations Conventions on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Article 4 of the Convention states that only persons and public officials can be accused of genocide, not juristic persons or states. Also, Article 6 of the same convention says that those allegations should be determined by competent tribunals.'' Stating that allegations have both political and legal implications, Amb Elekdag proposed that a court of arbitration should be formed to deal with the issue (3). When Amb Elekdag was reminded during a break that the British Parliament had responded negatively to the Turkish parliament’s request for a rebuttal of the infamous “The Blue Book”, which was reported in Zulfu Livaneli column in Vatan (Nov 22) and also in Radikal, Sukru Elekdag said that it was not final yet.
Prof. Dr. Turkkaya Ataov, first complaining about not being allowed to attend the Bilgi University Armenian conference in Istanbul, presented information on his involvement in the 1984 and 1985 Orly lawsuits in Paris and his stay there for five months in “I Support Free Discussion. With My Personal Experience.”
The fifth session was chaired by Prof. Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu where Prof. Dr. Fikret Adanir spoke about “Armenian Genocide Arguments and Historiography.” Dr. Gunay Evinc (Attorney – USA) made a presentation on “The Armenian Pressure on the Freedom of Expression in US and the Law Suit brought by the Turkish-Americans in Massachusett.” Dr. Evinc also appeared on SKYTURK TV Channel where he spoke about the Massachusetts lawsuit and was also featured in a photograph together with former Swiss MP Albert Hourite in Tercuman newspaper on Nov 25. Mr. Hourite expressed his sorrow for the acceptance of the Armenian Resolution by the Swiss Parliamnet and apologized on behalf of the Swiss people, adding that EU is trying to break up Turkey.
The sixth session was chaired by Amb. Omer Lutem where Asst. Prof. Mehmet Yuva from Damascus University spoke on “The Approach of Syrian and Lebanese Armenians to the Issue”, PhD Hakan yavuz of Utah university spoke on “The Concept of Genocide in General and its Politicization” and others.
The seventh session was moderated by Prof. Dr. Bayram Kodaman where speakers told about the Armenian genocide in Azerbaijan and the drama of the Azerbaijani fugitives.
The eighth session on Friday was chaired by Dr. Bilal Simsir where the first speaker was the famous professor from Bilkent University, Prof. Stanford Shaw , formerly with the University of California, who made an excellent presentation called “The Ottoman Holocaust”, giving a complete overview of the tragedy and stated that between 1911-1923, the Ottoman Empire was involved in five destructive wars imposed on them by the great powers and the newly created Christian states in the Balkans. Referring to the “war of independence” led between 1918-1923, Prof Shaw stated that this should really be called “”War of Liberation” and that during the “The Great War of 1910-1915”, sixty percent of the Ottoman population had perished.
Prof. Stanford Shaw stated that both the US and the EU want to hold the Turkish Republic responsible for the events that took place before its founding, emphasizing that no single group should be blamed for the tragedies which cost the lives of 4 to 5 million Turks. Prof Shaw also indicated that bringing large number of German officers and the establishment of the Special Investigation Group were among the reasons to criticize the Ottoman government but not for a deliberate genocide. In order to understand the full account of events, Prof. Shaw suggested that archives of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Red Crescent, the Immigration Office and the Special Investigation Group should also be opened.
During the ninth session, moderated by Prof. Dr. Enver Konukcu, Asst. Prof. Senol Kantarci of Suleyman Demirel University, spoke about “The Second Van Insurgence: An important event Leading to the Decision of Reloaction.” Prof. Kantarci stated that 35-40 thousand Turks were massacred during the Van rebellion.
The highlight of the speeches was the presentation by Dogu Perincek during the final and the 11th session moderated by Prof. Dr. Resat Genc, where Prof. Dr. Selahi Sonyel from London Near East Universtiy also spoke. Dogu Perincek stated that the 4 million Turks in Europe and the 1 million Turks in US would be aroused to defend against the Armenian allegations.
In the above brief summary of some of the presentations, where the names of the presenters and their titles are noted, there was no one from the Bilgi University, Bogazici University or the Sabanci university, which came as a surprise.
Personal observations and suggestions
The November 17, 2005 vote in the Edinburg City Council, where around 41 brave British Turks and their friends fought gallantly against the passage of the proposed Armenian resolution with some help from friends around the world and Turkey and thus showed to the world that Armenian propaganda will no longer go un challenged. It would have been nice to have a representative from the Edinburgh Group to make a presentation at this conference in order to share their experience with the participants, especially a statement issued by one of the councillor to Edinburgh group who voted against the motion and said: “I completely agree with you that we are just being used to perpetrate a myth. This was an humanitarian tragedy, not genocide, if anyone is to be blamed, it is the European powers who for their own greed used the Armenians to try and to bring about the collapse and dismemberment of the Ottoman State. I would also be grateful to receive the excerpts of the anti-Turkish propaganda. I will ofcourse be voting against the motion on the alleged genocide.”
Prof. Stanford Shaw’s presentation provided new information on the Armenian issue and a new terminology (Turkish Holocaust), which could be presented during a special occasion at the US Museum of Holocaust, such as on April 24, 2006, where a demand for the removal of the Hitler panel can also be registered in person.
Although “Development of Turkish-Armenian relations” was the main title of this important symposium, there were no presentations or suggestions related to this, which I might have missed. A representative from the Avrasya Foundation could have told the vast audience the inroads that they have been able to make through their efforts and the publication of their excellent magazine, “Turkish & Armenian WM, Women’s Magazine” whose goal is to replace mutual mistrust and conflict with reconciliation and dialogue. Another organization which has been working on the improvement of relations through business relations is the “Turkish-Armenian Business Development Council”
There was no mention of the cultural exchanges between Armenia and the Turks either, which I might have missed, or any reference to the fact that the Turkish Government has taken an important step for the restoration of historic Armenian Church in Lake Van.
Almost all of the moderators were also themselves presenters. It would have been an excellent idea to have university students handle this position, giving them the experience and also training for future conferences . It would also been a good idea to have representatives from the ordinary public make presentations, especially those with first hand experience in the fight against the incredible anti-Turkish propaganda around the world. In the United States where a play “The Beast on the Moon” has made incredible damage to the image of Turks using the alleged Armenian genocide as a pretext.
There was an Exhibition by the State Archives in the hallway of the Conference centre, many dating back to the late 1900s, including some letters from the Armenian organization thanking the French government for their contributions. There was also several stands where books were available for sale, including:
- Ovanes Kacaznuni, Tasnak Partisinin Yapacagi Bir Sey Yok (1923
- What is the Truth? – Documents and Publications on Genocide, by Azerbaijan Cultural Association
- Azerbaycan Misak-I Millisi – 28 Mayis Istiklal Beyannemesinin Tahlili
- Azerbaycan Turk Kultur Degisi
There were no handouts or copies of the presentations. The organizers promised that all the presentations would be published soon and made available to anyone interested on this issue. As the above conference was coming to an end, there were several messages over the internet announcing more conferences to be held in the next 6 to 12 months, including one in Istanbul on December 15, 2005, one in Kayseri and another one in the US in April 2006. The proceedings from the above symposium could be useful for these conferences.
As a last comment, I would like to suggest that in future conferences emphasis be given to the Turkish-Armenian relations in Turkey and elsewhere. Here is a real life story of a Turkish woman who meets an Armenian in the United States by chance and learns that her grandfather had protected Aram (not his real name) during the temporary relocation of Armenians in 1915 and facilitated his emigration to the United States, the grandfather of the Armenian. Nesrin (not her real name) goes to one of the northern states in America to pursue her education in medicine. On the arrival date she goes to a restaurant and hears people sitting at the next table speaking Turkish. She introduces herself and starts a conversation with them. Upon learning that she is Turkish, they tell her that they are Armenian, but welcome her. Aram tells her that in 1915 before the soldiers come to their home at a town in eastern Turkey for their relocation, a Turkish man takes them to his house. They stay with him for a while before they migrate to the United States. The Turkish man sells the Armenian family's house and other properties and sends the proceedings to the Armenian in the US.
The Armenian prospers in the US and when Nesrin tells him that the Turk who had helped the Armenian family was his grandfather, he invites her to stay at his house. Nesrin tells the Armenian that she will check in at a hotel first, so her family knows where she is, and than come to their house for a visit. She keeps her promise and goes to the Armenian's villa and they reminisce about the old days in Anatolia. The Armenian invites Nesrin to stay at his house and sponsors her education for two and a half years as she was his own daughter. Nesrin returns to Turkey ten years ago and starts working at a hospital and regularly corresponds with the Armenian who helped her.
There must be many stories similar to the one above, which is seldom told for a variety of reasons. I went to American High Schools in Turkey where there were several Armenian students who were my best friends. We never thought about being different and always had good relations. When I was first introduced to the Armenian issue after attending a commemoration service at the Riverside Church in New York City in 1965, I listened to incredible stories from Robert Morgentau, the NYC Attorney General at the time, and the son of Ambassador Henry Morgentau who published a book written primarily by his Armenian secretary and Armenian translator about the Armenian issue, “Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story”. Chapter 24 of the book was re-issued by the Armenians as "The Murder of a Nation" in 1975, which does not tell the true story of what happened.
This writer happens to believe that reconciliation between the Armenians and the Turks is possible if the Armenians accept the facts as they actually happened and not as fabricated by some Armenians. An international discussion of the issue should be held with all the participants of the First World War and the non-goverenmental organizations active at the time with the documents that they possess and put this issue to bed so the Armenians once again can be friends with the Turks.
Yuksel Oktay, PE
Civil Engineer
Istanbul, Turkey
November 25, 2005
Notes:
(1) Prof. Yusuf Halacoglu was also a member of the organization board, which included Sukru Elekdag, Halil Sivgin, Omer Engin Lutem, Prof. Dr. Resat Genc, Assoc. Prof. Yusuf Sarinay and Prof. Dr. Kirali Murtezoglu.
(2) Prof. Guenter Lewy presented signed copies of his new book, The ARMENIAN MASSACRES in OTTOMAN TURKEY – A Disputed Genocide” to many of the speakers. He was asked if it would have been better to include Turkish or Moslem in the title, stating, “THE ARMENIAN AND MOSLEM MASSACRES in OTTOMAN TURKEY” and leave out “A Disputed genocide” since over 530,000 Turks were also massacred by the Armenians, according to Prof. Halacoglu. He did not agree, arguing that the way the Armenians were massacred during the relocation were different, which is debatable.
(3) Even though there were over 24 TV cameras and many reporters during the opening session of the Symposium, there was very little coverage in the TV news and very little written in the newspapers. There were also very few articles in the internet, the one from Meltem Deniz being the only one in English, as far as I could observe.
26/02/07
Comments:
Ergun KIRLIKOVALI
* More such panels, papers, more presentations presenting the Turkish suffering and losses in early 1900s are needed.
Everyone must understand clearly that what we, Turks and Turkish-Americans, are fighting is “perception”, not “reality”. The perception today is, unfortunately, primarily based on Armenian distortions, embellishments, and falsifications, thanks to Armenian propaganda saturated the West since 1915.
But perceptions are known to change. All we have to do is keep telling our side of the story until the day the West, indeed the world, learns to include the very real and more profound Turkish pain and suffering into this equation. As they do, the perception will gradually change from the unfair, biased, and bigoted charge of genocide to a more balanced, honest, and truthful reality of irregular war fought by Ottoman-Christians and Ottoman-Muslims causing a catastrophe for “all inhabitants of the area” (not just Armenians.) The role of Czarist Russia, France, England, US Protestant missionaries, the New York Times, and Armenian nationalist violent organizations, all unified in a massive front against the Ottoman Empire and all hell-bent on destroying the Turk one way or another, must also be well understood.
17.4.07
1619) Bodrum Symposium 2007 :Turks, Armenians & Truth in History
About “BODRUM” PANEL, Apr.14, 2007 “Tarihte Turkler Ermeniler ve Gercekler – 2”
This panel, was a continuation of the larger symposium of Dec.5, 2005, and was again very well organized by cooperation of Marmara Egitim Vakfi – Bodrum Municipality – Bodrum Chamber of Commerce, under the leadership of kaymakam Abdullah Kalkan, ex beuty queen Gunseli Basar, starting at 10 a.m. and closing at 3.30 p.m. with a half hours coffee break, in the conference room of Marmara Koleji. . .
First speaker Prof. Yusuf Halacoglu, made a presentation showing some documents signed by Bogos Nubar, confirming that the (Dashnak) Armenians were “belligerents de facto” and that in 1918, 390.000 were alive whilst the number of relocated persons was 600 to 700.000. Hence, there is no confirmation in any Armenian document that 1.5 million died, who did not even exist. Halacoglu said that they have records of some 450.000 relocated by names, and that 518.000 were killed or died in the same area for same reasons. Halacoglu explained that Ara Sarafian changed his mind lately, to come and evidence the opening of a new mass grave and that he hoped that a Swedish professor would show up since he had accepted all their conditions. Halacoglu explained that he even offered to cover the cost for “classification of Boston Dashnak archives” (or Yerevan) which are both closed.
Second speaker Prof. Nursen Mazici, explained the close relationship between ASALA, PKK, Cypriot Greeks and explained the involvement of the missionaries in the old days as well as their present activities spread out over Turkey. She explained that Turkey cannot possibly accept the three main conditions put forward, viz. that (1) Turkey accepts the genocide accusation, (2) that we come to terms with PKK and (3) that we surrender Cyprus to Greeks. Mazici explained that another condition, Art. 301 of the penal law, was not related to any of these. She explained that other than the previous written agreements on Cyprus, the island is of “key strategic” importance for Turkey. Likewise on PKK, who caused some 30,000 deaths and are still active with modern weaponry and bombs obtained easily in Iraq, Turkey cannot let her unified country chopped up in districts by EU. Mazici also explained the “flip-flop” activities of the Jewish lobbies primarily for their own interests.
Third speaker Sukru S. Aya, explained that he took interest in the matter, because of contradicting and conflicting information given by so called scholars, and that he found many details to be totally wrong and still copied from one another. Aya explained that the relations between Dashnaks and CUP were extremely amicable, that they had offered Autonomy in August 1914 against their siding with Turks in the coming war, but that the Dashnaks in Tiblisi rejected the offer in their craze of war for looting, taking the advice of Britain and the higher bid of the Russian Tsar to give them two more Russian provinces, on top of the Six provinces offered by the Ottomans. A quick chronological count was made to prove that there was no reason, time, means, end benefits to plan any annihilation but that the war zones had to be evacuated immediately as a military necessity of both German and Turkish army commanders. In reply to a question, Aya explained the paradoxical dedication of the Dashnaks first to Tsarist Russia, France and Britain, later to Soviet Russia becoming their satellite state. But during WWII, some Armenians from Turkey and Lebanon joined Hitler’s army, and their Armenian 812 Battalion which started with 8,000 later increased to over 20,000 with addition of Russian Armenians who fell prisoner to Germans. Aya explained the role of the Nazi Armenian troops in rounding up Jews, when the Turkish ambassador and Consuls in France, saved close to 20,000 Jews related in one way or another with Turkey, giving them Turkish I.D. apers. These were finally transported in 1943 by trains in railway cars sent from Turkey. The incident was also confirmed in the Washington Post of June 17, 1943, but that these go unnoticed by the Jewish members of the US Congress and instead they speak of a sentence which Hitler never spoke, but which was used as another Andonian type fabrication, which converted Nazi Soldier Armenians, into “Russian Army Armenian prisoners” who found acceptance in large quotas into USA including General Dro-Antranik of the Nazi army.
Fourth speaker Prof. Norman Stone spoke in his broken Turkish and pointed out the frequent errors made by Turkish historians when speaking of Assyrians (Suryani) and Keldanis, both Christians in the South East of Anatolia, one of them faithful to the Ottomans, the other collaborating with British and Arabs against Ottomans.
Last speaker Asst. Prof. Orhan Cekic, made a presentation with photos, showing the devastation of the city Van as well as several massacres. Prof. Cekic showed samples of forged documents, similarities between the signature attributed to Talat Pasha and the Aleppo governor, who was not even there on indicated dates.
The panel audience was a few hundreds, with serious questions to the panelists, promptly replied. The panel will be continued next year.
Sukru Server Aya
Istanbul, 17.04.2007
Labels: Norman STONE, Sukru AYA, Yusuf Halacoglu
22.3.07
1530) Halacoglu & Sarafian Emails
Yusuf Halacoglu, head of the Turkish Historical Society (TTK), late last month started an initiative for a joint academic study of the so-called Armenian genocide claims and in particular a alleged mass grave site near Harput, southeastern Anatolia, but his Armenian counterpart Ara Sarafian rejected the TTK head's invitation, for reasons which became the subject of much media speculation. TNA said late last month that a joint commission of scholars could conduct excavations near Nusaybin to determine whether the recently unearthed grave contains the remains of Armenians and Assyrians, another people claimed to be massacred by Turks.
However, when Sarafian refused the invitation of Halacoglu, the excavation plans were shelved.
TNA now reveals the details of the process and the email traffic between the two academics over the issue, based on the documents made available by Halacoglu himself.
The details and the emails are as follows:
Fatih Altayli from Sabah daily claimed in his March 13 column that Yusuf Halacoglu, head of the Turkish Historical Society (TTK), refused to open up all the archives and show certain documents. "His Armenian counterpart Ara Sarafian decided not to meet with Halacoglu, claiming that there's no meaning in the meeting if some documents are hidden or not shown," wrote Altayli.
Likewise, Mehmet Ali Birand headlined his March 14 column "Armenians score a goal." Based on Altayli's statements, Birand claimed that the meeting was cancelled due to our unwillingness to share some documents and he asked, "Then why do we invite these people?" Ismet Berkan from Radikal daily also claimed that Halacoglu is reluctant to meet with historians.
Halacoglu stated that he already declared the facts in a March 9 press conference and gave reporters copies of emails between Sarafian and himself. "No, I repeat that neither have I been unwilling to open the archives, nor have I said I would only open only a part of them," said Halacoglu. "Moreover, I don't have any authority to hide documents or not show them. Every person who does research knows this. The administration of the State Archives belongs only to the State Archives General Directorate." Halacoglu added that all archives regarding Armenians are open to researchers at http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr
"So the accusations of journalists Altayli and Birand are untrue," said Halacoglu, and added that he has always been willing to cooperate with foreign colleagues, especially Armenian ones, on this issue. "I'll continue to my efforts to cooperate," he said. "As for Sarafian, emails send by him to me and my replies were given to reporters, and anyone who wants to read them is welcome. If those mails are examined carefully, it's clear why Sarafian changed his mind. On such a sensitive subject, everyone should be more careful not to lead to misunderstandings."
First email of Ara Sarafian dated Feb. 22:
Dear Dr. Halacoglu,
I am writing to thank you for agreeing to undertake a case study of the events of 1915 in the Harput area. I hope that we will be able to reach a better understanding of our different positions on this period. I certainly look forward to examining Ottoman deportations records from Turkish archives today.
Since you accepted our offer, I would like to publicize our preliminary agreement and use the opportunity to raise some funding and to approach specialists for the work ahead. I hope you will also be able to find the means to carry out the work in Turkey as well. I realize that the work ahead will not be easy for either one of us.
Perhaps we can arrange a meeting in Ankara some time soon and meet face to face. I will keep you updated on a weekly basis. Should you wish to discuss any matter with me, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ara Sarafian
Email I sent on Feb. 26 in reply:
Dear Dr. Sarafian,
I received your mail. I want to thank you, too. No one can understand each other on this issue better than us, I guess. Please don't fall prey to newspaper reports. They write many things according to their biases. Let's set a date to work together and talk face to face. Let's determine the principles, what kind of work we'll conduct, who will be on the committee and which archives we'll research. We have to work on these issues. Let's have a dialogue directly, not via the newspapers. If this isn't inconvenient for you, would you write your letters in Turkish? In Turkey almost everyone supports the idea of working together. This will be a good start. We are scholars and accept the result we get.
Wishing you success.
Sincerely,
Yusuf Halacoglu
Reply of Ara Sarafian dated Feb. 28:
Dear Dr. Halacoglu,
I have been following developments on Turkish news channels and I am sorry we couldn't proceed with our joint project.
The project I suggested last week was in good faith. I thought it would be both challenging and productive for both of us. If the relevant Ottoman records you previously characterized as meticulously kept are not available, then we cannot proceed. Obviously I am disappointed.
I hope we will be able to work together on new projects in the future. Next time I will write to you directly and avoid any undue public discussion.
Sincerely,
Ara Sarafian
Gomidas Institute,
London
My reply mail dated Feb. 28:
Dear Dr. Sarafian,
I have to say that your mail disappointed me. I told you that I'd be glad to cooperate with you. We would be do research in Ottoman archives and see what happened together. I mentioned that meeting face-to-face would be better. I can appreciate your condition. Until I receive a reply to my mail, I'll inform no one. Maybe you could change your mind. As you know the one who told the newspapers first wasn't me, but you sent your mail to the papers. I await your reply.
Sincerely,
Yusuf Halacoglu
22 March 2007
New Anatolian
Labels: Ara SARAFIAN, Yusuf Halacoglu
9.3.07
1478) Sarafian bows to diaspora pressure, says Halaçoglu
The possibility of joint research by Turkish and Armenian historians into the 1915 tragedy of Anatolian Armenians -- described by Armenians as a genocide but contested by Turkey -- has fallen through, Yusuf Halaçoglu of the Turkish Historical Society (TTK) announced yesterday in Ankara, blaming Armenian diaspora pressure for the failure. . . .
Labels: Ara SARAFIAN, Yusuf Halacoglu
21.11.05
443) 'Turks and Armenians were Made Enemies'
Turkish Institute of History (TTK) President Professor Yusuf Halacoglu stated Turks and Armenians, who lived together in peace for 850 years, were made enemies of each other by internal and external powers. . .
Indicating a serious murder is being committed Halacoglu added:
“The committers of these murders are the imperialist powers which accept so called Armenian Genocide in their parliaments.”
Halacoglu gave a speech at a panel titled, “Loyal Nation: Armenians,” organized by the Federation to Fight Against the Unfounded Armenian Allegations (ASEF). He questioned the reasons why Turks and Armenians became enemies all of sudden after living in peace for 850 years and added the main problem was that Armenian organizations like Kipchak and Tashnak made the two countries enemies.
Halacoglu wanted to open cases against the countries which accept the so-called, Armenian Genocide claim and reminded he said three years agos, ‘If there is an Armenian Genocide and mass graves of Armenians show me and lets open them together.”
Halacoglu noted this kind of an offer has not reached him so far, however, they have opened two mass graves of Turks massacred by Armenians.
Armenian name the 1915 Events as 'genocide' while the Turkish side argue that more than 500,000 Turkish people were massacred by the Armenian forces.
21 November 2005
Zaman, JTW
Labels: Yusuf Halacoglu
20.11.05
441) Will we ever know what actually happened?
November 19, 2005
Scholars spend two days debating at the International Turkish Archives Symposium in Istanbul
ISTANBUL
A two-day symposium that concentrated on the topic of what happened between the Armenians and the Turks in the two-year period of 1914-15 wrapped up yesterday with its participants agreeing that it is necessary to cast a critical eye over the sources available. . .
Turkish Historical Society Chairman Professor Yusuf Halacoglu pointed out at the conference that the number of people examining Turkey's archives for that period could be counted on one hand.
Archives in France, Britain and the United States covering the 1914-1918 period cite as many as 1.5 million Armenians killed in this span while Halacoglu brought forward a series of documents that showed that the number of Armenians living in the eastern part of Turkey at the time numbered 400,000 at the most. He also said the documentation indicated that these people were fed and housed while they were moved away from a war zone that included Russian, Armenian and Ottoman troops.
Backing up Halacoglu's presentation was Professor Justin McCarthy, an American who is internationally regarded as an expert on the Armenian/Turkish conflict and frequently threatened for his research that shows the Ottomans did not carry out a genocide.
McCarthy explained that recorded material produced by the Armenians in the early days after the mid-1910s were very pro-Armenian and aimed at influencing Armenian opinion. But he went on to say that the only way the issue can be settled was to look at what the Ottomans at the time had said, noting that the Armenians were always praising their side while the Ottoman documents show that some things were bad and some good. So perhaps one has to consider documentation that was more honest.
Dr. Ilber Ortayli, who has recently taken over management of the Topkapi Palace Museum, chose to look at the issue from a different angle. He stressed the issue of the system by which religious groups were separated from each other. So the Greek Orthodox were with other Greek Orthodox and the Armenians with Armenians. According to Ortayli, the Athens Greek Orthodox Church broke off in 1831 because they wanted to get rid of Ottoman rule but not because they wanted to separate themselves from the Greek Orthodox leaders in Istanbul.
© 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc. www.turkishdailynews.com.tr
Labels: Yusuf Halacoglu
10.7.05
0099) Realities Behind The Relocation
Why Were They Relocated? Yusuf Halacoğlu
The disturbances which the European Powers and Russia stirred up across the Ottoman realm as part of an intervention strategy, fashionably called the "Eastern question", had taken a course which threatened to culminate in the proclamation of an independent Armenian state. Armenian orchestration of great power meddling, the massacre of Muslims by armed bands of Armenians followed by uprisings at Van and Zeytun which were timed with the outbreak of World War I, and the Armenian support to Russian armies invading Anatolia, compelled the Ottoman Government to take forceful measures. .
Indeed, as the Armenian uprising raged at Van, reports that Armenians had also risen up in other provinces, that they were robbing travellers, raiding villages and killing off their population kept arriving in Istanbul . Occupied in the battlefields, the Turkish army was unable to deal with these events behind the frontlines. So, Enver Paşa, the Deputy Commander-in-Chief, sent the following dispatch to the Interior Minister Talat Bey (later, Talat Paşa) on 2 May 1915 :
"The Armenians around the periphery of Lake Van , and in other regions which are known to the Governor of Van, are engaged in continuous preparations for revolution and rebellion. I am of the opinion that this population should be removed from this area, and that this nest of rebellion is broken up.
"According to information provided by the Commander of the Third Army, the Russians, on April the 20th, began expelling their Muslim population, by pushing them without their belongings across our borders. It is necessary, in response to this action, and in order to reach the goals that have been outlined above, either to expel the Armenians in question to Russia or to relocate them and their families in other regions of Anatolia . I request that the most suitable of these alternatives be chosen and implemented. If there is no objection, I would prefer to expel the creators of these centers of rebellion and their families outside our borders, and to replace them with the Muslim refugees pushed across our borders".[1]
With the above directive seen as the first signal of the decision for relocation (deportation), Enver Paşa sought to disperse the Armenians in a way that they would no longer be able to rebel. Dividing the Armenians into small communities spread across the empire instead of keeping them massed in one place would rob them of the chance to stage further uprisings. Again from this directive, it is understood that its implementation is requested only in places where the Armenians staged rebellions and disturbances. In fact, special care has been shown to this point in the first deportation.
In the face of the delicate situation, Interior Minister Talat Bey was forced to start the removal without seeking a Cabinet decision and without waiting for the legislation of a provisional act, shouldering the responsibility by himself.[2]
Aim of the Relocation
So far as it is clear from the documents, the relocation, which Talat Bey set in motion and was subsequently endorsed by the Cabinet, was carried out solely in areas where the security of the borders were under threat. First of these was the Erzurum , Van and Bitlis area which constituted the rear of the Caucasus and the Iran front. Second was the Mersin-iskenderun area, the rear of the Sinai front. The Armenians in these areas were found to be collaborating with the enemy and were engaged in activities aimed to facilitate possible landings. The move was later expanded so as to cover Armenians living in other provinces where they rebelled, collaborated with the enemy and harbored Armenian terrorists. Although Catholic and Protestant Armenians were initially excluded from the scope of relocation, the ones engaged in harmful activities among these, too, were later sent away.
Therefore, a circular dated 22 June 1331 (5 July 1915), was sent to the provinces of Adana, Erzurum, Bitlis, Aleppo, Diyar-bakir, Syria, Sivas, Trabzon, Mamuretulaziz as well as to the Directorate of Abandoned Property in Adana and the prefectures of Zor, Maraş, Canik, Kayseri and izmit, informing them that the areas allocated for the settlement of Armenians were enlarged out of necessity. This meant that they would be settled in proportion of 10% to the Muslim population, in the following manner:
(1) At the eastern and southern regions of the Mosul province including the sanjaq of Kirkuk with its villages and townships as near as 80 kilometers to the Iranian border;
(2) East and south of the sanjaq of Zor, including the settlements in the valleys of Euphrates and Habur rivers, 25 kilometers inside the border of Diyarbakir ;
(3) All the villages and towns at the east, south and southeast of the Aleppo province except the north, at towns and villages 25 kilometers from the railroads, including the sanjaqs of Havran and Kerek in the province of Syria.[3]
Assailed by the adverse propaganda of the Western powers and their press, Talat Bey was compelled to furnish repeated assurances that the measures taken against the Armenians were not aimed at massacring them. Indeed, in a coded telegram sent to the governors or prefects of Hudavendigar, Ankara , Konya , izmit, Adana , Maraş, Urfa , Aleppo , Zor, Sivas , Kutahya, Karasi, Nigde, Mamuretulaziz, Diyarbakir , Karahisar-i Sahib, Erzurum and Kayseri , the aim of deportation was explained thus:[4]
"The objective sought by the government in evicting the Armenians from their settlements and moving them to the areas marked for resettlement is rendering this ethnic element unable in engaging in anti-government activities and prevent them from pursuing their national aim of founding an Armenian government. The annihilation of these people is, not only out of question, but also the authorities should ensure their safety during their movement and see to it that they are properly fed, making the necessary expenditures from the Refugee Fund. Apart from those evicted and moved, the Armenians allowed to stay should be exempt from further evictions. As communicated earlier, the government has taken a firm decision not to move families of soldiers, sufficient numbers of artisans as well as Protestant and Catholic Armenians. Firm measures should be taken against those who attack the moving parties or any gendarmes or officials who instigate such attacks. These people should be immediately expelled and court-martialed. Provinces and sanjaqs will be held responsible for the recurrence of any such events."
Earlier, in a secret dispatch sent to the Ankara province on 14 May 1331 ( 27 May 1915 ), the following was noted: "The measures taken against the Armenians are solely based on the need to establish and safeguard order in the realm. That the government does not follow a destructive policy against the Armenian element is evident from the fact that Protestant and Catholic Armenians observed to have taken a neutral position for the time being were not touched..."[5] In fact, in another coded message sent to the provinces of Erzurum, Diyarbakir, Mamuretulaziz, and Bitlis on 1 June 1331 (14 June 1915), those in charge were ordered to protect the lives of Armenians on the roads and even when measures become inevitable against deportees who try to escape or attack their guards, to make sure that the local people do not intervene. They were also ordered to prevent the outbreak of incidents between Armenians and Muslims that could result in fatalities and a bad image abroad for the Ottoman state.
In a coded telegram he sent to the 4th Army Command on 10 May 1331 (23 May 1915), Talat Bey provided information concerning the Armenians to be deported and listed the places he wanted to be evicted as follows: (1) Provinces of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis; (2) sanjaq of Maras except the city itself; (3) with the exception of administrative center of the Aleppo province, all towns and villages attached to iskenderun, Beylan (Belen), Cisr-i Sugur and Antakya; (4) sanjaqs of Adana, Sis (Kozan) and Mersin (except the cities themselves) and the sanjaq of Cebel-i Bereket.
The Armenians evicted from the provinces of Erzurum , Van and Bitlis would be settled at the southern part of the province of Mosul , the sanjaq of Zor and the sanjaq of Urfa except the administrative center. The Armenians removed from the Adana-Aleppo-Maraş area would go to places marked by the government at the eastern part of the Syrian province and the east and southeast of the Aleppo province and would be settled there. To supervise the process of transportation, State Inspector Ali Seydi Bey and Hamid Bey were assigned to the Adana area and Aleppo-Maraş areas respectively. Ali Seydi Bey reported at his post, accompanied by another inspector and a special treasury official. Upon reaching their destinations, the Armenians would either be resettled at the houses they were to build at the existing towns or villages, or at new villages they would set up at government-specified places depending on the situation and conditions in the area. It was decreed that the Armenian villages would be at least 25 kilometers away from the nearest railroad. The transportation and resettlement of the Armenians who had to be moved again were left to local authorities. Likewise, protection of the lives and property of the Armenians distributed to their final settlements were the responsibility of local officials on the route who would also make sure they were served meals and allowed to rest. The deported Armenians were allowed to take with them all their movable property. As to the unmovable, it was decreed that a detailed set of guidelines would be published and communicated to those involved.[6]
To ensure that the Armenians to be moved from the eastern and some of the south-eastern provinces to the south of the Diyarbakir province, the Euphrates River valley and to the vicinity of Urfa-Suleymaniye would not become hotbeds of subversion, the High Command issued certain warnings. In a note sent to the Interior Ministry, the High Command stated that officials should pay due attention to the following: (1) The population of Armenians in their new homes should not exceed 10% of the local tribes and Muslims; (2) Villages to be set up by deported Armenians should not have more than 50 houses; (3) Resettled Armenian families should not change their domiciles even through travel or house-moving.[7]
Coinciding with the time the Interior Ministry was busy with these measures, Russian, French and British Governments issued a joint declaration on 24 May 1915 . They charged that in eastern and south-eastern Anatolia , to which they referred as " Armenia ", pogroms were carried out against the Armenians. Ignoring the murderous campaign launched against the Turks by the Armenians they incited and supported, they stated that the Ottoman Government would be held responsible for the incidents.[8] After the issue thus assumed international dimensions, Talat Bey decided that he could no longer shoulder single-handed responsibility for the deportation and sought to provide a legal basis for the action and thereby spread the responsibility to other Cabinet members as well.
Hence, he sent Memorandum No. 270, dated 26 May 1915 , to the Prime Minister's office.[9] In that document, Talat Bey explained how the aggressors with designs on Ottoman territory sowed seeds of discontent among the Armenians and backed their insurgency, how the insurgent Armenians did everything to obstruct the operations of the army against the enemy, prevented delivery of supplies and munitions to the soldiers on battlefronts, collaborated with the enemy and how some of them joined the enemy ranks, launched attacks against the army units and innocent civilians, committed murders, plundered cities and towns, provided supplies to enemy warships, and pointed out fortifications to the enemy. Then, he pointed to the need for effective measures for the state's security and therefore, noted that it was decided to move Armenians creating unrest in combat areas to elsewhere. Beside the details of the decision on deportation, including the places to be evacuated and the destinations of the deportees, the memo assured that they would be provided with new accommodations and land, commensurate with their former stature, from the Refugees Fund. It also assured that the needy would be given aid, and the state would support their production-oriented activities by providing tools, materials and seed. As for their property left behind, the memo assured that they would be registered in an official book, and a decree would be drafted to that effect.
The Interior Ministry's memorandum was channeled to the Council of Ministers by the Prime Minister's office with another memorandum, dated 29 May 1915 , which repeated the arguments of Talat Bey, endorsed the already-started implementation and called for the provision of a legal framework for it.[10] On 30 May 1915 , the Council of Ministers put its stamp of approval to what was being done. The text said the crackdown on such subversive activities, which negatively affect the ongoing struggle for the protection of the state, had been absolutely necessary and timely. It added that a decision had been taken to issue a declaration concerning the unmovable property of deported Armenians, that they would be registered by committees that would be appointed, that the deportees would be granted work opportunities suiting their positions and aid from the Refugees Fund. It finally called for dispatch of necessary directives to the officials to ensure that the deportees could be moved in security.[11]
The directive sent from the Prime Minister's Office to the Ministries of Finance, War, and Treasury on 30 May 1915, set forth the guidelines for deportation:[12] (a) The Armenians would be moved to places reserved for them with due care to the safety of their lives and property as well as their comfort, (b) Until they were settled in their new homes, their upkeep would be provided from the Refugees Fund, (c) They would be given houses and land commensurate with their former financial status, (d) The government would build houses for the needy; equipment and seed would be provided for the farmers, (e) Their movable property left behind would be forwarded to them; the immovable, following registry and appraisal, would be distributed to Muslim refugees to be settled there. Olive grooves, berry and citrus orchards, vineyards and such assets as shops, inns, factories and warehouses which remain outside the expertise of the immigrants would be auctioned or rented and their revenues would be collected and registered in trustee funds to be given to their owners, (f) Special commissions would implement this directive once it was drafted.
On 14 May 1915 , a day after Talat Bey presented his memorandum to the Prime Minister's Office, "The Provisional Law Concerning the Measures to Be Taken by the Military Against Those Who Oppose the Actions of Government During Wartime" was enacted.[13] The first article of this provisional law[14], which entered into force with its publication in the Takvim-i Vekayi (Chronicle of Events) on 1 June 1915, empowered the army, corps or division commanders to take immediate military action against anyone opposing government orders, the country's security and order, and, in the event of armed attacks or resistance, to annihilate the rebels. The second article empowered the same commanders to deport individuals or whole populations of villages of townships and settle them elsewhere if they engage in espionage or treason. Thus, this provisional law transferred the conduct of deportation, arbitrarily started by the Interior Ministry, to the army.
With the directive dated 10 June 1915 ,[15] properties of the deported Armenians were taken under protection. "Abandoned Property Commissions" were set up, comprising a president and a representative each from the administration and the treasury. These commissions would identify the properties belonging to Armenians in evacuated villages and towns and would keep detailed books. One of these books would be kept at the local church, one would be handed to the local government, and a third would be given to the commission. Perishable goods and livestock would be auctioned, and the proceeds would be kept in custody. In places where no commission was sent, local officials would carry out the directives. Both the commissions and local officials would be responsible for the safekeeping of the abandoned property until the return of the Armenians.
Movement to Resettlement Areas
To be distributed to the areas of resettlement, groups of deportees were assembled at such centers as Konya , Diyarbakir , Cizre, Birecik and Aleppo sitting on the crossroads. According to the documents, the closest routes were picked for the movement of groups to cause least difficulty to the deportees. Considerations of the security of the groups also played a role in the choice of the routes. Indeed, those deported from Kayseri and Samsun were moved over to Malatya, and those coming from Sivas, Mamuretulaziz, Erzurum and its environs were moved over the Diyarbakir-Cizre road to Mosul.[16] But sometimes-overcrowded roads and possible unrest at certain sanjaqs made detours necesssary.[17] Those going from Urfa via the Re'sulayn-Nusaybin road were re-directed to Siverek road to protect them from raids of Arab tribes and other clans.[18]
Groups coming from Western Anatolia over Kutahya-Karahisar-Konya-Karaman-Tarsus were sent to Zor over Kars-i Maras-Pazarcik road.[19] In the planning of the routes, those with railroads and river transport facilities, considered safest at the time, were preferred. In fact, train moved all the deportees from western Anatolia to their new settlements.[20] Those sent over the Cizre road were also moved either by train, or riverboats called "Shahtur".[21] In places lacking train or river transport, the groups were brought by pack animals or carts to certain centers and moved by train from there on.
Despite the war conditions, the Ottoman Government has shown due care to the orderly implementation of the transport and protection of groups from possible harm. It has used every available means to facilitate the transport. But it is understood that shortages of transport and a host of other difficulties had been encountered during the process, since railroads were kept busy by the transport of soldiers and provisions to the battlefronts. Indeed, there were great congestion at the railway stations, and transportation was occasionally disrupted due to lack of adequate number of carriages.[22] Because the harvest time increased the local demand for animals and carts and limited their availability for other purposes, the deportee parties could move with difficulty.[23]
Despite all these, a foreign diplomatic mission acknowledged the fact that the government has succeeded in moving the deported Armenians to their new settlements in an orderly fashion. In a report he sent to Ambassador Henry Morgenthau on 15 August 1915 , Edward Nathan, the U.S. Consul in Mersin , noted that the rail route was packed with Armenians from Tarsus to Adana . From there onwards, the Armenians could buy tickets and travel by train, Nathan wrote. Despite the misery caused by the congestion and tiresome procedures, the diplomat noted that the government was handling the case quite efficiently, that it did not permit violence or disorder, it provided enough tickets for the deportees and gave aid to the needy.[24] Observations of the American consul are supported by the reports Ottoman officials sent to the capital. In contrast, by keeping up their attacks even during the deportation, the Armenian insurgents showed how right the state had been in adopting the measure. In fact, the letter dated 12 Sevval 1333 (23 August 1915) sent by the U.S. Consul Leslie A. Davis in Mamuretulaziz, to Ambassador Morgenthau in Istanbul, details the atrocities the Armenians carried out in the province center and the villages.[25] The letter bearing the register number 1080, had been intercepted by the Ottoman security service, translated and read, closed again and sent on.[26]
Attacks on Armenians and Measures by the State
The need to finish transportation of Armenians quickly and the adverse conditions the war has brought were topmost among causes making it difficult to provide security for the transiting groups and to distribute food. It is estimated that some 20-21,000 Armenians have succumbed to contagious diseases on the way.[27]
For instance, the document dated 8 Zilhicce 1333 ( 17 October 1915 ) noted that typhoid fever and dysentery claimed 70-to-80 lives daily among the deportees which were in Hama and ordered immediate adoption of measures.[28] Furthermore, a number of Armenians seem to have died in armed raids mounted mostly by the Arab tribes, particularly between Aleppo and Zor. For instance, the documents show that on the roads to Meskene just an hour to Aleppo , close to 2000 Armenians were killed in raids, launched by the Arab tribes to rob the deportees.[29] The same documents also note that a further 2000 deportees being sent from Diyarbakir to Zor and from Surug to Aleppo via Menbiç were attacked and robbed by the Arab tribesmen.[30] Documents also cite intelligence reports to the effect that bandits had rounded up further batch of some 2000 Armenians, among the deportee groups assembled in Diyarbakir area, drove them to Mardin and killed them.[31] On the news that a 500-strong group of Armenians were attacked and murdered by Kurds on the Erzurum-Erzincan road, a coded telegram was sent to Diyarbakir, Mamuretulaziz and Bitlis on 14 June 1915, ordering the authorities to use every means to prevent attacks by bandits and peasants during the transit of deportees, and curb those attempting murder and robbery.[32] Another document, dated 27 June 1915 , quoted Erzurum provincial officials as reporting that local bandits in the Dersim area had intercepted and murdered the Armenian groups sent from Erzurum , and it had not been possible to save them. The government responded with a strong rebuke, saying such acts were impermissible, ordering the officials to take immediate measures that would ensure safe transit of the deportee groups.[33] From the above records, it is seen that some 9,000 Armenians, or around 10,000 had died during the deportation as a result of bandit attacks. This is the final sum in Ottoman documents, which lack any other record of mass murder.
It is clear that while fighting at the front, the Ottoman state was at the same time exerting a massive effort to feed the Armenians on the move and provide them security. Indeed, once the murders and robberies became known, the government has immediately sent directives to the scenes of incident, ordering officials not to send on the deportee groups without gendarme escort, and take all necessary measures to ensure safe transit. In another directive sent to officials of every province falling under the scope of deportation, the government sought the apprehension and punishment of the bands attacking the Armenians, while ordering stronger escort to the passing convoys. In a coded telegram it sent to the affected provinces in connection with the above directive, the government asked how many of the attackers were caught and punished.[34]
As another measure to enforce discipline, the government set up investigation committees to identify officials who did not do their jobs properly during the transit or engaged in corruption. One such committee, led by First Judge Asim Bey of the Interrogation Court and including State Inspector Muhtar Bey of the Ankara province and Lieut. Col. Muhiddin Bey, the gendarme inspector for the Izmir area, was sent to cover the Adana, Aleppo, Syria, Urfa, Zor and Maraş areas.[35] Another committee, led by the Appeals Court President Hulusi Bey and including Ismail Hakki Bey of the State Accounting Office, was dispatched to the Hiidavendigar, Ankara , izmit, Karasi, Kiitahya, Eskisehir , Kayseri , Karahisar-i Sahib and Nigde areas.[36] A third committee, chaired by former Bitlis governor Yasar Bey and including former Istanbul chief prosecutor Nihad Bey and gendarme Major Ali Naki Bey, was sent to Sivas, Trabzon, Erzurum, Mamuretiilaziz, Diyarbakir, Bitlis and Canik. In a coded telegram sent to the third committee chairman Mazhar Bey, who set up a shop in Sivas , the committees were requested to regularly send their investigation results to the capital.[37]
Under directives given to the investigation committees, implicated gendarme, policemen, public officials and their superiors would be sent to the martial law courts depending on the investigation results. A list of those sent to such courts would be supplied to the Interior Ministry. The results of the investigations against governors or prefects would be forwarded to the Interior Ministry first, and any further action would wait for instructions from the Ministry. In case the martial law court presidents, judges and military officials were implicated in corruption or misconduct, they would be reported to the army commands they were affiliated to.
In the light of the investigation committee reports, many officials were relieved of their posts for misuse of power (in the form of stealing money or property from the transiting deportee groups, not providing sufficient protection and thus exposing the parties to attack, detracting from deportation orders, rape, etc.) Some were court-martialed and were handed down heavy sentences.[38]
Armenians Spared from the Move and the Converts
As noted above, the decision for deportation was not applied to all Armenians. At first, some of the Armenians living in certain places (towns of Germiş and Birecik in Urfa , Erzurum , Aydm, Trabzon , Edirne , Canik, Canakkale, Adapazari, Aleppo , Bolu, Kastamonu, Tekirdag, Konya and Karahisar-i Sahip) were excluded from the scope of deportation.[39] But later, when these, too, were seen to engage in acts of treason, most of them were sent away.[40] The sick and blind were allowed to stay, and those from the Catholic and Protestant creeds, civil servants, soldiers and their families, tradesmen, some construction workers and foremen were also excluded from the scope of deportation. Indeed, with telegrams sent to the Maraş and Adana provinces, the government instructed the officials not to send away the sick, blind, invalids and the elderly and see to it that they were settled in cities.[41]
In a telegram sent to the concerned provinces on 3 August 1915 , and in a subsequent one sent on 15 August 1915 , officials were ordered not to deport Catholic and Protestant Armenians, settle them in their original cities and report their numbers.[42] These were settled in various towns within their respective provinces.[43] Those who were mistakenly deported were sought out and settled at the cities they were at the time.[44] But when some of those allowed to stay were seen engaged in harmful activities, they, too, were deported irrelevant of their creed.[45]
A coded telegram sent on 15 August 1915, to provinces of Erzurum, Adana, Ankara, Bitlis, Aleppo, Hiidavendigar, Diyarbakir, Trabzon, Konya as well as to the prefectures of Urfa, Izmit, Canik, Kayseri, Afyon, Karesi, Maraş, Nigde, and Eskisehir delivered instructions to local authorities to keep the Armenians serving as officers, doctors or medics in the Ottoman Army in their original places and exclude them from deportation.[46] Furthermore, the Armenians employed in the main and provincial branches of the Ottoman Bank, Tobacco Administration, and some foreign consulates were allowed to stay, provided they remained loyal to the state and displayed good conduct.[47]
Beside these, orphaned children and widows were allowed to stay, taken under protection in orphanages or villages, and were given material aid.[48] Meanwhile, the children orphaned during the course of deportation were sent to Sivas and placed in the orphanage there.[49] An order was published on 30 April 1916 , concerning the Armenian families needing care. The order stipulated that: (a) Families whose men folk were deported or serving in the Army would be settled at villages and towns with no Armenian or other foreign population and would be supported from the Refugees Fund; (b) if local orphanages were not adequate, children up to the age of twelve would be given to rich Muslim families for their upkeep; (c) low-income Muslim families would be paid 30 kuruş from the Refugees Fund for the upkeep of children; (d) young and widowed Armenian women would be allowed to marry Muslim men if they so wished.[50]
During the deportation, some Armenians were seen to have converted to Islam not to be sent away. But the Ottoman Government decided not to accept such applications obviously aimed at circumventing deportation. A circular, dated 1 July 1915, sent to the provinces and sanjaqs in connection with this, warned that some of the deported Armenians were renouncing their religion singly or collectively in order to be allowed to stay, that such people should in no way be trusted, that they would continue with evil deeds under the guise of Islam, and ordered the officials to deport renegade Armenians as well.[51] Similarly, a coded telegram sent to the prefecture of Karahisar-i Sahip on 29 October 1915 , reveals that even conversions of soldiers' wives were not acknowledged.[52] But with the deportation drawing to its end, the state adopted a more favorable attitude and from the end of October 1915, applications for conversion were accepted.[53] Indeed, a circular sent to all provinces and prefectures on 4 November 1915 , said that the Armenians were allowed to stay in their original places, or those allowed to return after deportation were free to convert.[54]
After this circular, the applications of those who converted in Mentese were accepted,[55] and their properties were returned.[56] A coded telegram sent to Sivas on 9 March 1916 , also made clear that the properties of the Armenians allowed to stay due to conversion or other reasons would not be liquidated.[57] As for the applications from deported Armenians, their conversion were accepted after their arrival in their respective destinations.[58] Some applications, from Armenians allowed to stay, were accepted on condition that they would not bar possible future deportation.[59] When some of the converts were later deported, it was decided not to write their new religion on their identity papers and issue them documents only showing their original domiciles.[60] The purpose was to prevent the infiltration of terrorists back into the country under the guise of conversion.
The Ottoman Government also adopted measures concerning Armenians coming from abroad or going out of the country. Male Armenians with Ottoman citizenship aged between 17 and 55 were forbidden to leave the country.[61] Armenians who were nationals of neutral countries were allowed to leave on condition that they would not return until the end of the war. As for Armenians wanting to enter the Ottoman realm, they were refused permission regardless of nationality.[62] A tactic frequently used by the Armenians to avoid deportation was showing themselves as foreign nationals. Such claims have led to serious problems during the deportation. It is understood that the American ambassador intervened on behalf of some Armenians claiming to be U.S. nationals and requested the government to halt their deportation. The government was hard put to authenticate such claims. A telegram sent to the Mamuretulaziz province on 8 July 1915 , instructed the officials to list any "real" American Armenians and give up deporting them.[63] The U.S. consuls in the area and representatives of other countries appear to have followed the deportation very closely. While the American consuls toured cities to investigate the fate of the Armenians,[64] some German officers were reported to have taken pictures of Armenians being moved by rail at Aleppo , Konya and Adana with the intention of using them to criticize the Ottoman Government. When it became clear that foreign officials were using rumors or fabricated news they gathered from Armenian civil servants to fuel a propaganda campaign against the Ottoman state abroad, the government sent coded instructions to the concerned provinces for the adoption of measures to prevent acts or incidents that the foreigners could exploit to embarrass the country.[65]
Caring for the Deported Armenians
Before starting the deportation, the government sent letters to all the provinces, requesting the authorities to make necessary preparations and stock food to ensure that all needs of the passing deportee parties would be met.[66] Numerous orders and instructions were given to the Directorate for the Resettlement of Tribes and Refugees for the provision of supplies.[67] Director Şukru Bey was personally charged with the task of identifying the needs and meeting them.[68] The documents show that 400,000 kuruş was sent to Konya to help meet needs of the transiting parties; 150,000 kuruş was sent to the sanjaq of izmit, 200,000 to the sanjaq of Eskişehir, 300,000 to the Adana province, 300,000 to the Aleppo province, 100,000 to the Syria province, 300,000 to the Ankara province[69] and 500,000 to the Mosul province[70] for a total of 2,250,000 kuruş.[71]
While the provinces dipped into their own resources as well to supplement the state aid, there were occasional requests from the government for additional money.[72] Meanwhile, some money sent from the United States for the Armenian deportees were distributed by American missionaries and consuls with the government's knowledge.[73] Beside this, documents show that Armenians living in the United States also collected some money and secretly delivered it to the deportees.[74]
Apart from spending considerable sums of money for the deportation, the Ottoman Government either postponed or erased the debts the deported Armenians owed to the state or individual creditors. In a telegram he sent to the Maraş prefecture on 1 August 1915 , Talât Bey called on the officials not to collect the debts of Armenians.[75] Another order sent to all provinces on 4 August 1915 , requested the officials to postpone the farm tax and other taxes collected from Armenians subject to resettlement.[76] The government also assigned medical personnel to the deported parties to treat the sick.[77] Legal proceedings against the criminals and suspects were also postponed.[78]
Property of Resettled Armenians
As noted above, with a circular published on 10 June 1915 , the property of deported Armenians were put under state custody. The same circular stipulated that perishable goods, livestock, or production facilities which had to be kept operating would be auctioned by special commissions and the proceeds would be sent to the owners. It is understood that the Ottoman Government has shown utmost scrupulousness in the implementation of the instructions. Great care has been shown to prevent corruption. The properties were sold on market value by the Abandoned Property Commissions on behalf of the deported owners who were paid the proceeds.[79] On hearing rumors surrounding the auction, the government sent a coded telegram on 3 August 1915 , to the prefectures, provinces and the Abandoned Property Commissions, banning state officials from buying property through these sales on the grounds that it will inevitably foster corruption.[80] But subsequently, the ban was lifted in some provinces on condition that the property was purchased with cash on its true value.[81] The government has not withheld other measures designed to prevent every form of corruption. Indeed, a coded telegram sent on 29 July 1331/11 August 1915, to the chairman of the Abandoned Property Commission in Sivas , measures are requested to prevent corruption and embezzlement.[82] Another telegram bearing the same date sent to all the provinces listed the measures and practices to be adopted.[83] This directive stipulated the following: (a) No suspicious people will be allowed to enter the evacuated areas; (b) in case some people were found out to have bought property below the normal rates, the sale would be annulled, and property will be auctioned again on true value so as to prevent the illegal acquisition of wealth; (c) deported Armenians will be allowed to take with them any property they wanted; (d) among the belongings which cannot be carried away, those that will deteriorate will be sold, but the durable ones will be protected in the name of their owners; (e) for the unmovable, care will be shown that such transactions as rent, transfer or mortgage will keep linked with the owner and transactions concluded in violation of these articles after the start of the deportation will be annulled; (f) no disputes will be allowed concerning the ownership of these properties; and (g) deported Armenians will be allowed to sell their property to anyone they wished except the foreigners.[84]
The Ottoman officials have tried to implement these stipulations with utmost care. The artistic and commercial institutions left behind by the deportees were turned over with their true value to the housing companies set up for the purpose.[85] The proceeds from the sold property were paid to the exiled owners through the Abandoned Property Commissions.[86]
Repercussions Abroad and Relocation in Documents
Foreign observers at the areas of relocation have written that despite the difficulties entailed by the war, the Ottoman Government had carried out the resettlement in an efficient and orderly way. But some countries including Russia , Britain and the United States and the Western press in general have painted a distorted picture of the events. Although U.S. Consul Edward Nathan in Mersin reported that the transport of deportees proceeded smoothly in general, despite certain defects, and that the deportees were provided train tickets as mentioned before,[87] U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau reported the events to his country in a completely different light. The American press used these reports to attack the Turks. The newspapers alleged that Morgenthau had bribed the Ottoman Government to buy the freedom of some Armenians and sent them to America . The U.S. ambassador was also deified as the savior of British, Russian and French nationals in Istanbul . All these baseless reports, published in the newspapers, were reported to Istanbul by a Turkish citizen living in the United States at the time.[88] Beside the U.S. Ambassador,[89] the spread of the contentions that Armenians were massacred can be mainly attributed to Lord Bryce[90] and the German Protestant priest Johannes Lepsius.[91] Furthermore, Arnold Toynbee,[92] a member of the Wellington House, was another avid user of information supplied by Morgenthau. The writings of these people have become a chief source for the subsequent books written on the so-called Armenian "genocide".
Similarly, contentions such as the massacre of one million Armenians, contained in the reports of the British consuls in Iran , inflamed the British Parliament, which protested the Ottoman Government. Furthermore, in a Blue Book published in Britain over the deportation, it was claimed that a third of 1.8 million Armenians said to be living in Turkey had been murdered.[93] Despite these biased articles, a part of the Western press conceded that the incidents were purposefully distorted. In a newspaper published in Stockholm , an article entitled "Massacres in Ottoman Provinces where Armenians Live Peacefully", such claims were brushed off as ludicrous and reasons for their fabrication were explained.[94]
The Ottoman Government has denied British allegations with a statement signed by the Foreign Ministry Undersecretary issued on 4 January 1917 .[95] The statement argued that the Armenian population hardly reached a million in the Ottoman state, and the total had in fact decreased through successive emigrations before the outbreak of the war. The same document also referred to an article in The Times, in which Germans, too, were held responsible for the massacre of Armenians.[96]
From then until our day, a lot has been written in the West and the United States on deportation. But none were based on genuine documents. Hiding behind fake documents, the Armenians succeeded in deceiving the world for a long time. The tales of Armenian massacre, starting at first with a figure of 300,000 to eventually reach 3 million, have all been based on books that keep referring to each other. But as will be seen from this chapter (the extensive version of which appears in my latest book in Turkish entitled The Armenian Resettlement and Facts: 1914-1918) based on secret documents of deportation kept by the Cipher Office and General Security Directorate (Police), the Ottoman Government officials have repeatedly stressed that the deportation, launched as a necessity dictated by national security, was never aimed to annihilate the Armenians. On the contrary, the state has shouldered heavy financial burdens to provide security and rations for the deportees. Sure of its conduct, the government has even sought the investigation of deportation and its background, in hopes of silencing the Western allegations of massacre. On 13 February 1919 , it communicated notes to the Governments of Sweden, Holland , Spain and Denmark , calling on them to contribute two independent jurists to the proposed commission.[97] In their reply sent on 6 May 1919 , these states turned down the request.[98] During deportation and resettlement that lasted about a year and a half from May of 1915 to the October of 1916, the state could largely protect the lives and property of the deportees through directives sent from the center, or measures taken locally, despite the difficult conditions of the time and an ongoing war. It has shouldered administrative, military and financial burdens as if a new front had been opened. In contrast to what was being done, Russia drove about one million Muslim refugees to the Ottoman territory in hunger and misery at about the same time. Hence, the Ottoman Government had to settle and feed this flood of Muslim refugees, too.
As will be seen from the new documents to be cited below, the transfer of Armenians to their new settlements, the first planned population movement of the century was conducted in great discipline. The number of Armenians in the places they left and in those they arrived were constantly monitored so as not to allow the resettled Armenians to concentrate in one place and disperse them to different towns and villages. The table below was compiled from the documents published in this book concerning the deported Armenians and those allowed to remain behind.[99]
Provinces and prefectures Deported Remaining
Adana[100] 14,000 15-16,000
Ankara (Center)[101] 21,236 733
Kalacik[102] 257
Keskin 1,169
Haymana[103] 60
Nallihan 479
Sungurlu 576
Aydin[104] 250
izmir[105] 256
Dortyol[106] 9,000
Eskişehir[107] 7,000
Aleppo [108] 26,064
izmit[109] 58,000
Karahisar-i Sahip[110] 5,769 2,222
Kayseri[111] 45.036 4,911
Mamuretulaziz[112] 51,000 4,000
Sivas[113] 136,084 6,055
Erzurum[114] 5,500
Diyarbakir[115] 20,000
Trabzon[116] 3,400
Yozgat[117] 10,916
Kutahya[118] 1,400
Birecik[119] 1,200
Konya[120] 1,990
Kirşehir[121] 747
Giresun[122] 328
Perşembe 390
Ulubey 30
Surmene 290
Tirebolu 45
Ordu 36
Görele 250
Maraş[123]- 8,845
Total 422,758 42,766
In a telegram, dated 5 October 1331/18 October 1915, sent from Aleppo by Şukru Bey, director of the Office for the Resettlement of Tribes and Refugees, it was noted that the number of Armenians sent to Aleppo was estimated to be 100,000.[124] Meanwhile, about 120,000 Armenians had been assembled in Diyarbakir by 5 September 1331/18 September 1915, to be sent to Mosul and Aleppo , while 136,084 had assembled at Cizre by 15 September 1331/28 September 1915.[125] The documents show that some of the people from these groups were resettled at the following areas:[126]
Province of Syria 37,702
Menc-Bab-Maarra prefectures 5,700
Urfa-Zor-Mosul 29,957
Kerek and Havran 65,147
Hama-Homs 12,000
Kuneytra-Baalbek-Tebek and Doma 492
Rakka and Obik 25,000
Zor 6,120
Aleppo 30,000
Total 212,118
REALITIES BEHIND THE RELOCATION
In a telegram sent from Nizip on 21 October 1915/3 November 1915, Şukru Bey reported that the transfer was proceeding smoothly.[127]
Of the people included in resettlement but shown as remaining behind in the above list, those left in Adana were subsequently moved to areas of resettlement.[128] The number of the Armenians resettled in the south, thus, totaled 438,758 while those reaching the resettlement area numbered 382,148. So, there is a difference of 56,610 between those who set out and those who made it to their new homes.
This difference stems from the following events according to documents: 500 people were killed between Erzurum and Erzincan, 2,000 more were killed at Meskene between Urfa and Aleppo , and a further 2,000 were killed by bandits and Arab tribes near Mardin. Although no firm figures are available, it is estimated that a similar number, that is, about 5,000 or a little more, were killed in the Dersim area by bandits attacking groups of transiting deportees.[129] In the light of these data, it is estimated that about 9-10,000 Armenians were killed during their deportation. It is also understood from the documents that some others starved to death on the road.[130] Apart from these, another 25-30,000 deported are believed to have succumbed to such diseases as typhoid or dysentery,[131] raising the number of casualties to some 50,000. As for the rest, some are believed to be those put on the road but later settled at the city they reached when the deportation was suspended. For instance, on 26 April 1916 , instructions were cabled to the province of Konya that the Armenians on the roads within the provincial borders should not be sent on, but settled within the province.[132] Meanwhile, it is believed that some Armenians marked for deportation had been smuggled out of the country and taken to Russia , Western Europe and the United States . In the documents there are records that about 50,000 of the Armenians under arms had defected to the Russian Army and 50,000 others were trained in the U.S. Army for the past three or four years to fight the Turks. A letter sent by an Armenian living in the United States to Murad Muradyan, a lawyer in Mamuretulaziz, contains such information.[133] The letter explicitly states that some Armenians had been spirited into Russia and the United States , and about 50,000 American-trained soldiers were about to leave for the Caucasus . All these documents make clear that large numbers of Ottoman Armenians were dispersed to many countries, headed by the United States and Russia , before and during the war. For instance, in a letter he sent to General Security Directorate on 19 January 1915 , Artin Hotomyan, an Armenian on a trading visit to the United States , wrote that thousands of Armenians were being smuggled into America , and that they were living in hunger and misery.[134] The same letter informed the officials that an istanbul-based network had been smuggling the Armenians in the Ottoman state into the United States in return for material gain. One member of the gang was identified as Aramoyis from Kayseri , the son of Karabet, a shoemaker. This man was hiding the clothes of deserting Armenian soldiers, and were helping them escape to America or other countries in return for five or ten lira, the informer wrote. At the end, Hotomyan wrote that the reason he supplied this information was not connected with any feeling of grudge or personal hatred, and asked it to be accepted as a humanitarian duty and a service to the country.
Such information show that there is no great discrepancy between the number of Armenians deported from Asian and European provinces of the domain, and the number of those who reached their destinations, and that there had been no deliberate and systematic murders on the road as alleged. Meanwhile, since the number of deported Armenians were about half a million, the total Armenian population of the Ottoman state appears to be somewhere between 600,000 and 800,000, including Catholic and Protestant Armenians, the Armenian community of Istanbul that was likewise exempted from deportation, and finally the Armenians living in provinces partly or fully occupied by the Russian Army, like Erzurum, Van and Kars. In fact, in a 1918 report he sent to Monsieur Gout, the representative of the French Foreign Ministry, Armenian Delegation Chief Boghos Nubar Paşa gave the breakdown of Armenians dispersed to various areas after the deportation as follows:
Caucasus 250,000
Iran 40,000
Syria-Pales tine 80,000
Mosul-Baghdad 20,000
The Armenian representative argued that the number of the deportees was not confined to this total of 390,000, but actually ran into 600-700,000 that he said, excluded the exiles dispersed to here and there in the deserts.[135] But it is clear from the figures supplied by Boghos Nubar Paşa, that 290,000 were those who left Ottoman territory without being exiled -since none were sent to Caucasia or Iran. So, if one subtracts 290,000 from the "600-700,000" deportee number given by the Armenian representative, then one arrives at the 400,000-plus total we have given, using authentic data taken from the government or police archives of the time. This also proves that the bulk of the deportees had safely reached their destinations, leaving no support for the claims of genocide. Indeed, following a meeting with Zenop Bezjian, the representative of Protestant Armenians, U.S. Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, has noted in his diary, his deep surprise over Bezjian's remarks. In the following passage, Morgenthau describes his conversation with the Armenian dignitary:
"Zenop Bezjian, Vekil (Representative) of Armenian Protestants, called. Schmavonian introduced him; he was his schoolmate. He told me a great deal about conditions (in the interior). I was surprised to hear him report that Armenians at Zor were fairly well satisfied; that they have already settled down to business and are earning their livings; those were the first ones that were sent away and seem to have gotten there without being massacred. He gave me a list where the various camps are and he thinks that over one half million have been displaced. He was most solicitous that they should be helped before winter sets in".[136]
The passage above is illustrative in that it shows how the ambassador was taken aback on learning the contentment of the Armenians from the mouth of another Armenian.
As explained above, the decision on deportation had been taken after the Armenians, seeing the time as ripe for breathing life to the dream of an independent Armenia , stabbed their state in the back when it was occupied with the war. The documents reveal how the Russians deceived and instigated the Armenians.[137] Taken in by the Russian promises that the territories captured in war would be given to them and their independence would be recognized, Armenians have set up several revolutionary associations.[138] A verse written by the son of an Armenian named Murad shows the intentions of the Armenians without any room for doubt.[139] Having started their acts of terrorism before the deportation, they were seen to keep them up during the transit of deportees as well. The fact that they have collaborated with the enemy and engaged in massacres against the Muslim population, not only at the border areas, but also deep inside were borne out by Turkish as well as Russian documents.[140] There are documents showing that the Armenian atrocities continued even after the war. One example what were in store for the Muslims was displayed in 1920, when a 1200-strong unit entered Nakhechevan under the command of an Armenian named Hanov.[141] It is also clear from the cables dated 18 and 22 February 1336/3 and 7 March 1921 sent by Mumtaz Bey, the vice-governor of the Mamuretulaziz province, the Armenians who came under French protection were dreaming of an independent Armenia stretching from the Amanos Mountains to Adana .[142]
In the end, the Ottoman Government decided on publishing the documents of 'Armenian atrocities' in a book, and sent instructions to all provinces for the collection and dispatch of such documents describing the Armenian acts of cruelty and the pictures of captured arms and bandits.[143] In the light of these documents, The Objectives and Revolutionary Activities of Armenian Committees Before and After the Proclamation of Constitutional Monarchy was published.[144]
Armenians after Resettlement
During its course, there were times when the deportation was halted due to congestion or climatic reasons. With instructions sent to the provinces after 12 November 1331/25 November 1915, the officials were informed that deportation was provisionally stopped because of winter.[145] On 21 February 1916 , all provinces were ordered to stop sending off deportees. But it was clarified that the order did not cover those engaged in anti-government activities, who would be immediately rounded up and sent to the sanjaq of Zor.[146] But just twenty days later, the Ottoman Government issued another general order on 2 March 1332/15 March 1916, announced that relocation was terminated "due to administrative and military reasons", and the provinces were told not to send away Armenians on any account.[147]
Meanwhile, because the Armenian population was largely sent to Syria and nearby provinces, the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul was abolished and moved to Jerusalem on 28 July 1332/10 August 1916. In a parallel move, Sis and Akdamar chapters were combined and likewise transferred to Jerusalem .[148] Sahak Efendi, the former Catholicos of Sis, was appointed as the head of the new patriarchate.[149]
The Decree for Return
After the end of World War I, the Ottoman Government issued a decree, announcing that the deported Armenians were free to return. In a letter to the Prime Minister's Office dated 22 December 1334/4 January 1919, Interior Minister Mustafa Paşa informed that the necessary instructions were sent and preparations were made to arrange the transport of Armenian deportees who wished to return to their original places.[150] According to the government decree for return dated 18 December 1334/31 December 1918, (a) only those who wished to return would be sent, and no others would be touched; (b) necessary measures would be taken to ensure that those repatriated would not suffer on the roads and on their return would find shelter and livelihood; to prevent any surprises, returning deportees would be sent only after the officials of the place of return were contacted and necessary measures were completed; (c) those returning under these terms would be given back their homes and land; (d) any refugees settled in the homes of returning deportees would be evicted; (e) not to leave anyone without shelter, several families would be provisionally accommodated together if necessary; (f) buildings like churches or schools and their revenue-bringing assets would be returned to the community; (g) if so wished, the orphaned children would be given to foster parents or the community to be looked after; (h) those who had converted would be able to return to their former religion if they wished; (i) of the women converts, those married to Muslim men would be free to take up their former religion; if they return to their original faith, the wedlock with their husbands would automatically dissolve; matters pertaining to those who do not want to return to their original faith or part with their husbands would be settled by courts; (j) untouched Armenian property would be returned to their owners, while the return of the property turned over to the Treasury would be subject to the approval of the local estate officials; detailed guidelines would be published for such transactions; (k) the real estate sold to (Muslim) refugees would be handed back to the returnees; article 4 will be strictly implemented in this respect; (1) if the refugees had done repairs or extensions to the houses and shops in their possession to be returned to their former owners, officials would see to it that rights of both sides would be safeguarded; (m) the cost of transport and food for the needy returnees would be met from the War Ministry funds; (n) the Government would be told how many people were sent back, and with immediate effect would be sent regular reports on the 15th and the end of each month, showing the number and destinations of returnees sent back; (o) the Armenians who left the Ottoman country by themselves would not be allowed to return until further notice.
The articles of the above decree also applied to the returning Greek refugees.
Conclusions
One can conclude that the deportation of the Armenians who betrayed the Ottoman armies on the Caucasus front in World War I and assisted the Russian occupation of the Ottoman provinces of Van, Kars and Erzurum should be seen as legitimate self-defence to which every nation is entitled. The armed terrorism carried out by secret societies and armed bands of independence-seeking Armenians instigated by great powers such as Russia , Britain , France and Germany , bent on partitioning the Ottoman state, has resulted in the massacre of large numbers of defenceless Turks. The massacres carried out in the Kars , Van, izmit, Erzurum , Bitlis and other Ottoman provinces assumed dimensions, which caused even the commanders of the Russian occupation forces to revolt.[151] Indeed, documents expose that in Kars and Ardahan alone, about 30,000 Muslims were murdered by the Armenians and Russians,[152] with the number going up to several hundred thousand when calculated for all Ottoman provinces.
As a precaution, the Ottoman state had to recourse to forced resettlement, starting with Armenians in the areas closest to the theatre of war. When the Armenian gangs kept up their atrocities and continued to supply information to the foreigners detrimental to the security interests of the country, the scope of the deportations was expanded to include all other Armenians, except the populations of izmir and istanbul, as well as the Protestants, Catholics, orphans, solitary women and the sick. The Armenians known to be loyal to the state were also excluded.
The deportation, of course, was painful. Displacing thousands of people suddenly and resettling them is not an easy task. Yet, advance planning of the routes and staging areas, wide use of railway stations as dispatch centers, the use of trains to transport the bulk of deportees, distribution of rations by the state, assignment of medical personnel and gendarmes to the departing parties, have turned the deportation into one of the most orderly population movement of the past century. Of course, during the deportation, moving groups occasionally came under attack from vengeful people and about 9-10,000 Armenians were massacred.
Besides, there had been deaths due to contagious diseases, which is normal in such massive population movements as seen during the immigration of European Turks to Anatolia . No doubt, none of these were things desired by those who gave the order for deportation. Indeed, the government continuously took measures against corruption, and those seen to have engaged in immoral behaviour were punished. With the end of the war, the decree permitting the return of deportees was issued.[153] Those who converted to avoid deportation were allowed to return to their original faith. Orphaned Armenian children kept by Muslim families were turned over to a commission set up by the Armenians;[154] the returnees received state rations for a while,[155] committees were set up to investigate complaints and identify those who have mistreated the Armenians,[156] their property were returned to those who came back,[157] travel expenses of the returnees were met,[158] they were exempted from certain taxes,[159] their belongings kept safe at public offices were returned,[160] and commissions were set up to look into matters concerning the return of property.
All these show, once again, that the Ottoman Government had no intention to subject the Armenians to genocide, that it resorted to deportation as a precaution for its security and implemented it only during the war, and that it allowed the Armenians to return after its end. In fact, large numbers of Armenians accompanied Russian, British and French forces that occupied Turkey at the end of the war, and again large numbers of Armenians left Turkey after the occupation forces withdrew. The decisions and measures mentioned above are not the ones that a state aiming at genocide would normally take. Secret documents, kept in the archives of the Cipher Office and Directorate of General Security attached to the Interior Ministry, do not contain even a single article that might be regarded as suggesting an intention of massacre or genocide. Documents show that deportation was closely monitored and photographed by many foreign observers and diplomats, particularly the U.S. consuls. Strangely, however, in Europe and in the United States , deportation has been presented to the public as genocide against the Armenians, with the claim largely based on the reports of the U.S. ambassador in Istanbul and some Western journalists. This hostile attitude may be attributed to the feeling of frustration when the Ottoman Government launched deportation as a means of disrupting the plans for the partition of the country.
Some historians of the countries that accuse Turkey of genocide have been studying the Ottoman archives for years. Researches of foreign scholars have been published in their respective countries and have made important contributions to the understanding of history. The archive documents made available to historians were referred to as first-hand sources in the books they published. That makes it difficult to understand how the Western critics can cast doubt on the authenticity of the documents concerning the Armenians in the Ottoman archives to which over 6,000 foreign scholars have attached great importance. It is surprising and saddening to see that books published by Turkish researchers are undermined with the same political bias that prevailed in 1915. I think it will be futile to propose a comprehensive joint research by American, European and Turkish scholars, extending from the outbreak of the first Armenian rebellions, to the end of the deportation; from the sources of Armenian arms, to the charges of genocide, with unrestricted access to the Ottoman, Russian, German, British, French and American archives, as it will be rejected just like the Ottoman proposal in 1919 for the appointment of a neutral commission to investigate the allegations. How else the blood-baths carried out by the French in Algeria , by the British in India and Africa , by the United States against the so-called "Indian" population, by Germans against the Jews, by Russia also against the Jews and later the Turks can be erased from public memories and guilty consciences?
[1] Askeri Tarih Belgeleri Dergisi (Journal of Military History Documents), 81 (December 1982), Document No. 1830.
[2] Yusuf Hikmet Bayur, Turk Inkilabi Tarihi (History of the Turkish Revolution), III/3, Ankara , Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1991, p. 38.
[3] T.C. (The Republic of Turkey), Ba§bakanlik (The Prime Minister's Office), Osmanli Arsivi (The Ottoman Archives, hereafter BOA), Cipher Desk, No. 54/315.
[4] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55/292.
[5] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 53/4.
[6] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 53/94.
[7] General Staff, No. 1/1 File No. 207, F. 2-3, referred to by Kamuran Guriin, Ermeni Dosyasi (The Armenian File), Ankara , Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1985, p. 213.
[8] Bayur, op. cit., III/3 p. 37.
[9] BOA, Babiali Evrak Odasi (BEO), No. 326758.
[10] Council of Ministers Letter, Book No. 198, Decision No. 163; Bayur, op. cit., III/3, pp. 37-38; Guriin, op. cit., pp. 213-214.
[11] Bayur, op. cit., III/3, pp. 40-42.
[12] BOA, BEO, No. 326758.
[13] Bayur, op. cit., III/3, p. 40; Guriin, op. cit., p. 214.
[14] Takvim-i Vekayi, 1 June 1915 , Yr. 7, No. 2189; Bayur, op. cit., III/3, p. 40.
[15] Askeri Tarih Belgeleri Dergisi (Journal of Military History Documents), 81 (December 1982) Document No. 1832.
[16] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/157; No. 56/280; No. 56/387.
[17] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/278; No. 56/280; No. 56/308.
[18] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/277.
[19] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 65/95.
[20] Interior Ministry, Directorate of Public Security (EUM), Dept. 2, No. 68/99, Dept. 2, No.68/94; Dept 2 , No. 68/81; Dept 2 , No. 68/67; Dept. 2 , No. 68/96.
[21] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept 2 , No. 68/101.
[22] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/393.
[23] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/59; No. 54-A/96.
[24] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 2D/13.
[25] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/83.
[26] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2. , No. 68/84.
[27] For instance, with the coded telegram dated 26 June 1915, provinces of Trabzon, Erzurum, Sivas, Diyarbakir, Mamuretulaziz and Bitlis and the prefectures of Maraş and Canik were requested to report the number of Armenians killed because of illness or rebellion since the start of the war (BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/112) Furthermore, it is understood that at Eregli and Mosul, such contagious diseases as typhus, dysentery, and malaria were pretty widespread. (Telegram dated 8 June 1915 sent to Konya, BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/337; Telegram sent to Zor prefecture dated 3 February 1916, BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 60/219).
[28] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/51, 71
[29] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 59/244.
[30] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/140; 55-A/144.
[31] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54/406, 54-A/73, No. 54-A/248.
[32] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54/9.
[33] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54/162.
[34] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55-A/84.
[35] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/186.
[36] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 58/38, 56/335.
[37] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/267.
[38] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 58/278; No. 58/141; No. 55-A/156; No. 55-A/157; No. 61/165; No. 57/116; No. 57/413; No. 57/416, No. 57/105, No. 59/235; No. 54-A/326; No. 59/196.
[39] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/155; No. 56/114; No. 56/225; No: 56/226; No. 57/89; No.59/218.
[40] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/271; No. 54-A/272 (22 Temmuz 1331/4 August 1915).
[41] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/27; No. 67/186.
[42] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/252; No. 55/20; No. 55/292 (App. XXVI).
[43] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/112 ( 19 September, 1915 , to Konya province).
[44] On this, orders were sent to Sivas on 26 Sept. 1915 (BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/176), Mamuretulaziz and Diyarbakir provinces (BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/172); and on 14 Nov. 1915, to Konya (BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 58/2) and to Ankara provinces (BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 58/159).
[45] A telegram was sent to Adana province in this direction (Cipher Desk, No. 55-A/23) on 2 September 1915 . See also BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 61/186; No. 61/192; No. 61/122; No. 61/290; No. 61/210; Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , 2F/11.
[46] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55/18.
[47] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/36 ( 16 Sept. 1915 ); No. 56/243 ( 30 Sept. 1915 ); No. 56/3360 (11 Oct. 1915).
[48] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54/411; No. 54/450; No. 54-A/325.
[49] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 61/18-20.
[50] This order has been sent to the provinces of Adana, Erzurum, Edirne, Aleppo, Hiidavendigar, Sivas, Diyarbakir, Mamuretulaziz, Konya, Kastamonu and Trabzon as well as the prefectures of Izmit, Canik, Eskisehir, Karahisar-i Sahib, Maras, Urfa,Kayseri and Nigde (BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 63/142) and to the Ankara province (BOA,Cipher Desk, No. 64/162) on 30 May 1916 .
[51] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54/254; 20 July 1915 , No. 54-A/49; No. 54-A/232; No. 55-A/83;No. 56/88.
[52] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 58/146.
[53] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/115.
[54] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/281.
[55] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/344.
[56] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 58/201.
[57] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 61/253; No. 61/225.
[58] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 59/83.
[59] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 60/58; 61/221.
[60] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 61/71.
[61] Age limit has been raised to 60 from 2 Aug. 1915 (Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/251).
[62] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 53/334; No. 54-A/251; No. 54-A/309.
[63] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54/356.
[64] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/291.
[65] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55-A/217.
[66] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55/291; No. 55/341; No. 57/345; No. 57/351.
[67] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55/152; No. 55/291; No. 55/341; No. 55-A/17; No. 55-A/77, No.55-A/135; No. 57/110.
[68] BOA, Cipher Desk, NO. 55-A/16 (Telegram dated 31 August 1915).
[69] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55-A/17
[70] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 53/305.
[71] The 1915 budget of the Directorate for the Settlement of Nomadic Tribes and Refugees was 78,000,000 kuruş and its 1916 budget was 200,000,000 kuruş. The funds were spent for the deported Armenians, Greeks and Arabs as well as Muslim refugees coming in from territories invaded by the enemy. (BOS, BEO, No. 334063).
[72] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 53/305; No. 55-A/118.
[73] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 60/281.
[74] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 60/178.
[75] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 53/200.
[76] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/268.
[77] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/226.
[78] In a letter sent by the Justice Ministry on 14 Dec 1915, the Prime Ministry was informed of the decision that the trial of the deportees would be conducted at places they were sent to, while those allowed to stay would be tried at their hometowns.
[79] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 53/303.
[80] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/259.
[81] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 55/107.
[82] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/385.
[83] For the texts of the legislated laws concerning the property of deported Armenians, see "Provisional law on the property, debts and the settlement of the left assets of the people deported to other areas", Takvim-i Vekayi, 27 Sept. 1915 , No. 2303, Yr. 7, and Y. H. Bayur, Turk inkilabi Tarihi (History of Turkish Revolution) Ankara , Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1957, III/3, pp. 45-46.
[84] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 54-A/388.
[85] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 61/31; No. 60/275; No. 60/277.
[86] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/348; No. 57/349; No. 57/350.
[87] See: Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 2D/13.
[88] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept 2 , No. 2F/6.
[89] See: Heath W. Lowry, The Story Behind Ambassador Morgenthau's Story, Istanbul , The isis Press, 1990. In this work (pp. 69-77), Lowry says that Morgenthau's memoirs were published almost simultaneously in Europe and the United States , and reveals relations of Morgenthau with Lepsius and Bryce.
[90] Great Britain , The Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire : Documents Presented to Viscount Grey of Fallodon, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, London , H.M.S.O., 1916.
[91] Le Rapport secret du Dr. Johannes Lepsius sur les massacres d'Armenie, Paris ,Payot, 1918.
[92] Armenian Atrocities : The Murder of a Nation, London , Hodder and Stoughton , 1915;The Murderous Tyranny of the Turks, London , Hodder and Stoughton , 1917.
[93] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , File 1, Document 23.
[94] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 2/105.
[95] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 2D/17.
[96] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 59/19.
[97] Foreign Ministry, Truce, No. 43/17.
[98] Foreign Ministry, Truce, No. 43/17.
[99] Meanwhile, Armenians in Kastamonu, Balikesir, Antalya , Istanbul and Urfa , the Protestant and Catholic Armenians as well as the sick, teachers, orphans and solitary women have not been deported.
[100] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/77.
[101] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/66.
[102] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/79.
[103] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/66.
[104] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 8/250.
[105] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 9/260.
[106] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/89.
[107] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/72.
[108] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/76.
[109] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/67.
[110] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/73.
[111] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/75.
[112] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/70.
[113] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/84.
[114] Interior Ministry, Cipher Desk, No. 54/9; Interior Ministry, Cipher Desk, No. 54/162.
Both documents report that of the deported Armenians, a 500-strong party had been massacred by Kurds between Erzurum and Erzincan. The other document says that the Armenians sent from the Dersim area were killed to a man by the Dersim bandits. Since it is not known how many deportees were in these parties, a putative figure of 5,000 has been accepted.
[115] The documents do not clarify how many Armenians were deported from Diyarbakir . But since other documents note that a total of 120,000 deportees, including those who came from other places, were sent on, it is estimated that 20,000 Armenians were sent from Diyarbakir itself.
[116] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/41.
[117] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/66.
[118] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/93.
[119] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/101.
[120] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 69/34.
[121] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/66.
[122] Figures for Giresun, Perşembe, Ulubey, Surmene, Tirebolu, Ordu and Görele were supplied in the same document. Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/41.
[123] Interior Ministry, Cipher Desk, No. 63/110.
[124] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/80.
[125] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/71; Dept. 2 , No. 68/84.
[126] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/80; No. 69/5-6-7-8-9.
[127] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/101.
[128] Although the number of deportees arriving at Aleppo was reported to be "around" 100,000 (Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 68/80), the number has been taken as 100,000.
[129] See: m. 29-32.
[130] Interior Ministry, Cipher Desk, No. 57/110.
[131] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2, No. 68/81; see also Interior Ministry, Cipher Desk, No.57/51; No. 57/71.
[132] Interior Ministry, Cipher Desk, No. 63/119.
[133] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 2F/14.
[134] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , No. 2F/94.
[135] Bilâl Şimşir, Les Deportes de Malte et les allegations armeniennes, Ankara, Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres, 1998, p. 49 ( from: Archives des Affaires Etrangeres de France, Serie Levant, 1918-1928, Sous Serie Armenie, Vol. 2, folio 47).
[136] Lowry, op. cit., pp. 50-51.
[137] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 45/115 (With the telegram dated 23 Sept. 1916 , the provinces of Van, Bitlis, Mamuretulaziz, Adana , Diyarbakir and Sivas were given instructions in this respect).
[138] BOA, BEO, No. 328331; No. 337081; BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 56/382.
[139] Interior Ministry, EUM, Dept. 2 , Folder 1, doc. 45/2.
[140] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 61/50; No. 62/24; No. 63/175; No. 64/92; No. 64/163; No. 64/194; No. 66/51; No. 66/56; No. 66/192; BOA, BEO, No. 343464.
[141] Letter from the Interior Ministry sent to the Prime Ministry on 1 Febr. 1920 (BOA, BEO,No. 341351).
[142] Interior Ministry, EUM, No. 2 F/3; Interior Ministry, EUM, File 2 F/5.
[143] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 62/21 (App. LX).
[144] Istanbul, Matbaa-1 Orhanlye, 1332 (1916).
[145] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 57/273; No. 58/124; No. 59/123; No. 60/190.
[146] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 61/72.
[147] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 62/21 (App. LX).
[148] For the new regulations set for Armenian Patriarchate in 1916, see Bayur, Turk inkilâbi Tarihi (History of the Turkish Revolution), III/3, p. 57-59.
[149] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 66/202; No. 66/220; No. 63/136.
[150] BOA, BEO, No. 341055. This letter from the Interior Ministry has been transferred by the Prime Minister's Office to the Justice Ministry.
[151] Foreign Ministry, Great War, Folder 173/5.
[152] Foreign Ministry, Great War, Folder 122/4; Folder 122/6.
[153] Foreign Ministry, Truce, No. 43/34.
[154] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 96/248.
[155] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 96/279.
[156] BOA, Cabinet Letters, No. 213/60.
[157] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 99/35.
[158] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 95/124.
[159] Interior Ministry, Political Div., No. 53/2.
[160] BOA, Cipher Desk, No. 96/230.
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
Labels: Yusuf Halacoglu

