The Analysis of the Armenian Genocide - Research Paper Example

Module Module ID: Armenian Genocide The present paper aims to explore the causes, chronicleof events and consequences of the flabbergasting massacre of the people of Armenia at the hands of the Ottoman Turks during the initial years of WWI in 1915 (Fein 2007). One of the most significant objectives behind discovering the afore-stated heinous incident of the massacre includes the elucidation of the throbbing pains and sufferings the men, women, children and elderly belonging to Armenia had to undergo during their persecution by the Turkish military and security forces, which let no attempt go waste to brutalize, torture and torment the hapless Armenians out of cold blood (Adalian 8). Another noteworthy reason behind elaborating the topic selected for this research includes the strong denial tenaciously witnessed by the Turks with regards to the happening of such a gruesome incident at such a massive scale, claimed by the Armenians (Mikaberidze 233). Despite the very fact that the Turks persistently repudiate the number and ratio of the Armenian masses killed by the Turks, they emphatically endorse the catastrophe of the Armenian persecution and killing during the First Great War. Somehow, the recent offer of seeking the apology from the people of Armenia, on the part of the incumbent Turkish prime minister, on the eve of the completion of ninety-nine years of the mishap ratify the claims made by the generations of the Armenian about the tyrannies and cruelties exercised by the Turks on the Armenians partly because of their ethno-racial and religious differences on the one side, and the financial and moral support rendered by the Armenians to the enemies of the Ottoman Empire on the other (Russian Times 2014). By critically investigating into the history of the world at large, it becomes evident that the humans have always been involved into clashes, conflicts, bloodshed and war against the fellow-beings since the primitive eras of Paleolithic and Neolithic civilizations (Durkheim 33). The origin of religion also reflects the lust of the humans to obtain a dominant position against their rival clans, tribes, groups, communities, societies and nations, where the individuals sought support from the metaphysical and supernatural forces to win their favours and earn financial, physical, political and social gains to employ the same against the rival forces (Freud 21). In other terms, spiritual belief system has always been one of the most noteworthy bones of contention among the individuals adhering to and emulating the diverse religious code and faiths. The same is equally applied to the state of conflict between the Turks and Armenians, which led to the occurrence of such an unprecedented incident of the genocide of the latter at the hands of the former by the beginning of twentieth century. The Armenian genocide is frequently ascertained to be one of the bleakest episodes attributed to the modern history of the world at large (Mikaberidze 234). The gloomy incident not only mirrors the magnitude of hatred existing between the Armenians and Turks on the foundations of ethnic differences, but also reflected the prejudice and malice the despotic rulers and imperialistic governments belonging to the big powers predominantly England, Russia, Germany, France, Ottoman Empire and others had projected and promoted in the sacred name of religion and faith. Consequently, the Christian and Muslim rulers ignited the flames of hatred with the aim of exploiting the sentiments and emotions of the innocent masses in order to get them engaged into worthless and unnecessary issues, so that they could not criticize the rulers for embarking upon war adventures and getting indulged into revelries as well. In simple words, all the conflicts the rulers had augmented with the foreign states maintained some secret agendas of prolonging the tenure in power. As a result, the diverse religious ideologies were stimulated all over Europe in such a nefarious manner that the Christian and Muslim subjects put aside their social and cultural ties and associations that had been established during the last several hundred years, and rose against one another during WWI in the name of faith. Thus, the weapon of religious differences was employed by the opportunist rulers to augment the scale of abhorrence amongst the masses coming of one and the same geographical zone (Jacobs 25). The historical records maintain that the Armenians belonged to one of the most ancient civilizations of the world, which had been settled in the region between the Black Sea and Caspian Sea for the last several hundred centuries (Kurkjian 27), where an overwhelming majority of the people adhere to the Christian faith (Garsoïan 81). The state served to be the smallest of the former Soviet Republics, which won its freedom on September 23, 1991 from Russia in the aftermath of the disintegration of the USSR. Having intimate spiritual and socio-cultural affiliations with Russia, the Armenians appeared to be standing by the Triple Entete on the eve of every military conflict appeared between the Christian Russia and the Muslim Turkey. Their sentimental inclinations towards Russia were always a matter of bitterness for the Turks. As a result, the people could never manage to develop cordial and brotherly relations with their neighboring Turks. The same acrimony ripped into a long term enmity between both the civilizations, and the Armenians had to experience the throbbing consequences of their rivalry with the Ottomans during WWI, which caused heavy losses of the Armenian nation both in men and material. WWI was commenced out of the ashes of the political conflicts existing between Serbia and Austria-Hungary, where the five Serb nationalists had hatched the successful conspiracy-plot for assassinating the Austrian crown-prince Archduke Ferdinand, in order to win freedom from the Austrian imperialism (Mahajan 13). The assassination led to the commencement of the horrible war embracing the entire Europe in its fold subsequently. Being one of the most important allies of Germany and Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire also jumped into the flames of conflict, and immediately declared war in reaction to the mobilization of the Allied forces including Russia, England and France against the central Powers. Since the Armenians maintained soft corner for Russia, the self-acclaimed patron and protector of the interests of Christian community all over the globe, the reactionary Turkish forces were determined to annihilate the Armenians in order to take revenge of their providing the moral support to the enemy states of Turkey (Bryce 39). However, identical with the rest of Christian rulers of Europe, the Russian imperialism also maintained least concern regarding the woes and worries experienced by the Christian community under the non-Christian sway. On the contrary, they only used to exploit the name of faith for their political and strategic gains. Like their Muslim counterparts, they also had an unquenchable lust and thirst for capturing more and more lands to annex these areas with their territories. It is therefore the European imperialists supported the Muslim Ottomans during the Balkan Wars (1911-13) against the Christian Balkan states due to the very fact that the European imperialism looked for the perpetuity of despotism in various parts of the globe (Kedourie 20-1). The Russian strategists had made huge investment by funding the churches, and spending heavy amount of money on the Christian spiritual leaders, intellectuals and mentors with the aim of launching propaganda against the Ottomans, so that the emotions of the Christian community could start launching freedom movement against the Ottoman subjugation, and hence would announce the annexation of the Armenian areas with the mighty Russian Empire eventually (MFA 4-5). Out of the encouragements and temptations made by the Russians to the Armenians with regards to make demands for their social and political rights motivated the minority group to organize their community and start struggle for their just rights. Since the Armenians had been leading a life equivalent to the third-grade citizens within the Ottoman jurisdictions, their political rights had already been negated altogether (Femenia 177). Somehow, it was also another bitter truth that the common men from the Muslim populations even had been denied to have an active participation in the national political affairs under the Ottoman Empire; and the same was also the case with the Russian imperialism as well during that era. Nevertheless, the social groups and communities belonging to the Christian faith started their struggle for the acknowledgement of their separate identity and religious, political, economic and cultural rights (Kurkjian 28). The Armenians witnessed adopting different codes and cryptograms that served to be the symbols of their separate identity from the mainstream Muslim population of Turkey. Somehow, denial of recognition of their rights, on the part of the Ottoman administration, created frustration and some narcissistic hurt that appeared to stimulate wrathful reactions from the minority group (Femenia, 181). The Armenians were well aware of the Turkish resentment over the issue of their support for the Allies. As a result, they openly raised slogans and organized demonstrations in favor of the Triple Entete or Allied forces and against the Central Powers in order to exhibit their fidelity and dedication to the Entete Powers. It not only infuriated the Turks to a great extent, but also they looked extremely determined and resolute for retaliation. Consequently, the Ottomans decreed orders of the expulsion of the Armenians from the boundaries of the empire. As a result, the Armenians were directed, with the use of force, to vacate all the areas immediately, and leave the country as well as all their assets and belongings including properties, businesses and everything they possessed. Since the Armenians had noticed the graveness of the situation as well as the tone of the Ottoman forces and the self-acclaimed force with the title Young Turks, they did not have any choice other than surrendering their possessions and running amuck in order to save their life and honor that explicitly looked to be at great stake at the hands of the Ottomans. The Ottoman rulers and their Muslim subjects were in consensus on the fact that the Armenians did not have any loyalty and patriotism for their motherland. Consequently, the Turks were certain that the Armenians would applaud every foreign aggression to be inflicted on the empire. Such an explicit exhibition of the anti-nationalist sentiments was certainly unacceptable for the Turks, which forced Sultan Abdul Hamid II to announce the expulsion of the community from the Turkish soil instantly (Leads 211). Hence, the Turkish forces and organizations, predominantly Young Turks took it to be an opportunity to inflict every type of atrocities and butcheries on the unarmed and hapless Armenians. The Turks were not only resolute to crush and trounce all surges meant to sabotage the peace and create chaos and disorder in the country, but also took revenge for the grudges they maintained against the minority community members (Fein 2007). The historical records maintain that the most atrocious and appalling incidents attributed to the Armenian annihilation occurred by the beginning of April 1915, in the wake of the issuing of the decree of the deportation of the community from the Turkish soil to the scorching desert areas situated in Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq), Syria and other barren lands and wilderness (Bryce 31). The Armenians, belonging to different age groups and both the genders, had to run amuck in vast deserts in scorching heat in order to escape the Turkish retaliation; during the course of which hundreds of men and women lost their lives because of hunger, starvation, thirst and hot weather. Besides, the cruel members of Young Turks organization inflicted pains and sufferings upon the Armenians, and killed hundreds of them out of sheer feelings of abhorrence for the community. It is estimated that from 600,000 to 1500,000 Armenian men, women, children and elderly lost their life either because of massacre or due to unbearable starvation (Toynbee 2013). As a result, the community celebrates this first genocide of twentieth century every year on 24th of April in order to pay tribute to the Armenian writers, intellectuals, freedom-fighters and other general public brutally massacred by the Ottomans. Hence, the pitiable atrocious acts of Armenian genocide is widely condemned by the Armenian citizens and diaspora every year with great ethno-racial, religious and patriotic fervor. The Turks had put aside all moral and human values while massacring the Armenians in 1915. The American forces had also neglected all ethical principles while inflicting sufferings and pains on the poor Vietnamese and Iraqis during the US invasion on both these countries during 1955-75 and 2004-7 respectively; which endorses the bitter reality that the powerful nations turn out to be tyrant and atrocious in order to capture the resources and possessions belonging to the weaker nations of the world. It is not confined to one particular social group or community; on the contrary, the same tradition of might is right has been in vogue perhaps since the establishment of first human clan or tribe on the face of the earth (Zaidi 2009). It is therefore, the Germans and Russians are also blamed for exercising cruelties on their Jewish and Bosnian Muslim subjects respectively by dint of their military and strategic superiority over the minority groups existing in both of these despotic states. Despite the fact that the indigenous Armenian population and diaspora, along with the anti-Turk elements and states vehemently proclaim that over 1.5 million Armenians were massacred during the genocide of the community in April-June 1915, the Turk sources denied the loss of such an astoundingly high number of precious lives during the deportation of the people of Armenia in 1915. On the other hand, the Turk sources provide ample historical sources in support of their argument that the world, predominantly the Triple Entete, had successfully exaggerated the sad incident by multiplying the facts and figures to a great extent in the aftermath of their triumph over the Central Powers in 1918. The Turkish Centre for Strategic Research (CSR) vehemently condemns the embellishment witnessed by the Christian and European historians while depicting the catastrophe (7-8). The Turkish sources are of the view that though they admit the happening of such a doleful cruelty against humanity; somehow, at the peak of war, every nation and community adopted the best possible way and exercised the most tyrannical techniques in order to defeat their enemies at any cost. As a result, no party considered the losses it looked determined to inflict upon the foes. Even then, the physical losses could be counted to be in thousands actually, instead of in millions, falsely reported by the anti-Ottoman forces and elements. In addition, the Turks claim that the Armenians persistently played the role of traitor of their motherland throughout the state of conflict arose between the Ottomans and their Christian rivals, and did no stone unturned to do harm to the national cause. As a result, the ottomans were justified in deporting the members of the traitor community from their fatherland. Consequently, the expulsion of the agents of the enemy Allied forces served as a national obligation in the eyes of the patriotic Turks, for punishing the elements determined to play in the hands of the enemies of their nation (Adalian 1991). It is therefore the Turks justified their act of deporting the Armenian population from the Turkish soil in 1915. Although the Turks admit that they had expelled the Armenians, the supporters of their enemies; nonetheless, they viewed the allegations of committing the genocide of the Armenian population to be entirely a false story, fabricated and directed by the foes of the Ottomans against the reality altogether. In other terms, the incident took place at a far lesser scale, where the patriotic Young Turks attacked and killed some open traitors deliberately in order to demonstrate their resentment over the treachery maintained by the Armenians. As a result, the US-UK-France alliance defamed the Ottomans and damaged the image of the Germans and their allies by launching a condemnable propaganda during the WWI, in order to justify all the atrocities and cruelties inflicted by the victorious Allies over the Central Powers in the aftermath of WWI in the form of the shameful terms of Versailles Treaty of 1919, and other treaties imposed on the vanquished Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire (Mahajan 21). Thus, the Turks absolutely refuted the possibility of any occurrence of some planned genocide campaign against the Armenian minority at the hands of the Ottomans. Somehow, the denial of the genocide falsely claimed by the Turk does not lessen the severity of crimes the Ottomans had committed against the hapless Armenians altogether; nor could the Turks and their supporters wipe out the explicit evidences proving the cruelties exercised on the Armenians on the part of the Turks. On the contrary, the bitter truth of committing tyranny against the humanity in 1915 under the Ottoman Turks serves as a bleak mark on the face of the history, which will keep on condemning the heinous crime forever and ever. To conclude, it becomes crystal clear that Armenian genocide serves as one of the bleakest chapters of twentieth century history of the world. It not only caused the heavy loss of precious lives, but also their expiration because of unbearable heat, thirst and starvation during their moving astray in the wilderness increases the intensity of gruesome cruelties had been inflicted upon them in the wake of the political, religious and ethnic rivalries between the Armenians and Turks. Despite the reality that the purported enlightened civilizations vehemently condemned the genocide from every platform; the same Allies exercised far more heinous crimes and atrocious offences on the poor Vietnamese and Iraqis during their invasion on both these states. As a result, the purported civilized US-UK alliance could not deny the unspeakable tyrannies they inflicted upon the prisoners of Abu Ghuraib cell of Baghdad from April 2004 onward, and hence repeated the condemnable and stunning crimes against the humanity. It emphatically endorses the age-old notion of might is right, and the powerful maintains every right to inflict and exercise every kind of inhuman inflictions upon the weak and vanquished rivals in general (Zaidi 2013). In addition, it has also been the tradition that the warring factions put false allegations and blames on one another, including infliction of war crimes predominantly massive and gang rapes of women and children, butchery of all kinds exercised upon the weaker side by the powerful and tyrannical massacre of the male stratum of society. The Chinese frequently cite the occurrence of the tragic Nanking incident on December 13, 1937, the day when thousands of the Chinese women and children were raped and killed by the invader Japanese forces in cold blood. Despite the fact that the Japanese also viewed the number of victims to be highly exaggerated and multiplied by the Chinese; somehow, like the Turks, the Japanese also confess the occurrence of the tyranny and atrocity on the Chinese. The same is equally applied to Turkey, where its incumbent prime minister has sought apology from the Armenians on the condemnable mishap took place ninety-nine years before in April-May 1915; which reflects the occurrence of the catastrophe, where hundreds of thousands of the Armenians lost their lives because of the genocide exercised upon them by the Ottoman Turks. Works Cited Adalian, Rouben Paul. The Armenian Genocide: Context and Legacy Social Education: The Official Journal of the National Council for the Social Studies: 1991, (February). Web. Bliss, Edwin M. Turkey and the Armenian Atrocities. 1896. Reprint. Fresno, Calif.: Meshag Publishers, 1982. Print. Bryce, Viscount. The Treatment of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire 1915-1916. New York: G.P. Putnams Sons, 1916. Print. Durkheim, Emile. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. London: Allen & Unwin. 1912. Print. Fein, Leonard. On Armenian Genocide Politics Trumps Truth The Hour August 15, 2007. Issue of August 17, 2007. Web. Femenia, Nora. Foreign Policy Decision-Making. Social Conflicts and Collective Identities., Coy, Patrick G. and Woehrle, Lynne M.; (Eds.) 2000. Print. Freud, Sigmund. Totem and Taboo. London: Psychology Press. 1999. Print. Garsoïan, Nina. Armenian People from Ancient to Modern Times. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Volume 1, 1997. Print. Jacobs, Steven Leonard. Confronting Genocide: Judaism, Christianity, Islam. New York: Lexington Books, 2009. Print. Kedourie, Elie. “The End of the Ottoman Empire”. Journal of Contemporary History, Volume 3, No. 4 1918-19. From War to Peace October 1968 19-26. Sage Publications Ltd. Accessed December 22, 2013. Kurkjian, Vahan. History of Armenia Michigan: Armenian General Benevolent Union. 1958. Chapter XXXIII The Tragic Prelude Retrieved on April 25, 2014. Web. Leads, C. A. European History 1789-1914 5th Edition London: M & E Handbooks. 1989. Print. Mahajan, V.D. International relations Since 1900. Ramnagar: S. Chand & Company Limited. 2003. Print. Mikaberidze, Alexander. Atrocities, Massacres, and War Crimes: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO, 2013. Print. Toynbee, Arnold. The Deportations of 1915: Procedure. Armenian National Institute. May 12, 2013. Web. Zaidi, Mujtaba Haider. “Perpetual Separation between Dogmatism and State.” The Frontier Post Daily Newspaper December 01, 2013. Web. Zaidi, Mujtaba Haider. “Vae Victis.” The Frontier Post Daily Newspaper March 20, 2009. Web. The Armenian “Genocide”? Facts & Figures. Ankara: Center for Strategic Research. 2007 4-37. Web. Russia Times. “Shared pain: Turkish PM Erdogan in historic Armenian statement.” Edition April 23, 2014. Web. Read More