The Great Game of Genocide : Played by Whom on Whom?

Donald Bloxham, The Great Game of Genocide: Imperialism, Nationalism, and the destruction of the Ottoman Armenians. OUP, 2005.

Winner of the 2007 Raphael Lemkin Award, awarded by the International Association of Genocide Scholars

A copy of this prize winner book [1] is with me over some time but each time I intended to start reading, I somehow did not feel like doing this and postponed, although the text is only 234 pages, and the rest of 329 pages includes notes, bibliography and the index. I have come to a point I exhausted my extension rights by far and paid enough fines and   I have to be finished with it and return it to the Library.

I can't make any comment on the content of a book I have not read, but only had a look through. However, I would like to note that Yücel Güçlü [2] has written a good review on it. I quote a correction from him as we frequently come across this fake photograph which shows a man holding up a piece of bread. This is what Güçlü says on this photograph:"The final illustration between pages 146 and 147 must be a fake, as no Ottoman administrative official of the World War I era would wear a fashionable Western-style tie and go bareheaded." 

Having said that, it would not be true to say that all Ottoman officials in charge behaved properly and were able to keep the process under control, prevent attacks of irregulars and Kurds during relocation. As Sarınay [3] covers in his article titled "The Relocations (Tehcir) of Armenians and the Trials of 1915–16" misconduct and violation of government policies by some civil servants unfortunately occurred. Minister of Interior Talat Pasha’s memorandum dated September 28, 1915, led the Cabinet to decide to establish three investigatory commissions. Tacar and Gauin [4] state that “individuals or members of the groups who attacked the Armenian convoys and officials who exploited the Armenian plight, neglected their duties or abused their powers were court-martialed and punished.” While more than 20 Muslims were sentenced to death and executed for such charges in 1915; 1673 Muslims—including captains, lieutenants, first and second lieutenants, commanders of gendarme squads, police superintendents, and mayors—were sent to martial courts in March-April 1916. 67 were sentenced to death, 524 were sentenced to jail, 68 received other punishments such as forced labor, imprisonment in forts, and exile. I don't know if Bloxham mentions this.

The thing that put me off was the premises of the book that genocide is a fact and should not be denied, as can even be seen at the back of the dust cover where it reads: "...For nearly a century this genocide has either been ignored or not recognized for what it was. ..."

This sentence reveals that OUP who states that "As a department of the University of Oxford [which also has got a Faculty of Law - SA] our worldwide publishing furthers the University's objectives of excellence in scholarship, research, and education. Our main criteria when evaluating a new title for publication are its quality and whether it supports those aims of furthering education and disseminating knowledge [5]" takes the view that the tragic events of 1915 can be regarded as a genocide.

“Genocide” is a legal term which describes a crime specifically defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of  Genocide adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 9 December 1948. Tacar and Gauin who have studied the legal aspect of Armenian relocation in the above mentioned article, warn that “to term the events of 1915 as genocide is to detach genocide from its legal definition and to use it for political or moral purposes. Whether it is sound to keep hammering on a legal term based on non-legal considerations is doubtful… it adds to a wrong conceptualization of the legal system and eventually could lead to a devaluation of the norm itself…”. In their article Tacar and Gauin explain why Turkey does not qualify the tragic events of 1915–1916 as genocide, basing their arguments on two important principles of the 1948 Convention which read as follows:

       Dolus specialis – special intent which should be beyond any doubt, as the intent was not to destroy a group as such; 

          A competent tribunal to judge the genocidal acts;

and the following principles of international law:

         “Nulla crimen sine lege - no crime shall exist without law”

        “Nulla poena sine lege - no person shall be punished without a law foreseeing such punishment”

      "Ne bis in idem - no person shall be tried with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the competent court."

Aktan, who sets the background starting with  Westphalian system, 1648, concludes that the "ground for the relocation based on imperative military reasons is in line with international law in his article titled  “The Armenian problem and International Law" . [6]

I have no intention to go into details but would like to point out that it was Britain who could not open a case in lack of evidence in 1921 as a result of Malta Tribunals [7], and ECHR verdict of December 12, 2013 has covered more or less the same ground [8]. Some court verdicts mentioned in my post titled "Dilemma of Legal vs. Political Views Concerning 1915 Tragic Events" based on a panel talk by Dr. Palabıyık should also be recalled at this point [9].

Under the circumstances, my reaction of not taking seriously a book with a premise which overlooks legal principles should be understandable. What makes me most sorry is the fact that as a British Council Librarian for 26 years I promoted OUP books with a genuine belief that OUP is a reliable publisher. After this experience I no longer can be so sure. It is a great pity. Of course OUP is not the only one. There are unfortunately other universities which maintain the same stance.

Before I wrote this post I wanted to get to know the author David Bloxham better and read an article by him written in 2003 [10]. In this article, referring to Orel and Yuca, Bloxham says that the governor of Erzurum was directed to auction off the property of the deported Armenians of the province on June 9, 1915 by Talat Pasha and adds himself that "they were clearly not expected to return." This seems to be a typical example of alleging scholars' selective/incomplete references, which distort the meaning and cause misunderstandings, since the full telegram actually reads as follows: 

The properties which could not be taken by the Armenians with them to their places of resettlement should be placed under protection and sold by auction on behalf of their owners, since the money equivalent of the value of those properties is going to be paid by the goverment to their owners. You have been mailed the detailed regulation on this matter. It is considered appropriate to delay for the time being the transfer of the women in need and of those who are working in the military workshops.

It was signed not by Talat Pasha but by Ali Münif on his behalf. "The Regulation Dated 10 June 1915 on the Management of the Properties, Buildings and Land of the Armenians to be Relocated due to the War and the Extraordinary Political Conditions" was complementing the order with details. A translation of this regulation can be found in the book titled Turkish – Armenian Conflict Documents which is edited by Özdemir and Sarınay [11]. Sarınay, who has summarized this regulation in the aforementioned article has included the item which reads: “Perishable chattels, as well as livestock, were to be auctioned by the commissions and the revenues held in trust so that payments later could be made to the relocated owners.” 

Additionally not to be expected to come back does not necessarily mean extermination. Actually Talat Pasha's wife Hayriye Talat Bafralı has mentioned Talat Pasha's personal efforts concerning provision of food and jobs to those who were resettled and how he expected Armenians to revive economic life in the south with their wit and skills, during an interview with Murat Bardakçı. Talat Pasha's comment on this tragedy which has been cited in several sources explicitly manifest that there was no intention to exterminate Armenians: "Relocation which was nothing but only a military measure in essence turned to a tragedy in hands of remorseless and dishonest people. I have no intention to conceal disgracefulness of this conduct". [12]

Pakize raped & killed, Erzincan 

The quotations I think talk for themselves and justify criticisms of Güçlü about the book. I don't understand why authors who subscribe to genocide allegations close their eyes to the pains and sufferings created by Armenians while they are so sensitive to the sufferings of Armenians if they are really sensitive. Use of the word “canards” in the last paragraph of concluding thoughts is unfortunate. The last sentence is right though. The future of the past is bound to remain uncertain so long as facts are denied and allegations are imposed politically. There is a genocide game indeed but who is playing on whom is most likely to be different from what the Western people want to believe to be.

If what is told as genocide is a mispresentation of war time sufferings, does it matter even not only 26.000 [13] but a million volumes are published worldwide! During the WWI Ottoman Muslim civilians lost their lives at the highest rate but nobody laments for them. 

Sources

1. Winner of the 2007 Raphael Lemkin Award, awarded by the International Association of Genocide Scholars. The Great Game of Genocide. Accessed on 31.08.2014 at http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199226887.do.

2. Güçlü, Y. (Spring 2006 ). Mislabeling Genocide? Middle East Quarterly, pp. 67-68. Review of The Great Game of Genocide: Imperialism, Nationalism, and the Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians by Donald Bloxham. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. 329 pp. $35. Accessed at http://www.meforum.org/969/the-great-game-of-genocide on 31.08.2014.

3. Sarınay, Y. (2011). The Relocations (Tehcir) of Armenians and the Trials of 1915–16. Middle East Critique. 20 (3), 299-315.

4. Tacar, P. and Gauin, M. (2012). "State Identity, Continuity, and Responsibility: The Ottoman Empire, the Republic of Turkey and the Armenian Genocide: A Reply to Vahagn Avedian " EJIL, 23, 3, 821–835 doi:10.1093/ejil/chs047

Accessed on 31.08.2014 at http://ejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/23/3/821.full.pdf+html

5. Oxford University Press. (2012) Introduction. Accessed on 31.08.2014 at http://global.oup.com/about/introduction?cc=tr

6. Aktan, G. [n.d.]. “The Armenian problem and International Law,” pp.263-314. Accessed on 31.08.2014 at   http://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/DISPOLITIKA/ErmeniIddialari/gunduz-aktan-the-armenian-problem-and-international-law-2001.pdf

7. European Court of Human Rights. (2013). Criminal conviction for denial that the atrocities perpetrated against the Armenian people in 1915 and years after constituted genocide was unjustified. Accessed on 21.03.2014 at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/003-4613832-5581451 .

8. Gürkan, Uluç. (2014). Malta Yargılaması : Özgün İngiliz Belgeleriyle. İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları.

9. Aslan, S.  (2014, April 13). Dilemma of Legal vs. Political Views Concerning 1915 Tragic Events. http://armenianholocaustmystory.blogspot.com.tr/2014/04/time-to-face-facts-of-1915-for-third.html

10. Bloxham, D. (2003, Nov.). The Armenian Genocide of 1915-1916: Cumulative Radicalization and the Development of Destruction Policy. Past & Present. 181, 141-191.

11. Özdemir, H., Sarınay, Y. (n.d]   Turkish – Armenian Conflict Documents . Ankara: TBMM.  pp. 101-103.

12.  Aslan, S. (2013, Oct.13). Talat Pasha and Armenians. Armenian Holocaust My Story. Accessed on 21.09.2014 at http://armenianholocaustmystory.blogspot.com.tr/2013/10/talat-pasha-and-armenians.html

13. Aktar, C. (2014, April 24). Armenian genocide: Turkey has lost the battle of truth. Al Jazeera. Accessed on 21.09.2014 at http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/04/armenian-genocide-turkey-lost-b-201441772048318940.html 

Armenian Holocaust:My Story blog by Selma Aslan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Gayriticari-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.