Christopher Hitchens: Turkey Denies HistoryRoundup: Media's Take
April is the cruelest month for the people of Armenia, who every year at this season have to suffer a continuing tragedy and a humiliation. The tragedy is that of commemorating the huge number of their ancestors who were exterminated by the Ottoman Muslim caliphate in a campaign of state-planned mass murder that began in April 1915. The humiliation is of hearing, year after year, that the Turkish authorities simply deny that these appalling events ever occurred or that the killings constituted "genocide."
In a technical and pedantic sense, the word genocide does not, in fact, apply, since it only entered our vocabulary in 1943. (It was coined by a scholar named Raphael Lemkin, who for rather self-evident reasons in that even more awful year wanted a legal term for the intersection between racism and bloodlust and saw Armenia as the precedent for what was then happening in Poland.) I still rather prefer the phrase used by America's then-ambassador to Turkey, Henry Morgenthau. Reporting to Washington about what his consular agents were telling him of the foul doings in the Ottoman provinces of Harput and Van in particular, he employed the striking words "race extermination." (See the imperishable book The Slaughterhouse Province for some of the cold diplomatic dispatches of that period.) Terrible enough in itself, Morgenthau's expression did not quite comprehend the later erasure of all traces of Armenian life, from the destruction of their churches and libraries and institutes to the crude altering of official Turkish maps and schoolbooks to deny that there had ever been an Armenia in the first place.
This year, the House foreign affairs committee in Washington and the parliament of Sweden joined the growing number of political bodies that have decided to call the slaughter by its right name. I quote now from a statement in response by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the current prime minister of Turkey and the leader of its Islamist party:
In my country there are 170,000 Armenians. Seventy thousand of them are citizens. We tolerate 100,000 more. So, what am I going to do tomorrow? If necessary I will tell the 100,000: OK, time to go back to your country. Why? They are not my citizens. I am not obliged to keep them in my country.
This extraordinary threat was not made at some stupid rally in a fly-blown town. It was uttered in England, on March 17, on the Turkish-language service of the BBC. Just to be clear, then, about the view of Turkey's chief statesman: If democratic assemblies dare to mention the ethnic cleansing of Armenians in the 20th century, I will personally complete that cleansing in the 21st!
Where to begin? Turkish "guest workers" are to be found in great numbers all through the European Union, membership of which is a declared Turkish objective. How would the world respond if a European prime minister called for the mass deportation of all Turks? Yet Erdogan's xenophobic demagoguery attracted precisely no condemnation from Washington or Brussels. He probably overestimated the number of "tolerated" economic refugees from neighboring and former Soviet Armenia, but is it not interesting that he keeps a count in his head? And a count of the tiny number of surviving Turkish Armenians as well?..
comments powered by Disqus
fehmi colpan - 4/9/2010
Of course, even these few examples give great harm to the present Armenian thesis and lead people to question the Armenian’s innocence, their predominance in Ottoman population, and most importantly their genocide thesis. Of course, the fact that Turks offered the Dashnaks an autonomous Armenia (made up of Russian Armenia and the three Turkish vilayets of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis) under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire’, if they joined the Turkish side and stopped supporting the Russians, the other fact that the executive committee of the Dashnagzoutiun rejected the proposal in August 1914 before the war broke and that they rejected all other Turkish calls of negotiations repeated during WWI too, are the major points that are not wanted by the Armenians to be known
(Garo Pastırmacıan, Why Armenia Should be Free?, Boston, Dec.1918, Hairenik Publishing Company p. 16-17 and Papers relating to the foreign relations of the United States The Paris Peace Conference 1919 , United States Government Printing Office, 1948, Vol IV, p 139-157).
Of course they fear a question of why the Turks did offer autonomy to Armenians if they decided to eradicate them.
And they fear the question of why and how the Armenian prime minister Simon Vratzian applied the Turkish government on March 18, 1921 and asked military help of the Turks against the Bolsheviks, in spite of the fact that the Turks committed a (so-called) genocide and murdered 1.5 million Armenians!
And they also are very frightened of the question how the Ottoman Government eradicated 1,5 million of Armenians but in spite of this it was the Ottomans who first conceived the idea of founding an independent Armenia, and recognized it first. Moreover, it was the Ottoman Sultan who first wished not only the development of Armenian Republic, but that she be strong in order to retain her independence! Astonishingly, it was the Ottoman Sultan, who stated that friendly relations would always exist between the two countries
That is, the Armenian ancestors who created their history (the top representatitives of the Ottoman Armenians, Dashnags and prime ministers of Armenia), the Armenian historians and poets who wittnessed this period and even the Armenian murderers of Turkish diplomats are the main deniers!
So, it is not surprising that both the book of Hovannes Katchaznouni, the first prime-minister of the Armenian state, ‘Dashnagzoutiun Has Nothing to do Anymore’ and the book of K.S.Papazian ‘Patrionism Perverted’ are banned in Armenia. It is also a fact that all the copies of the book of Hovannes Katchaznouni, in all languages were collected from the libraries in Europe by Dashnags. The book is included in the catalogues but no copies can be found in the racks.
It is not surprising either that, the Armenians even claim that nobody called A.A. Lalayan, the Soviet-Armenian historian, ever lived!
Yes, they can ban the books of the makers of their history, they can buy politicians by their votes and urge them to accept historical resolutions and memorial laws in their parliaments, they can threaten the historians who do not support their thesis, they can sue them, they can even bomb their houses (http://188.8.131.52/gtd1/ViewIncident.aspx?id=56624), they can make the world opinion blind by their propaganda and may deceive some of them, but they can never ban scholar thought and silence all the historians of the world!
Note that Pierre Nora, president of the association ‘Liberty for history’ founded in 2005, has recently stated that the history should not be a slave to currency or written under the dictation of competing memoirs; in a free state, it does not belong to any political authority to define the historical truth and restrict freedom of the historian under threat of criminal sanctions. In a democracy, freedom for history is the freedom of all (http://www.lph-asso.fr//articles/46.html, . http://www.lph-asso.fr//tribunes/49.html)
fehmi colpan - 4/9/2010
The Armenian poet Mikael Nalbandyan who wrote these lines in his poem ‘The March of People of Zeytun, was another denier and Turkish nationalist:
‘..Şad ısdrugner yeğan azad/Miyayin menk mnank hılu hıbadag/Zeytuntsiner mer zposank/E baderazm yev arşavank/ Sur, tur, kıntag yev hıratsan/ Mer khağalikın en havidyan….’
(A lot of slaves were set free/ Only we were left who were obedient/Amusements of us, people of Zeytun are/ War and raid/ Our inexhaustible toys are/ Sword, saber, bullet and gun…….) (Nor Knar, p99). Zeytun was one of the places where the Armenians rebelled and massacred the Turks and Muslims.
The Armenian journalists of Armenian newspapers published in İstanbul, like Hayrenik, were also deniers, since they praised the Ottoman government for letting the relocated Armenians return their previous locations in 1918 and allocated 2 million liras for their return. They were deniers since they also critized the Russians and other states for using the Armenians as their tools.
KS Papazian the writer of ‘Patriotism Perverted’ published in 1934, in Boston was also a denier. Because:Papazian critized A. Khatisian and the then prime minister S.Vratzian for not publishing the text of Treaty of Gümrü which they signed on December 2, 1920 to put an end to the war between Turkey and the Armenian Republic on December 2, 1920, which coincided with the entrance of Bolsheviks in Armenia.
Papazian also stated that the Armenian prime minister Simon Vratzian applied to the Turkish government on March 18, 1921 and asked military help of the Turks against the Bolsheviks!
Even Gourgen Mıgırdıç Yanıkyan (age 78), the Armenian murderer of Los Angeles prime consul of Turkey Mehmet Baydar (age 49) and the co consul Bahadır Demir (age 30) in Santa Barbara, in 1973, was a real denier, Turkish nationalist and agent of Turkish government. Because he admitted in his trial on June 13, 1973, via his attorney Lindsay that he (Yanıkyan) had been a member of an army made up of 10 000 volunteers to fight against the Turks in Armenia, in the beginning of March 1915 and in chief of this army had been an Armenian general called Andranik.
This had been prepared as four parties and had started to battle with the Turks in Iğdır, under the leadership of Russian general Dron and had proceeded to Van, they had occupied Van and meanwhile had destroyed and had fired Turkish villages (Dışişleri Bakanlığı <Santa Barbara Suikasti. Telephone from Washington Embassy to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, 15.6.1973, No:220 and June 21, 1973. No:225)
fehmi colpan - 4/9/2010
Armenian Messrs. Ahonian and Hadissian who were the spokesmen of the Armenian delegation of the New Armenian Republic and visited Sultan Mehmet VI, Vahdeddin in Istanbul on September 6, 1918 were also Turkish nationalists. See the telegram sent by Mr Ahorian to the Armenian Prime Minister Kachaznuni:
‘On September 6th, we presented our congratulations on his accession to the throne. We submitted our best wishes for the development of the Empire and its well-being and stated that the Armenian nation would never forget that it was the Ottoman Government which first conceived the idea of founding an independent Armenia, and recognized it, that the Armenian Government would do everything possible to protect friendly relations between the two countries and to strengthen them. His Majesty thanked and stated that he was very happy at seeing the envoys of independenbt and free Armenia, that he wished not only her development , but that she be strong in order to retain her independence.
His Majesty is entirely convinced that friendly relations will always exist between the two neighboring countries, Turkey and Armenia, in order that both of them may develop.
He concluded his remarks by stating that he was very hapy to see that Armenia had the strength to found an independent state which was able to send envoys to Istanbul, and repeated his best wishes for our country’. (Erich Feigl, A Myth of Terror, Edition Zeitgeschichte Freilassing, Salzburg, Austria p.97)
The Armenian Soviet historian A.A.Lalayan who stated that the Dashnaks displayed extreme courage to massacre Turkish women, children and ill and old people (Contrarevolyutsionnıy ‘Daşnaktsutyun’ İ İmperialisti-çeskaya Voyna 1914-1918 gg.’, Revolyutsionnıy Vostok, No.2-3, p.92, 1936) and
who also quoted the following report of a Dashnag officer, Aslem Varaam written in 1920, in Beyazit-Varan was an Armenian denier and he was also hired by the Turkish government . The report of Aslem Varaam was:
"I exterminated the Turkish population in Bashar-Gechar without making any exceptions. One some times feels the bullets shouldn't be wasted. So, the most effective way against these dogs is to collect the people who have survived the clashes and dump them in deep holes and crush them under heavy rocks pressed from above, not to let them inhabit this world any longer. So I did accordingly. I collected all the women, men and children and extinguished their lives in the deep holes I dumped them into, crushing them with rocks."
A.Lalayan, Revolutsionniy Vostok (Revolutionary East) No: 2-3, p.92 vd, Moscow, 1936; Istoricheskie Zapisky No 2, p.101, 1928
Armenian T. Haçikoğlyan who told that the Dashnaks eradicated thousands of Turks with their bloody hands (T. Haçikoglyan, 10 Let Armyanskoy Sttrelkovoy Divizii ,p4-6. İzdatelstvo Polit. Uprav. KKA, Tiflis, 1930) was also a denier and agent of Turkish government.
fehmi colpan - 4/9/2010
Whoever tells about topics which obviously abolish the imaginary past of the Armenians are labelled as ‘deniers’, as ‘agents of Turkish government’, or ‘people hired by the Turkish government’ or ‘disingenous scholars/authorities’ Turkish nationalists’, ‘Turkish racists’. And, here are the names of Armenians who comply with the these terms:
“Garo Pasdermichan (Pastirmaciyan), the Ottoman deputy of Erzurum and commander of all the Armenian officials and soldiers of the Ottoman Third Army which joined the Russian Army in 1914, was the main denier and Turkish racist. Because, he wrote in his book ‘Why Armenia Should Be Free’ (Boston, Dec.1918, Hairenik Publishing Company p. 16-17) that
annual Congress of Armenian Party Dashnagzoutiun was held in Erzurum in August 1914, before the war broke, and Turkish emissaries offered Dashnaks an autonomous Armenia (made up of Russian Armenia and the three Turkish vilayets of Erzurum, Van and Bitlis) under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire’, if they joined the Turkish side and stopped supporting the Russians.
He also stated that the executive committee of the Dashnagzoutiun rejected the proposal!
The Armenian members of this parley were the well-known publicist E.Aknouni, the representative from Van, A.Vramian, and the director of the Armenian schools in the district of Erzurum, Mr Rostom.
Another main denier was Boghos Noubar Pasha, the Armenian National Delegation President in The Paris Peace Conference 1919 who also stated that the Turks offered them autonomy in August 1914, much before the deportation, but they rejected this proposal and placed themselves without hesitation on the side of the Entente Powers from whom they expected liberation [Papers relating to the foreign relations of the United States The Paris Peace Conference 1919 (United States Government Printing Office, 1948, Vol IV, p 139-157)].
Armenian Boghos Noubar Pasha, who told that ‘150 000 Armenian volunteers in Russian Army were the only forces against Turks’ (Times of London , 1919 Jan 30 Link: http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2007/10/2013-150-000-armenian-volunteers-in.html) was obviously a denier and agent of Turkish government.
Hovannes Katchaznouni, the first prime-minister of the Armenian state founded in 1918 and the prime authority of the Dashnagzoutiun Party who wrote a book ‘Dashnagzoutiun Has Nothing to do Anymore’ was also another chief denier. Because, in his book which is banned in Armenia at present, he stated that:
*it was a mistake to establish the volunteer units.
*They were unconditionally allied with Russia,
*They massacred the Moslem population,
*The Armenian terrorist acts were directed, at winning the Western public opinion.
*British occupation aroused hopes of the Dashnaks,
*They were provoked by imperial Sea to Sea land demand,
*They had not taken into consideration Turkey’s power,
* They should have used a peaceful language towards the Turks but they (Armenian Dashnaks) rejected the Turks who suggested to negotiate with them and they went on making war
(KS Papazian the writer of ‘Patriotism Perverted’ published in 1934, in Boston, also confirms this Turkish suggestion. Note that ‘Patrionism Perverted’ is banned in Armenia).
*The decision of the deportation of Armenians was a rightful measure taken by Turks.
*Turkey had acted with an instinct of self-defence.
*Their government was a Dashnak dictatorship.
*The fault was within the Dashnak Party. They should commit suicide. They had nothing to do.
Vratsyan, the last prime minister of Dashnaks who wrote in an article published in December 3 1920 issue of Araç, that they transformed Armenia to an arenna of endless wars with its neighbours for the Entente Powers (RGASPİ fond 80, list 4, file 83, sheet 136) was another chief denier and agent of Turkish government.
akasya dogan - 4/8/2010
Let us go to a few years ago:
*In 2004, the Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform (VAT) was founded to exchange documents about the 1915 events by Austrian, Turkish and Armenian historians. After receiving 100 Turkish documents, the Armenians abondened the project refusing to continue to fulfil their commitments and afterwards the Armenian foreign minister announced that they did not want to discuss the 1915 events with historians.
*Armenia refused the Turkish prime minister's and the Turkish Assembly's invitation announced on April 13, 2005 which suggested to establish a Joint Commission composed of historians from both sides and discuss the events which took place during the 1st World War.
*And the Turkish prime minister repeated the same invitation on February 2008 , in Munich at the 44th Security Conference where the Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Oskanian also attended?
In neither of these invitations was there any precondition, unlike it is claimed by the Armenians.
***Why did the Armenian historian Sarafyan, who accepted the invitation of the then chief of Turkish History Foundation, Halacoglu, for cooperation to investigate Harput events, abandon the project, after talking the Armenian diaspora?
*The Ottoman and Turkish archives are open, unlike it is claimed by the diaspora. http://www.ankara.edu.tr/english/yazi.php?yad=36. http://www.tsk.mil.tr/ENGLISH/8_FRAGMENTS_FORM_HI...
http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents... http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents... http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr/kitap/kitap.asp...
Even, Armenian historian Ara Sarafian from Gomitas Institute and Hilmar Kaiser searched the Ottoman archives (www.sarigelinbelgeseli.com
*In spite of this, why are the Armenian archives including the one in Zoryan Armenian Institute in Boston closed?
Both Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation offered the Armenians to open these archives; but the directors of the Zoryan Institute replied that they did not have enough money to open the archives. Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation promised financial support.Why did the Armenians refuse this suggestion too? (Nüzhet Kandemir, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/418517.asp). Note that Zoryan Institute has quite enough money to provide financial support for Taner Akçam who advocated the Armenian claims while working in Minnesota University until recently.
Why have the Armenians always been terribly afraid of establishment of historical joint commissions?
Is it not striking that Sarafian, the head of the London-based Gomidas Institute, said Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s offer to Armenia to establish a commission of historians to
resolve the Armenian issue was positive, but Armenia was the wrong address. He also said that freedom of expression for historians in Armenia is limited and the genocide issue has become a political tool. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/10426...
If a genocide had really occured, why did Brian Ardouny of the Armenian Assembly of America announce ‘We don’t need to prove the genocide historically, because it has already been accepted politically’? Why did the chief of the Armenian Archives in Armenia tell that they were not interested in the achives, but all they are interested is the world’s public opinion.
Or why have the Armenians not admitted to an international court yet?
In your life, have you ever seen a criminal who persistently calls the victim to bring his evidences? And, have you ever seen a victim who passionately accuses somebody of committing crime and giving him great harm but strictly avoids of bringing his proofs before the referees or going to court, and tells that he need not prove that person’s guilt, because the community has already accepted him as guilty?
In this situation would you not question the era you are living in? 5000 BC or 2000BC?
What else should the Turks do to face their history? Is it Turkey/Turks or Armenia and those who support them who are terribly afraid of facing their history?
akasya dogan - 4/8/2010
If Turks committed a genocide which is the greatest crime of humanity, and if Turkey really avoids of facing its history, and if the Armenians and their supporters sincerely want Turkey to do it, then why do the Armenians persistently refuse Turkey’s suggestions to discuss these events together with historians from both sides and other countries? For example:
“Our objective is to have the matter investigated by historians and experts. We are ready to accept the decision of the joint historical commission. We agree for different professionals from various countries to be involved” Abdullah Gul recently said. If historians committee project could be realized, issue of so called Armenian genocide will not be discussed by politicians but by historians. Furthermore, other than Turkish and Armenian historians, historians from third countries will also be included.
The Turks who were eager for establishment of such an historical commission, were supported by the United Nations, European Parliament and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). http://www.tegenwicht.org/weblog_2006/67_armeens.... http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/bericht/77330, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/93374... and was very happy.
While Turkey was eager and very happy, the Armenians were exceedingly unwilling and very angry.
In an interview with Armenian Reporter, Prof Richard Hovannisian from California University and the father of Raffi Hovannisian, the first Foreign Minister of Armenia, said: ‘It is very dangerous to establish such an historical commission…because according to 1948 United Nations’s Genocide Convention, a deliberate and planned massacre is mandatory. The Turks will accept that nearly 200-300 thousand Armenian died; but nobody can call them deliberate acts. In Turkish Archives the Turks have the telegrams sent from vilayets about the then Armenian upraisals and documents about the Armenians who fled from the Ottoman Army. So, the Turkish historians will accuse the Armenians and say that all these events were a reaction to what the Armenians did and were not deliberate’ http://www.kophaber.com/news_detail.php?id=4726
One of the supporters of so called Armenian genocide resolutions in U.S. Congress, Adam Schiff said “A committee about history is a struggle for distracting the truth. Turkey cannot rewrite history in exchange for good relations with Armenia.”
ANCA and other Armenian lobbying organizations stated that Armenia is forced to make dangerous concessions by Turkey and that Turkey’s moves towards establishing joint historians commission aims to call so called Armenian genocide into question and suspend its international recognition. ANCA’s aim is to provide recognition of so called Armenian genocide by U.S. Congress before establishment of a historians committee to discuss the events by keeping pressure.urging the Congress.
bos bogaz - 4/7/2010
I understand that you try to make your case more sympathetic by referring to other tragedies in the history but this puts you under an obligation to show physical ties between the cases. If so called ‘Armenian genocide’ is like ‘Jewish Holocaust’. You have to be able to show why they are alike. So for example you should be able to point out where the concentration camps were in Turkey.
bos bogaz - 4/7/2010
Insulting? It's funny that you embrace so-called 'Armenian genocide' without any consensus but yet if I mention Azeri genocide, you ask for proof. You are giving me an equation “WAR = Atrocities” but you fail to point out Turks were engaged in WW1 in 1915. Yes, atrocities do happen during the time of a war. Mind you that the deportation of Armenians is not what Turks wanted. Armenians lived under Turkish rule close to 800 + years. They were able to engage trade, own real-estate and most importantly they were able to retain their culture, language and religion. During WW1, Armenians now had the opportunity to separate from the Ottomans. The Ottoman empire was weak and, allied countries of the west, especially French wanted to use Armenians to further weaken the crumbling empire. Russians were coming from the east in support of Armenians. The Tashnak and Hinchak etc. militia movement terrorized Turkish villages. The atrocities that were caused by these groups in the time of war caused Armenian population to be deported by the Turkish government.
Insulting? I think not… It’s an opportunity to prove your case. It’s an opportunity to reach a closure. If you are so sure of it, if you are confidant in what you believe in, you can take the challenge. It should be easier than trying to convince congress every year a so-called ‘Armenian genocide’. Of course if you are not confidant and if you have doubts, I would understand how horrifying this might be for you.
Berge Jololian - 4/6/2010
Before the word "genocide" was coined by Raphael Lemkin to describe the barbarity that befell the Armenians at the hands of the Turkish state, British prime minister Winston Churchill and other world leaders at the time described it as the "Armenian holocaust".
Berge Jololian - 4/6/2010
Can you imagine if back in the days of West Germany at the height of the
cold war, the United States refrained form condemning the Holocaust for fear
of upsetting or offending a strategic NATO ally?
The United States does not deny the African-American slavery, or the Native Indian massacres, or the civil war. Turkey denies the Armenian genocide and existence of Armenians in their homeland of Western Armenia (now Eastern Turkey).
Jurist Raphael Lemkin, a lawyer of Polish-Jewish descent, and
Holocaust survivor coined the word "genocide" specifically to describe the destruction of Armenians and the barbarity that befell upon them at the hands of the Turkish State.
Genocide is not an issue that concerns only Armenians, Jews, and others; Genocide is a human rights issue that concerns everyone; It is an American issue.
Genocide acknowledgment without accountability (punishment) is hollow and
meaningless. Turkey must be held accountable for its crime of genocide.
The Armenian genocide is not a old issue; it is current on-going genocide
1915-2010. The last act of genocide is denial. Genocide stops when denial ceases.
Denial is not just the simple negation of an act; it is much more the consequent continuation of the very act itself. Genocide should not only physically destroy a community; it should likewise dictate the prerogative of interpretation in regard to history, culture, territory and memory. As the victims, Armenians never existed.
The Turkish have not only murdered humans, destroyed an ancient culture and civilization, and rewritten history, but they continue to legitimize the act as well as
the racist ideology that led to the act. This includes the legitimization of any and all stereotyping of the Armenian people as a dangerous enemy, as a deadly bogeyman in the closet.
Denial is the final step in the completion of a mass extermination - and the first step towards the next genocide.
ara kantardjian - 4/6/2010
How would the world view...a panel of historians discussing the JEWISH HOLOCAUST? And regarding Karapagh...my friend, WAR = Atrocities. No one claims that horrible things do not happen during war. BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT GENOCIDE. I dare you to produce 1 scholar that claims the Armenians commiteed a GENOCIDE against the Azerbaijanis. HOGWASH.
bos bogaz - 4/5/2010
Author is making a case without any foundation. The arguments are one sided and it doesn't reflect the Turkish view on the case. The Turks are not denying these events because they are ignorant. They have their arguments as well and quite a bit of historians accept these arguments too. So whose historians are right? Who’s going to make that judgment? The congress or the senate? Turks has a plea for listening ears. The Turkish prime minister made this plea over and over but for some reason it doesn't get enough attention. The minister said to establish independent group of scholars who would come to a decision after looking at the archives and surveying the geographic areas. Turkey will accept the outcome of this research. No one dared to accept this challenge. Can Germans do this type of a challenge after ww2? But what if Turks are right. Oh it scares the hell out of politicians who milk Armenian Diaspora as their cash cow during every election.
Maybe there should be a similar scholarly committee established on atrocities committed in Azerbaycan’s Karabag area. Oh those people don’t have a cash cow behind them so it’s okay for a million people leave as refugees.
ara kantardjian - 4/5/2010
Christopher. Thank you so much for this article. I will distribute it all around. Excellent writing!
- Historian Tom Engelhardt Revisits His First Piece of Critical History – 48 Years Later
- Heather Cox Richardson: Trump isn’t the first president to compare himself to Jesus — the last one who did ‘planned to lead his white supremacist supporters to victory’
- Historians' archival research looks quite different in the digital age
- Senate Historian Daniel S. Holt Featured on Political Theatre Podcast
- The Way We Do the Things We Do: Making History-Making Visible