First, I’d like to introduce who the writers of this response are – a Turk and an Armenian. We both have an absolute adoration for our countries, and thus, the issue of “genocide” has come up between us in conversation numerous times. Even though we have different views on the issue, neither of us thinks it is up to anyone, aside from Armenia and Turkey, to officially resolve this issue.
On a personal note, I, the Armenian, am very attached to this issue. For how could I ignore the stories of my grandfather watching his parents being slaughtered and holding his 5-year-old brother as he starved to death?
Furthermore, Mike’s dates and numbers do not even coincide with the Armenian thesis. I am not a denier of these events; I just don’t see the purpose of recognizing.
Switching sides, I, the Turk, do not deny the catastrophic events that happened between the Ottomans and the Armenians, yet my personal view does not classify these events as genocide defined in the Geneva Convention. Aside from that, what annoyed me in Mike’s article was that some claims against Turkey were not based on even reasonable historical evidence. For example, “men were never forced to join the army,” because non-Muslims never fought in the army. Also, Turkish historians are not the only ones to say this was not genocide. To name a few famous American historians Bernard Lewis, Justin McCarthy and Stanford Shaw believe that although massacres occurred, these were not organized by the government, and thus cannot be classified as genocide.
Thus, we believe that this issue should be left to the politicians from Armenia and Turkey. More importantly, the historians from both sides need to resolve this issue, which cannot be attained unless Armenia and Turkey open their borders and start interacting again. On April 24, we hope Obama won’t screw the negotiations that have been taking place by saying the “g-word.”
Loading ...