Back to Humanities
Denial of the Armenian Genocide
Final Cartoon
“Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.” ~Edmund Burke.
For us to live a more fulfilling future, we must know our past. This future is being endangered by powerful, influential governments and individuals. In 1915, the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire was targeted for multiple massacres and deportation. After World War 1, the Turks gained control of the former empire and signed the Treaty of Lausanne, reversing the Treaty of Sevres, originally signed by the Ottoman Empire. The Treaty of Lausanne essentially pardoned the Turks for their crimes committed against the Armenians (Armenian). Many countries recognize the killings as a genocide, but the to this day, the Turkish government will not accept the word “genocide.”
Driven by an incentive, the Turks have hidden their darkest secret through centuries of history.
According to the UN Convention, “genocide means…intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” (Convention). The Turkish Government claims that the massacres committed in 1915 do not constitute as genocide because the Armenians were not systematically targeted and they were not the only group killed. Israel W. Charny quotes a Turkish pamphlet Armenian Propaganda, “…100,000 Armenians, may have died between 1915 and 1918, but this was no greater a percentage than that of the Turks and other Muslims who died as a result of the same conditions in the same places at the same time” (Idea).
However, through evidence of direct orders to exterminate the Armenians, it is clear that the Armenians were in the crosshairs. Talaat Pasha, Turkish Minister of the Interior, sent these orders to the captain of the police department, Djemal Bay, “You have already been advised that the Government, by order of the Djemiet, has decided to destroy completely all the indicated persons [Armenians] living in Turkey” (Duffy). Regardless of this evidence, the Turkish government continues to claim that the Armenians were not singularly attacked.
Not only do they deny the word genocide, they go as far as to blame the British for the theory of the genocide. The Turkish Grand National Assembly (TGNA) wrote a letter to the British Parliament claiming, “the report of the genocide was created by the British as propaganda during the World War 1, the British parliament was responsible for the Armenian genocide thesis and that the members of the British parliament should revoke the report from 1916” (Avebury).
The Turkish government is sponsoring lobbyists and they have convinced US congress to deny the genocide; “Turkey exerts political leverage and spends millions of dollars in the United States to obfuscate the Armenian genocide.” In the past years, the US has made efforts to officially accept the word genocide to define the massacres in 1915, but each attempt is met by the Turkish government rising up and putting an end to the US’s claims (Southern).
Clearly, much effort is put into denying the genocide; but why? In 1922, Turkey was a brand new country, under brand new rule. Similar to making a first impression on your older sibling’s friends, the Turkish government didn’t want their history to start with an ugly label stamped across their past. To define the massacres in 1915 as “genocide” would mean starting off on the wrong foot for this new country.
To sidestep this blow, they use the defense mechanism of denial and continue to debate the label. Psychological experiments show that denial is a defense mechanism that humans use when coping with anxiety.
Anxiety is created not only from outside stimulants but also from inside of our minds. According to Sigmund Freud, the human mind is made up of three dimensions; the id, ego and superego. Each has a unique goal and they are constantly at battle, creating a state of internal anxiety. The mediator, the ego, undertakes the task of minimizing this anxiety through internal defenses. Sofía K. Ogden and Ashley D. Biebers say, “denial is one of many defense mechanisms. It entails ignoring or refusing to believe an unpleasant reality” (NOVA). It’s easy to see that Turkey is refusing the reality of the genocide against the Armenians.
People who are uninformed of the history and deny the genocide are known as “innocent deniers.” Charny states, “[deniers] may not be aware that they are consciously seeking any benefit from their denials of a known genocide, we may be able…to create a psychological framework for understanding…people…who join the bandwagons of denial without…knowing that they are doing so or why.” In some cases, those who deny the genocide are not trying to be malicious in their statements; they are just naïve and need to be educated.
There are innocent deniers and “malevolent deniers.” The malevolent deniers are those that deny the genocide despite knowing the events. Many of these statements come in sloppy, poorly formed claims. Often, the malevolent deniers have celebrated the killings. This form of denial is stemming from the fact that they don’t want to face the “unpleasant reality” of their guilt or they are being bought off for their denial statement (Idea). For malevolent deniers, some form of punishment is necessary. However, innocent deniers may just need to be informed of their historical accuracy. The distinction between the two allows clearer determination in the consequences for these denials.
It seems that Turkey as a country is dealing with a much larger scale version of the id, ego and superego battle. Due to the anxiety this is putting on the government, they are falling back on their defense mechanism of denial.
This altercation of the past could prevent us from learning how to change. Years after the event, the Turkish government still denies the genocide to prevent shunning from the rest of the world. The simple urge to maintain a clean record has motivated the Turkish government to deny a most obvious event. It may be possible to deny something for so long that you begin to doubt the facts. Is your darkest secret worth forgetting your truth for?
Works Cited:
ANI. Armenian National Institute, 2013. Web. 24 Jan. 2013. <http://www.armenian-genocide.org/10-7-15-text.html>. Primary source
Armenian National Institute. Armenian National Institute, 2013. Web. 28 Jan. 2013. <http://www.armenian-genocide.org/turkey.html>. secondary source
Avebury, Lord, and Ara Sarafian. "British Parliamentary Blue Book." Gomidas Institute. Gomidas Insitute, 12 Dec. 2007. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. <http://www.gomidas.org/Blue_Book_Project/Blue_Book.htm>. secondary source
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Human Rights Web, 27 Jan. 2013. Web. 31 Jan. 2013. <http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html>.
Daventry, Michael. "What is the Turkish position on the Armenian genocide?" What is the Turkish position on the Armenian genocide? By Michael Davenrty. London: Queen Mary University of London, n.d. 23-44. Print. secondary source-the pages are just the ones i read
Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. Advameg, 2013. Web. 28 Jan. 2013. <http://www.minddisorders.com/Del-Fi/Denial.html>. primary source
First World War. Michael Duffy, 22 Sept. 2009. Web. 27 Jan. 2013. <http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/armenia_talaatorders.htm>. primary source
Idea Journal. Brave New Web, n.d. Web. 25 Jan. 2013. <http://www.ideajournal.com/articles.php?id=27>. primary source-2
NOVA Publishers. Nova Science, 2013. Web. 1 Feb. 2013. <https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=11210>.
Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC, 2013. Web. 27 Jan. 2013. <http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/fall/genocide-denial>. secondary source
Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC, 2008. Web. 28 Jan. 2013. <http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/summer/state-of-denial>. secondary source
For us to live a more fulfilling future, we must know our past. This future is being endangered by powerful, influential governments and individuals. In 1915, the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire was targeted for multiple massacres and deportation. After World War 1, the Turks gained control of the former empire and signed the Treaty of Lausanne, reversing the Treaty of Sevres, originally signed by the Ottoman Empire. The Treaty of Lausanne essentially pardoned the Turks for their crimes committed against the Armenians (Armenian). Many countries recognize the killings as a genocide, but the to this day, the Turkish government will not accept the word “genocide.”
Driven by an incentive, the Turks have hidden their darkest secret through centuries of history.
According to the UN Convention, “genocide means…intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group” (Convention). The Turkish Government claims that the massacres committed in 1915 do not constitute as genocide because the Armenians were not systematically targeted and they were not the only group killed. Israel W. Charny quotes a Turkish pamphlet Armenian Propaganda, “…100,000 Armenians, may have died between 1915 and 1918, but this was no greater a percentage than that of the Turks and other Muslims who died as a result of the same conditions in the same places at the same time” (Idea).
However, through evidence of direct orders to exterminate the Armenians, it is clear that the Armenians were in the crosshairs. Talaat Pasha, Turkish Minister of the Interior, sent these orders to the captain of the police department, Djemal Bay, “You have already been advised that the Government, by order of the Djemiet, has decided to destroy completely all the indicated persons [Armenians] living in Turkey” (Duffy). Regardless of this evidence, the Turkish government continues to claim that the Armenians were not singularly attacked.
Not only do they deny the word genocide, they go as far as to blame the British for the theory of the genocide. The Turkish Grand National Assembly (TGNA) wrote a letter to the British Parliament claiming, “the report of the genocide was created by the British as propaganda during the World War 1, the British parliament was responsible for the Armenian genocide thesis and that the members of the British parliament should revoke the report from 1916” (Avebury).
The Turkish government is sponsoring lobbyists and they have convinced US congress to deny the genocide; “Turkey exerts political leverage and spends millions of dollars in the United States to obfuscate the Armenian genocide.” In the past years, the US has made efforts to officially accept the word genocide to define the massacres in 1915, but each attempt is met by the Turkish government rising up and putting an end to the US’s claims (Southern).
Clearly, much effort is put into denying the genocide; but why? In 1922, Turkey was a brand new country, under brand new rule. Similar to making a first impression on your older sibling’s friends, the Turkish government didn’t want their history to start with an ugly label stamped across their past. To define the massacres in 1915 as “genocide” would mean starting off on the wrong foot for this new country.
To sidestep this blow, they use the defense mechanism of denial and continue to debate the label. Psychological experiments show that denial is a defense mechanism that humans use when coping with anxiety.
Anxiety is created not only from outside stimulants but also from inside of our minds. According to Sigmund Freud, the human mind is made up of three dimensions; the id, ego and superego. Each has a unique goal and they are constantly at battle, creating a state of internal anxiety. The mediator, the ego, undertakes the task of minimizing this anxiety through internal defenses. Sofía K. Ogden and Ashley D. Biebers say, “denial is one of many defense mechanisms. It entails ignoring or refusing to believe an unpleasant reality” (NOVA). It’s easy to see that Turkey is refusing the reality of the genocide against the Armenians.
People who are uninformed of the history and deny the genocide are known as “innocent deniers.” Charny states, “[deniers] may not be aware that they are consciously seeking any benefit from their denials of a known genocide, we may be able…to create a psychological framework for understanding…people…who join the bandwagons of denial without…knowing that they are doing so or why.” In some cases, those who deny the genocide are not trying to be malicious in their statements; they are just naïve and need to be educated.
There are innocent deniers and “malevolent deniers.” The malevolent deniers are those that deny the genocide despite knowing the events. Many of these statements come in sloppy, poorly formed claims. Often, the malevolent deniers have celebrated the killings. This form of denial is stemming from the fact that they don’t want to face the “unpleasant reality” of their guilt or they are being bought off for their denial statement (Idea). For malevolent deniers, some form of punishment is necessary. However, innocent deniers may just need to be informed of their historical accuracy. The distinction between the two allows clearer determination in the consequences for these denials.
It seems that Turkey as a country is dealing with a much larger scale version of the id, ego and superego battle. Due to the anxiety this is putting on the government, they are falling back on their defense mechanism of denial.
This altercation of the past could prevent us from learning how to change. Years after the event, the Turkish government still denies the genocide to prevent shunning from the rest of the world. The simple urge to maintain a clean record has motivated the Turkish government to deny a most obvious event. It may be possible to deny something for so long that you begin to doubt the facts. Is your darkest secret worth forgetting your truth for?
Works Cited:
ANI. Armenian National Institute, 2013. Web. 24 Jan. 2013. <http://www.armenian-genocide.org/10-7-15-text.html>. Primary source
Armenian National Institute. Armenian National Institute, 2013. Web. 28 Jan. 2013. <http://www.armenian-genocide.org/turkey.html>. secondary source
Avebury, Lord, and Ara Sarafian. "British Parliamentary Blue Book." Gomidas Institute. Gomidas Insitute, 12 Dec. 2007. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. <http://www.gomidas.org/Blue_Book_Project/Blue_Book.htm>. secondary source
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Human Rights Web, 27 Jan. 2013. Web. 31 Jan. 2013. <http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html>.
Daventry, Michael. "What is the Turkish position on the Armenian genocide?" What is the Turkish position on the Armenian genocide? By Michael Davenrty. London: Queen Mary University of London, n.d. 23-44. Print. secondary source-the pages are just the ones i read
Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders. Advameg, 2013. Web. 28 Jan. 2013. <http://www.minddisorders.com/Del-Fi/Denial.html>. primary source
First World War. Michael Duffy, 22 Sept. 2009. Web. 27 Jan. 2013. <http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/armenia_talaatorders.htm>. primary source
Idea Journal. Brave New Web, n.d. Web. 25 Jan. 2013. <http://www.ideajournal.com/articles.php?id=27>. primary source-2
NOVA Publishers. Nova Science, 2013. Web. 1 Feb. 2013. <https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=11210>.
Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC, 2013. Web. 27 Jan. 2013. <http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/fall/genocide-denial>. secondary source
Southern Poverty Law Center. SPLC, 2008. Web. 28 Jan. 2013. <http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/summer/state-of-denial>. secondary source
Animas High School 3206 North Main Avenue Durango, CO 81301 (970) 247-2474
My Contact Information: [email protected]
Updated on: 2.25.13
My Contact Information: [email protected]
Updated on: 2.25.13