Talk:Armenian genocide#Suggestion

• {{cite book |last1=Akçam |first1=Taner |title=The Cambridge World History of Genocide: Volume 3: Genocide in the Contemporary Era, 1914–2020 |date=2023 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-76711-8 |pages=67–92 |chapter=The Armenian Genocide: An Overview}}
• {{cite journal |last1=Akçam |first1=Taner |title=Top-Down and Local Violence in the Late Ottoman Empire: The Role of Security Concerns and a Century of “Accumulated Experience” |journal=Journal of Genocide Research |date=2024 |volume=26 |issue=2 |pages=121–141 |doi=10.1080/14623528.2022.2127488}}

File:Kurds massacre more Armenians.png

I see that the Kurdish involvement is completely missed out except for the Hamidiye cavalry in Hamidian massacres. It is a well known fact that during the genocide, some Kurdish tribes collaborated with the Ottoman authorities in the persecution of Armenians. Kurdish tribal leaders were motivated by promises of land and wealth. Even in some regions like Tur Abdin, Kurdish and Arab tribes jointly executed massacres against Armenians and Assyrians. There are some solid witnesses like Ernest Yarrow, where he states: "the Turks and Kurds have declared a holy war on the Armenians and have vowed to exterminate them." Or publications such as New York Times acknowledging it (pictured).

I would like to create a sub-section about the collaborators of this disgrace. Please do give your input on this. Regards. KarsVegas36 (talk) 16:56, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

:I reverted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armenian_genocide&diff=1287046229&oldid=1284633443 these edits] as I consider them poorly sourced and overly pro-Ataturk. The article currently doesn't mention him, because he was not particularly important to the genocide, however, for a better source consider Zürcher, Erik Jan (2011). "Renewal and Silence: Postwar Unionist and Kemalist Rhetoric on the Armenian Genocide". In Suny, Ronald Grigor; Göçek, Fatma Müge; Naimark, Norman M. (eds.). A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire. Oxford University Press. pp. 306–316 [312]. ISBN 978-0-19-979276-4. where Ataturk is quoted as saying, {{quote|Whatever has befallen the non-Muslim elements living in our country, is the result of the policies of separatism they pursued in a savage manner, when they allowed themselves to be made tools of foreign intrigues and abused their privileges. There are probably many reasons and excuses for the undesired events that have taken place in Turkey. And I want definitely to say that these events are on a level far removed from the many forms of oppression which are committed in the states of Europe without any excuse.}}

:We don't use primary sources like newspapers, rather secondary scholarship that places information in context. It's already mentioned in multiple places in the article, but I'm wary of exaggerating the "Kurdish" role as it is used to deny the genocide and shift blame from the main perpetrators. (t · c) buidhe 19:47, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

::I made these edits because the mainstream understanding includes Atatürk as a participant or supporter in the genocide, whereas he was clearly against it, with proven actions and statements. If you have a problem with the references given, I can seek for some better sources. His quote on this matter is actually very famous, even got itself a book title - A Shameful Act. Or appointing Armenians to key positions is basically common knowledge.

::About the collab, I understand the point and worry about steering the direction to denial. Denying it would also mean denying my own heritage for me so we can walk on ice without any problems here. For that, we could just narrow it down into a small paragraph rather than a sub-section. There are many 'credible' references which could be easily accessed. One of them goes;

:::Armenian civilians in eastern Anatolia were rounded up, men and older boys were often killed in situ, and the rest were deported to concentration camps in the Syrian desert, suffering massacres and abuses en route at the hands of Ottoman gendarmes, irregular fighters and local Kurds, Turks and Circassians. In the desert they were joined by Armenians deported from Cilicia and western Anatolia and held in horrific conditions, and in 1916 many of the survivors were massacred. - ‘We did commit these crimes’: Post-Ottoman solidarities, contested places and Kurdish apology for the Armenian Genocide - Memory Studies 2021, Vol. 14(3) 634–649, Huw Halstead - University of St Andrews, UK

::KarsVegas36 (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

:::{{tq|the mainstream understanding includes Atatürk as a participant or supporter in the genocide, whereas he was clearly against it}} please familiarize yourself with our policies such as wp:Npov and WP:NOR. Wikipedia presents "the mainstream understanding" even if you believe it's wrong. If you have a problem with that you're on the wrong website.

:::I think the article already references the involvement of some Kurds. Direct quotes from the current version of the article include, "many women and children were kidnapped by local Kurds", "Armenian homes, businesses, and land were preferentially allocated to Muslims from outside the empire, nomads, and the estimated 800,000 (largely Kurdish) Ottoman subjects displaced because of the war with Russia.", "the killings... also involved local militias, bandits, gendarmes, or Kurdish tribes depending on the area", "Nomadic Kurds committed many atrocities during the genocide, but settled Kurds only rarely did so", "Armenian women captured during the journey ended up in Turkish or Kurdish households"

:::I oppose a separate section because the Kurdish actors were only able to commit the crimes that they did because of the enabling structure created by the CUP, and there's little evidence that the behavior of Kurdish muslims, for example, was better or worse than other muslims such as bedouins. (t · c) buidhe 20:35, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

::::A quick Google search about the issue proves you wrong so you can take your WP:NPOV and WP:NOR back where you got them, can't paste the links so help yourself:

::::An article of Politico for example, 'Turkey fumes as Disney axes founding father series after Armenian outcry - Atatürk shouldn’t get the ‘Disney treatment,’ Armenian group warns.'

::::Another article from The Washington Post, 'Student group at Cal State Northridge boasts of ‘shutting down’ speech by award-winning scholar - Armenian students at California State University Northridge (CSUN) shut down a planned lecture about Mustafa Kemal Ataturk'

::::Maybe this - 'A Call for Action by the Armenian Association of Toronto - Ottawa No Home for Ataturk Bust' KarsVegas36 (talk) 20:51, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::There's plenty of scholarship on this issue so there's no reason to be consulting a newspaper, which are often inaccurate for topics outside of their area of expertise (the actual news). Although there is some debate, the sources I've consulted have concluded that there is basically no evidence that Kemal was in any meaningful way "against" the Armenian genocide. (t · c) buidhe 20:55, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::I have difficulty in understanding your argument.

::::::a) If there is "governmental cooperation" on a general level, how can the Hamidiye Units be dismissed from that level? It is a misrepresentation of facts to not include all of them. This is as big a fact misrepresentation as omitting later cooperators from the Holocaust, just because including them would "serve to shift blame to another group" doesn't mean you have to include them. The article you sited states "Achieving what the Wikipedia community understands as neutrality means carefully and critically analyzing a variety of reliable sources and then attempting to convey to the reader the information contained in them fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without editorial bias." this is not at all expressing that Wikipedia is tasked with publishing "The mainstream truth"

::::::b) There is a point to be made for Kemal's opposition to the Armenian Genocide. If you are refusing the memoirs and witnesses of the Era which can be cross-referenced, then that also extends to the Armenian witnessess and journalists who have documented and retold the massacres. Does the families all make up stories about the crimes they've suffered at the hands of the Ottomans? Refusing personal countances in a 20th century event is absurd, not to mention harmful and border-line Genocide denying attributes as it attacks on personal recountances. In this light, there are referances which put Kemal Pasha as a critic for the acts of CUP as user "KarsVegas36" has referenced in his text, and should at least be added as a contention point. Not adding it would be a refusal of personal recounting in Historiology and is borderline Genocide-denying behavior. Jirozki (talk) 02:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Doesn't mean you don't have to *

:::::::Typo. Jirozki (talk) 02:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::I'm not sure what the relevance of the Hamidiye regiments are. They were disbanded long before this event started.

:::::::I think you are misunderstanding how Wikipedia works. We don't have the expertise to determine which personal accounts are reliable. That's why we use scholarly sources that made their own analysis which are most credible. And the idea that Kemal was somehow against the Armenian genocide is not something that currently has a lot of support in the relevant fields. (t · c) buidhe 02:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::::I understand, from that perspective I suppose it makes sense; if not backed by academics in relevant fields how can you justify the use against the general population? Understandable, I stand corrected.

::::::::Hamidiye Regiments - or the "Aşiret Alayları" as they were later renamed because of the dislike of Abdülhamid II by CUP - were still existing even if under a different name.

::::::::To give right where it's due, the tribal participation was reduced by making the tribal leaders have reduced authority which would make the government participants at fault rather than the "Kurdish tribes" themselves. I am not sure how reputable you hold TDV to be but it's worth checking out if you're interested : https://islamansiklopedisi.org.tr/hamidiye-alaylari Jirozki (talk) 02:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::It's an interesting point that who exactly the low level perpetrators were and how they were organized and mobilized is not as well researched as it could be. Ideally we could include more information on them but I think it would be a mistake to focus too much on Kurds in particular since people of many ethnicities were involved. (t · c) buidhe 13:57, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Can you add information about massacre of Turks by Armenian gangs? These are documented in books, articles and archival materials. Best regards. 95.12.115.163 (talk) 20:50, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

The Armenian allegations of genocide [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG70UWESfu4 are refuted] by leading Middle East historian Bernard Lewis. 95.12.115.163 (talk) 20:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

:A video from 2002 on a random Youtube channel? EvergreenFir (talk) 20:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

::Rather a claim from one of the well-known academic authorities on the Ottoman Empire, although I agree that a written source should have been used as his views have been in writing form and have been subject of many controversy. Jirozki (talk) 06:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

The Armenian atrocity is widely recorded in archival material, official documents and memoirs. To write an impartial history of 1915, it is necessary to study the mutual killings.

• The telegram sent by the head official of the Mahmudi district of Van to the Ministry of Interior on 4 March 1915, describing the Armenian atrocities in the region cited in Kamuran Gürün's The Armenian File,

Those who were killed in the village of Merkehu: 41 men, 14 women
Those who were killed after being raped: 4 women
Those who were killed in the village of Ishtuju: 7 men, 4 women
Those who are alive among those who have been raped: 5 women
The wounded: 3 men, 2 women

• Massacres of prisoners and Muslim population in the neighborhood of Kars and Ardahan, taken from Documents on the Massacres Perpetrated by Armenians, p. 1,

The number of Muslims committed to the guards of Armenians and massacred by them after being inflicted physical pains upon and struck by the butt of rifles reached 30,000; the Armenians serving in the Ottoman army were deserting and deliberately surrendering to Russians to disclose information about the said army; Armenians from the Caucasus were first allowing to be taken prisoners by the Ottomans and afterwards evading and delivering to the Russians the intelligence they gathered.

• The telegram sent from the prime ministry to the interior ministry taken from The Armenian File,

Some of the Armenians residing in quarters near military areas are hindering the activities of the Imperial Army which is engaged in protecting the Ottoman borders against the enemies of the State. They combine their efforts and action with the enemy, they join the ranks of the enemy. They organize attacks against the Armed Forces and innocent people, they engage in aggression, murder, terror, and pillage of Ottoman cities and towns, they provide the enemy with provisions, and manifest their audacity against fortified places.

• General Harbord's report on Armenia, Conditions in the Middle East: The Report of Military Mission to Armenia, p. 35,

We know, however, so much to be a fact that the Armenians in the new State are carrying on operations in view of exterminating the Mussulmen element in obedience to orders from the Armenian corps commander. We have had copies of their orders under our eyes. That the Armenians of Erivan are following a policy of extermination against the Mussulmen and this wave of sanguinary savagery has spread right up to our frontier is also established by the fact of the presence within our borders of numerous Mussulmen fleeing from death on the other side. The government of Erivan has, on the other hand, resorted to direct acts of provocation such as the practice of gunfire this side of the border.

• This excerpt is from the document sent by the German Ambassador Wangenheim to the Germany Foreign Ministry dated 19 May 1915, cited in Nejat Göyünç's Osmanlı İdaresinde Ermeniler/Armenians under Ottoman Rule and Yusuf Halaçoğlu's Facts on the Armenian Relocation,

On 17 May 1915, Van was occupied by the Russian army. Armenians joined the ranks of the enemy and started massacring the Muslims. 80,000 Muslims are now fleeing towards Bitlis.

• The report dated 1916 on the massacre committed in Bitlis and Van by the Russian and Armenian forces, taken from Documents on the Massacres Perpetrated by Armenians, p. 41

During the occupation of Van and Bitlis terrible cruelties were commited by Russian and Armenian brigands against the muslim population; cossack cavalry arriving in Bitlis, massacred muslim families and children fleeing the Armenians; hearing that the Russians were coming to Van, Armenians uprose and pursued the fleeing muslim population trying to escape and tragically killed them, massacred thousands of women, young girls and men among those who didn't emigrate; all the population of the villages of Zive, Mollakâsım, Şeyhkara, Şeyhayne, Ayans, Paksi, Zorâbâd and many other villages, who stayed unable to emigrate were all exterminated and not a single person escaped the carnage; on the eve of the arrival of the Russians to Dir, a town attached to Hakkari, Armenians made irruptions on the roads and massacred all the male Kurdish population of the villages situated on these roads and cut up into chunks with daggers and swords more than thousand small children the oldest less than three years and used the cut and broken bodies as trenches and ravished more than four hundred Kurdish girls, the old women being killed.

• Confession of an Armenian revolutionary. Source: William L. Langer, The Diplomacy of Imperialism, 1890-1902, 2nd ed., New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1956, pp. 157-158.

The Hentchak bands would watch their opportunity to kill Turks and Koords, set fire to their villages and then make their escape into the mountains. The enraged Moslems will then rise, and fall upon the defenceless Armenians and slaughter them with such barbarity that Russia will enter in the name of humanity and Christian civilisation and take possession...We Armenians have determined to be free. Europe listened to the Bulgarian horrors and made Bulgaria free. She will listen to our cry when it goes up in the shrieks and blood of millions of women and children... We are desperate. We shall do it.

115. The Federal Court has itself admitted that there is no unanimity in the community as a whole concerning the legal characterisation in issue. Both the applicant and the Turkish Government cited numerous sources – which have not been contested by the respondent Government – attesting to diverging views, and argued that it would be very difficult to speak of a “general consensus”. The Court agrees, and would point out that there are differing views even among the various political bodies in Switzerland: whereas the National Council – the lower house of the Federal Parliament – has officially recognised the Armenian genocide, the Federal Council has repeatedly refused to do so (see points 4.2 and 4.5 of the Federal Court judgment in paragraph 13 above). In addition, it appears that to date, only about twenty States (out of more than 190 in the world) have officially recognised the Armenian genocide. In some countries, as in Switzerland, recognition has not come from the Government but only from Parliament or one of its chambers (see in this connection the declaration of 24 April 2013 by certain members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, paragraph 29 above).

116. The Court also agrees with the applicant that “genocide” is a clearly defined legal concept. It denotes an aggravated internationally wrongful act for which responsibility may nowadays be attributed either to a State, in accordance with Article 2 of the 1948 Convention (see paragraph 18 above), or to an individual, notably on the basis of Article 5 of the Rome Statute (see paragraph 20 above). According to the case-law of the ICJ and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (see paragraphs 21-23 above), for the crime of genocide to be made out, it is not sufficient for the members of a particular group to be targeted because they belong to that group, but the acts in question must at the same time be perpetrated with intent to destroy the group as such in whole or in part (dolus specialis). Genocide is therefore a very narrow legal concept which, moreover, is difficult to prove. The Court is not satisfied that the “general consensus” to which the Swiss courts referred as a basis for the applicant’s conviction can be relied on in relation to these very specific points of law.

117. In any event, it is even doubtful that there can be a “general consensus”, particularly among academics, about events such as those in issue in the present case, given that historical research is by definition subject to controversy and dispute and does not really lend itself to definitive conclusions or the assertion of objective and absolute truths (see, to similar effect, the Spanish Constitutional Court’s judgment no. 235/2007, referred to in paragraphs 38-40 above). In this connection, a clear distinction can be made between the present case and cases concerning denial of crimes relating to the Holocaust (see, for example, the case of Robert Faurisson v. France, determined by the UN Human Rights Committee on 8 November 1996, Communication no. 550/1993, doc. CCPR/C/58/D/550/1993 (1996)). Firstly, the applicants in those cases had not disputed the mere legal characterisation of a crime but had denied historical facts, sometimes very concrete ones, such as the existence of gas chambers. Secondly, their denial concerned crimes perpetrated by the Nazi regime that had resulted in convictions with a clear legal basis, namely Article 6, sub-paragraph (c), of the Charter of the (Nuremberg) International Military Tribunal, annexed to the London Agreement of 8 August 1945 (see paragraph 19 above). Thirdly, the historical facts challenged by the applicants in those cases had been found by an international court to be clearly established.

1. Binark. İ. (1995). Arşiv Belgelerine Göre Kafkaslar’da ve Anadolu’da Ermeni Mezâlimi/Armenian Violence and Massacre in the Caucasus and Anatolia Based on Archives–Vol. I (1906-1918) and Vol. II (1919). Başbakanlık Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü Yayınları, Ankara
2. Çiçek, K. (2012). The Great War and the forced migration of Armenians. Athol Books.
3. Çiçek, K. (2020). The Armenians of Musa Dagh, 1915–1939: A Story of Insurgency and Flight. Lexington Books.
4. Çiçek, K. (2010). Relocation of Ottoman Armenians in 1915: A Reassesment. Review of Armenians Studies, 22, 115-134.
5. Dyer, G. (1976). Turkish ‘falsifiers’ and Armenian ‘deceivers’: historiography and the Armenian massacres. Middle Eastern Studies, 12(1), 99-107.
6. Erickson, E. J. (2013). Ottomans and Armenians: A Study in Counterinsurgency (p. 119). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
7. Erickson, E. J. (2008). The Armenians and Ottoman military policy, 1915. War in History, 15(2), 141-167.
8. Gauin, M. (2015). “Proving” a “Crime against Humanity”?. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 35(1), 141-157.
9. Göyünç, N. (1983). Osmanlı İdaresinde Ermeniler. Gültepe Yayınları.
10. Güçlü, Y. (2012). A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire.
11. Gürün, K. (1985). The Armenian file: The myth of innocence exposed. Rustem.
12. Halaçoğlu, Y. (2002). Facts on the Relocation of Armenians (1914-1918) (No. 94). Turkish Historical Society Printing House.
13. Halaçoğlu, Y. (2008). The story of 1915: what happened to the Ottoman Armenians? (No. 113). Turkish Historical Society.
14. Halaçoğlu, Y. (2006). Die Armenierfrage. Wieser.
15. Lewis, B. (1961). The emergence of modern Turkey (No. 135). Oxford University Press.
16. Lewy, G. (2005). Revisiting the Armenian genocide. Insight Turkey, 89-99.
17. Lewy, G. (2005). The Armenian massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A disputed genocide. University of Utah Press.
18. Lewy, G. (2007). Can there be genocide without the intent to commit genocide?. Journal of Genocide Research, 9(4), 661-674.
19. McCarthy, J., Arslan, E., & Taskiran, C. (2006). The Armenian Rebellion at Van (p. 282). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.
20. McCarthy, J. (2003). Missionaries and the American Image of the Turks. In Turkish-American Relations (pp. 49-71). Routledge.
21. Palabıyık, M. S. (2015). Understanding the Turkish-Armenian Controversy Over 1915. Beta.
22. Sarinay, Y. (2011). The Relocations (Tehcir) of Armenians and the Trials of 1915–16. Middle East Critique, 20(3), 299-315.
23. Sarınay, Y. (2001). Ermeniler Tarafından Yapılan Katliam Belgeleri/Documents on the Massacre Perpetrated by Armenians–Vol. I (1914-1919) and Vol. II (1919-1921). Ankara: Başbakanlık Devlet Arşivleri Genel Müdürlüğü.
24. Stone, N. (2004). Armenia and Turkey. TLS-The Times Literary Supplement, (5298), 17-17.
25. Yavuz, M. H. (2011). Contours of scholarship on Armenian-Turkish relations. Middle East Critique, 20(3), 231-251.

There are many historical events similar to the Armenian relocation. In World War One, 2.5m Ottoman Muslims were killed. Why are we just focusing on this special group alone? We should give due weight to all deaths equally. All of them were human beings. And it doesn't matter if they were Christians, Muslims, Jews or Buddhists; they were killed. So, this article should mention them. 95.12.115.163 (talk) 21:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:This article is called "Armenian genocide". Therefore, it is about the genocide of Armenian people. — Czello ^(music) 21:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

::It ought to be included as an introduction to the historical context, just as it was incompletely done in this case - and since the example given is actually relevant to this topic. Jirozki (talk) 06:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

:How did I know this would be a Turkish IP address even before I checked?—Chowbok ☠ 04:34, 14 May 2025 (UTC)