The so-called “Armenian Genocide” has been widely discussed in the agenda of world history as well as the international political arena so far. However, Armenian lobbies and diasporas in many countries, especially Russia, the United States and European countries, have funded media outlets and numerous political circles with regard to promoting the campaign for the recognition of the genocide issue. And this policy is carried out until today. Unfortunately, no one or fewer people in the Western world have turned out documentaries reflecting the realities and truths of the bloody events of 1915 that occurred in the eastern part of the Ottoman Empire.
Axar.az presents an interview on the so-called "Armenian Genocide" with Dr Patrick Walsh, who is a professional historian on Ottoman and Caucasian studies, and one of the few Western historians who shared his criticism on Armenian claims of territories and the issue of Armenia genocide. He is also an author of numerous books, a political analyst and a teacher of history and politics in his homeland of Ireland.
- First, please tell us, what are the main lies of the so-called Armenian genocide campaign?
- There are a number of ways in which the Armenian Genocide lobby distorts the historical truth to make political propaganda around the tragic events of 1915. Firstly, they accuse the Ottoman state of a deliberate policy of annihilation of the Armenian population when what befell the Armenians was actually the consequences of an extraordinary wartime event. In addition, they misrepresent the motives of the Ottoman government in adopting a wartime policy of relocation to deal with military necessity. Furthermore, they hugely exaggerate the death toll of Armenians in the tragedy claiming figures of up to 1.5 million deaths deliberately massacred when the true figure of Armenian fatalities from all causes during the period was around 660,000. Finally, they completely ignore the equally horrendous casualty levels that affected the Ottoman Muslim populations in the main areas of Armenian habitation and the role of the Dashnaks in causing these deaths and general suffering.
- Do you think that Western powers took more responsibility for the occurrence of a series of the bloodiest events among Turks, Kurds and Armenians in eastern Anatolia?
- The Western Powers bear a fundamental responsibility for what happened to the Armenians in 1915. In response to Germany’s rise as a commercial power, Britain had re-orientated its Balance of Power policy in Europe. Making arrangements and informal alliances with its traditional enemies, France (1904) and Russia (1907), Britain decided to join in a future European war against Germany to smash her commercial development. The new British understanding with the Tsar, in which Russia’s military forces were to be used against Germany, necessitated a change in British policy with regard to the Ottoman Empire. No longer would Britain guarantee the Ottoman integrity against the Tsar’s ambitions but collaborate with Russia in its destruction. When the Anglophile/Francophile Young Turks came to power in Istanbul they attempted to distance themselves from previous fraternal relations with Germany but found it impossible given the predatory intentions of those they wished to have good relations with. They were driven back into Germany’s arms by the mutual need to avoid destruction. Prominent Germans like Paul Rohrbach and several military officers like General von der Goltz saw the danger and told the Ottomans to relocate the Armenians even prior to the war as they would act as a Russian fifth column in the event of a Russian invasion. The Young Turks were too trusting and thought they could still persuade the Dashnaks against such a catastrophic course of action. They did not want to take such a drastic course of action unless the existence of the state was actually threatened. So they hesitated until 1915 after it was clear the Armenians were in actual insurrection against the state and its citizens and posed a dire threat to everyone. The Ottoman relocation policy is the centrepiece of the “Genocide” allegation against the Turks. Prof. Edward Erickson in his book ‘Ottomans and Armenians: A Study in Counterinsurgency’ examines the relocation of a section of the Armenian populace and comes to the conclusion that it was primarily a military measure made necessary by an existential crisis involving a simultaneous 4 front invasion by Russian, British and French military and naval forces with co-ordinated internal risings by Armenian insurrectionists. He describes it as relocation rather than exile, deportation or ethnic cleansing because there is nothing to suggest the Ottomans had any intention of permanently moving the Armenians and there is evidence, both from Ottoman and Armenian sources that there was every intention of returning them after the war emergency.
- Please tells us about the massacres committed by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation-Dashnaks against Muslims and the local Armenian population in Anatolia during the period of the First World War.
In March 1915 the Armenians rose in rebellion in Van and massacred thousands of local Muslims who were left undefended due to the drafting of the young men to the front. In Bitlis, Muslims were hunted down and killed in the streets in February 1916 in the course of an Armenian rising. Villages were destroyed and the inhabitants were massacred by Armenian bands operating behind Ottoman lines. After the Tsarist collapse in 1917, the Armenians were placed in control of the front themselves, unrestricted by Russian authority. Fearsome massacres were conducted against Moslem civilians, on the Armenian line of retreat, around Erzincan, Erzurum, Bayburt, Tercan and particularly Erzurum in February 1918. When the Armenians were forced back, they continued their massacring of Muslims in Kars, Erivan, and Azerbaijan. Around 15 per cent of the Muslim population of the Southern Caucasus persisted in this period due to the aggressions of Dashnaks against unarmed civilian populations.
- Why does the Western world still believe groundless Armenian claims about so-called genocide, and do not want to see and hear bloody massacres carried out by Armenian rebel groups against the Muslim population?
- The Western narrative about the Armenians is a historical construct deeply embedded in the Western mind. In the late 19th Century important individuals in the Anglosphere, such as James Bryce, constructed powerful pro-Armenian and anti-Turk writings which became very popular in British Liberal circles. This was largely a pursuit of only one section of the British political class since the Conservatives opposed it with the slogan: “The Turk is a Gentleman” and were suspicious of Armenian attempts to draw England into conflict. However, this all changed after the 1907 alliance with Russia and the Great War of 1914. The bulk of the British political class now had an interest in producing and distributing anti-Turkish and pro-Armenian propaganda and a secret state department, composed of some of the ablest Britons of the day, including Arnold Toynbee, was created to do this. Wellington House performed this propaganda role and its objective was to bring the US into the war on Britain’s side, because Britain, it was concluded by this stage, could not defeat the Germans without American direct intervention. American Christian circles, including the US Protestant missions and President Woodrow Wilson himself, were very favourable to the Armenian cause and it was in these areas that the British state propagandists worked. So, a very powerful pro-Armenian, anti-Turkish narrative, backed up by the power of two great states was established to suit the wartime needs of propaganda. Armenians themselves latched on to the need to produce this material in the West and enthusiastically worked for the cause during the War. The development of Armenian diasporas in the West furnished more material for the production of this when the war ended. Ever since, these diasporas, in the US and France, have persistently worked to maintain this narrative, in a kind of patriotic duty. From the 1960s this developed into the Genocide lobby, eager to give the events of 1915 the special status achieved by the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews. This, therefore, is a very powerful and persistent narrative which has fed into racial and religious prejudice against Turks and Muslims held by many racist and religious elements in the West. The majority of Westerners are ignorant of the facts and do not care much about the conflict between Armenians and Turks or Azerbaijanis. However, a version of the pro-Armenian narrative, produced by wartime propagandists a century ago, has become the default position among the media and general Western public consciousness. It is very hard to shift since it has persisted for so long and there are such prominent campaigning individuals, particularly in the US, who are facilitated financially and politically by the very activist Armenian diaspora organizations, in continuing their work to this day against both Turkiye and Azerbaijan.
