The Republic of Turkey has never acknowledged its responsibility for the Hellenic Holocaust, despite the fact that the architect of the Genocide is now worshipped as the founding father of modern Turkey: Mustapha Kemal Ataturk (which means Father of the Turks).
The Republic of Turkey maintains to this day an official policy of denial, a policy vigorously pursued around the world. Terms such as “national security measures”, “relocation of people from war zones”, “a consequence of the war with Czarist Russia”, “retaliation for the activities of the Pontian guerillas and the Royal Hellenic Army” are used to excuse the Genocide, despite the volumes of German, Austro-Hungarian, English and American documents testifying to the pre-planned nature of the Hellenic Holocaust by the Ottoman and Kemalist Turks.
“Did We Slaughter The Armenians?” by Fehmi Koru. May 6, 1997
{Translation from the Turkish newspaper GUNDEM}{Source: http://www.euroway.com/hyetoon/News/grn687.html}
“Our media are fuming with anger because the Tehran Times wrote that ‘On its present course, Turkey will become another Libya’. Milliyet (newspaper) used the headline ‘Veiled Warning from Iran’; Sabah (newspaper) wrote ’ The Mullahs Crossed the Line Again’. Other newspapers also carried this news piece with an angry attitude towards it. Once again, we learn that the Turkish press is closely following the media of other countries and that it is sensitive to discordant voices coming from the neighbours.
However, what is puzzling is that the same sensitivity is not shown to a country that can be regarded as a neighbour in terms of the intimacy of its relationship. It is strange that neither the media nor the official circles have reacted to a program aired on the state television of Israel that detailed the ‘Armenian Genocide’ claims for several hours and demanded that Turkey apologize.
This strangeness has also attracted the attention of Jerusalem Post columnist Yosef Goell. In his column on May 4, ‘What has changed?’ Goell asks, ‘so that the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Turkish government, who over-reacted vigorously and stopped the dissemination even, of a programme on the Armenian Quarter of Jerusalem; and now the fact that the same Turkey stays silent in the face of such explicit ‘Genocide’ claims is indeed very remarkable.
Since this is an important topic, we present an excerpt from the column:
“The producer of the programme, Ya’acov Ahimeir, mentioned that he previously made a very short news story on the same subject in Washington, where he used to work. A few weeks later, Yossi Belin, who was the under-secretary of Foreign Affairs at the time, sent him a file filled with the reactions of the Jewish community in Turkey. The Turkish Embassy also formally protested that short piece. Ahimeir says, that this time, not even the slightest reaction came to this programme, that studied the Armenian tragedy of 1915 in detail.” The writer is of the opinion that it is time for Turkey to admit its role in that tragedy. Yosef Goell also adds that “Israel’s Yad Vashem organization, which ignored the Armenian claims with the concern that ‘if we accept the occurrence of another genocide, our Holocaust would lose significance’, has recently changed its attitude on the matter.
“Now, can you help but ask ‘What’s happening?’
“As Turkey increases its intimacy with Israel, everyone is rushing to handle their Turkish-related plans throughout this country. It appears that the latest cost of this intimacy will be the official recognition of the claim of the ‘Armenian Genocide’, against which Turkey has spent billions of dollars and persistently and stubbornly tried to popularize its own thesis. We find it difficult to find an alternative interpretation for the fact that the Israeli state television brought these claims to public attention right when the (Turkish) Minister of Defence, Turhan Tayan, was visiting Israel, and right before the visit of the second chief-of-staff of the (Turkish) Armed Forces, (General) Cevik Bir.
“A review of the programme was published in the Jerusalem Post on Sunday ( May 4). Also in that piece, all of the claims which Turkey has rejected so far, are presented without any apparent concern, with the excuse of reviewing the programme. In all probability, no official response to that article has been provided either.
“We should loudly repeat the question that the Israeli journalist is asking: ‘Have some things changed?’ Have the centres of power that have charted the course of Turkish foreign policy changed their position of ‘There was no Armenian Genocide’? If they have, why? The column advances a thesis:
“Admitting the truth of the claims would prove that Turkey is ‘European’, and would facilitate its entry into the European Union.”
“We ask a more important question: Intimacy with Israel is causing Turkey to fulfil all the wishes of its Jewish friends; what is the reason for such expensive intimacy?
“It is interesting that our media, which displayed oversensitivity to an Iranian newspaper’s evaluation of Turkey, remained silent in response to the programme shown on Israeli state television that depicted all of Turkey as ‘a bloody-handed pack of murderers’ and the column in the Jerusalem Post.
“Let’s see what happens.”
For a number of years now, Turkey has been actively funding tertiary studies in the United States and western Europe, aimed at promoting Turkey’s official line in international affairs and history. The Internet home page of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey has page after page of denialist material. {http://www.mfa.gov.tr}
“Foreign Gifts With Strings Have U.S. Colleges Fretting.”, Los Angeles Times, Sunday, November 30, 1997.
“America’s universities have long been a global drawing card, with governments and wealthy families alike sending their brightest students to U.S. schools. Since the late 1980s, top universities have also attracted something more from abroad: grants establishing professorships and research programs on issues vital to donors’ interests.
“Some American academics worry that donors, merely with the decision to give or withhold funds, are influencing the nature of the research. And when the Turkish government recently offered UCLA [University of California-Los Angeles] a million-dollar grant that contained some subtle wording, the controversy spilled far outside the academy.
“The Turkish government publicized its offer of US$1 million to endow a chair in Turkish and Ottoman history for a professor who would ‘maintain close and cordial relations with academic circles in Turkey.’ UC rules do not allow donors to impose such stipulations and, beyond that, Armenian interest groups protested. UCLA finally tabled the offer. There are plenty of other cases.”
“...”
“Few schools let donors explicitly dictate the nature or tenor of research. Still, foreign as well as domestic donors have been able to wield influence because of two loopholes that the university trade group, the American Council on Education, should work on tightening.
“ *Inadequate disclosure. While federal law requires universities to disclose any donation over US$250 000, disclosure of information regarding the provisions of the grant is not specified. Thus, if UCLA’s Academic Senate were to agree to the Turkish government’s requirement that a professor ‘maintain close and cordial relations’ with Turkish academics, it would not have to reveal such a requirement.”
The Pontian Genocide Studies Unit will combat official and unofficial Turkish denialism. With survivor testimony. With eyewitness accounts from non-combatants. With official documents from around the world. With original media reports.
Germany has confronted its genocidal past and apologised to its victims for the crimes of World War Two. Turkey continues to refuse to follow the example of its traditional ally, preferring to deny any responsibility for the suffering and deaths of so many innocent people.