I.
Armenian Question in a Historical Context
An Introduction to the Armenian Question: From the
Beginning to the Treaty of Lausanne
M. Serdar Palabıyık[1]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armenian question has been one of the most significant themes not only in
Turkish history but also in the history of the Near East, particularly
because of its attachment to the ‘Eastern Question’. Therefore, it is
necessary to examine this question in detail in order to understand the
current developments. Thus, in this article it is aimed to present the
reader the background of the Armenian question from the very beginning up
until the Treaty of Lausanne with which it had been resolved at least
legally. In doing that, fundamental aspects of Armenian history will be
referred, and then, the condition of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire
will be evaluated. Following that, the emergence of Armenian question will
be analyzed with special reference to its regional and international
implications. Finally the relocation of Armenians and subsequent
developments after the World War I will be examined.
From Ancient Times to Ottoman Rule: Two Millennia of Armenian People (13th
century B.C. – 15th century A.C)
Being one of the ancient peoples of Anatolia and Caucasus Armenians had a
history of three millennia, although they tend to exaggerate their past up
until five millennia or so. It is assumed that they came to Eastern Anatolia
and Caucasus from Trachea approximately at 1200 B.C. There is no proven
relation between the Urartu civilization that had dominated the region
between ninth and sixth centuries B.C. as claimed by the Armenians.
According to their folk traditions, Armenians consider themselves direct
descendants of Noah, survivor of the Biblical flood. According to monotheist
religions, the boat designed by Noah to survive the flood came to rest on a
mountain in the Ararat range. Thus, the territory of the Armenian Plateau is
regarded by the Armenians as the cradle of civilization, the initial point
for the further spreading of mankind all around the world.
Moses Khorenatsi, Armenian historian of the 5th century, presents a detailed
genealogy of the Armenian forefather Haik from Japheth, Noah's son[2]. Due
to these legends, even now, Armenians call themselves Hai, and their country
- Haik or Haiastan, in honor of Haik. However, it should be noted that these
claims are not scientific but only legendary. According to Western sources,
‘Armen’, the root of the word ‘Armenia/Armenian’, means ‘upper country’ in
ancient Persian. Thus, historians and anthropologists argue that Armenians
were named in accordance with the geographical region that they had been
living in.
Generally, Armenians were lived under foreign rule and divided among several
regional kingdoms. In 7th century B.C. Medes destroyed the Assyrian Empire.
Within this turbulence, Armenia turned out to be an independent kingdom
under Tigran the First. However, the era of peace ended as a number of weak
and insignificant kings ruled Armenia over the following years, and finally
the country became tributary to Persia. The dynasty of Hayk stopped and the
kings of Armenia were henceforward appointed by the Persian kings.
Persian hegemony survived until the period of Tigran the Great, who was
perceived by Armenians as the most glorious among all Armenian kings. He
succeeded his father in 95 B.C., gaining full control over the vast
territories[3]. Tigran's expansion ended with the Roman and Parthian
advances. In 69 B.C., the troops of the Roman general Lucullus invaded
Armenia and besieged Tigranakert. As a result of these mutual assaults,
Armenia lost its independence once more, divided and accepted Roman and
Parthian domination.
By late 3rd century A.C., many Armenians were converted to Christianity and
numerous secret Christian communities were established. Some Armenian
historians argued that in 301 A.C., Armenian King Tiridates (Dırtad III)
established Christianity as a sole religion of Armenia after his baptism by
St. Gregory the Illuminator, who was the first patriarch of Armenia[4];
whereas many European historians argued that Christianization of Armenia
must be later in time since it was only after 313 that Christianity turned
out to be an accepted religion in the Roman Empire. However still, the name
‘Gregorian’ that has been used to define the Christian sect of Armenians
came from St. Gregory.
A century later first Armenian alphabet was designed by St. Mesrob, who
would later translate the Bible into Armenian in 434[5].
With the split of Roman Empire, Armenia was partitioned between the
Byzantine and Persian Empires once more. This mutual domination was ended in
the 7th century with the defeat of Sassanid rule in Persia by the Arabs.
The Arabs first invaded Armenia in 640[6]. In 652, a peace agreement was
made, allowing Armenians freedom of religion. Arab domination lasted until
882, when Ashot I was solemnly crowned as the King of Armenia, but he had to
recognize the suzerainty of the Caliph[7]. Therefore, still, Arabs were
dominating the region and Armenians could not establish an independent
kingdom due to inter-tribal rivalries.
Just after the beginning of the new millennium, Seljuk armies reached
Armenian lands in their quest towards West. Starting from 1047 onwards, one
after another Armenian cities fell under Turkish control. However, it was
only after the Battle of Manzikert (Malazgirt) in 1071 that Seljuks took
control of whole Armenia[8]. Two centuries later, with the decline of the
Seljuk Empire in Anatolia and particularly with the Mongol invasion,
starting from 1231 onwards, Armenia fell into the Mongolian rule[9]. From
the beginning of the 14th century, the Mongol dominance in the region
receded. From then on, numerous Turkoman nomadic tribes invade the Armenian
lands.
It seems that the raids of Seljuks resulted in movement of some Armenians
toward Cilicia, the region situated between the Taurus and Amanos mountains
close to Mediterranean coast. However, majority of Armenians remained in
Eastern Anatolia and the Caucasus. In 1080, Armenian Prince Ruben asserted
authority over the local Armenian and Greek princes. Ruben became founder of
a new royal house called Rubenids that ruled over Cilicia for more than 300
years. Indeed, this Cilician Kingdom was not Armenian in essence, rather its
dynasty was presumed to be Armenian, and thus the Kingdom was generally
named as Cilician Armenian Kingdom. This state became quite active during
the Crusades and turned out to be a significant base for the crusading
armies. With the rise of Mamluk Empire in the region, this Kingdom was
gradually declined and finally fell into Mamluk domination in 1393.
Armenians in the Ottoman Empire (15th century – 19th century)
Although Ottoman-Armenian relations were generally started with the Conquest
of Constantinople in 1453 and subsequent installation of Armenian
Patriarchate, it might better be started with the Ottoman conquest of Bursa
in 1326, since in Bursa there was an Armenian community. Many of these
Armenians were craftsman, and their talent was welcomed by the Ottoman
Sultans. When Edirne became the new capital of the Ottoman Empire, many
Armenians were installed there[10].
When Constantinople was conquered by Mehmed II the Conqueror in 1453, he
brought many Armenian families from Anatolia to Constantinople and they were
installed for the economic revival of the city as was the case in Edirne. In
1461, in his return from the conquest of Trabzon, Mehmed II came to Bursa
and invited the head of Armenian community, Hovakim, to Constantinople, in
order to establish an Armenian patriarchate there. Ortaylı argues that this
was a strategic decision for Mehmed II, who tried to balance the Greek
population of Istanbul by another Christian community, namely the
Armenians[11]. Therefore, it was under the rule of the Ottomans that
Armenians acquired a Patriarchate in Constantinople. From then on, Armenians
lived in peace up to 1880’s in the Ottoman Empire.
In 1473, with the defeat of Akkoyunlu state in Eastern Anatolia, many
Armenian cities, including Ani, were incorporated into the Ottoman Empire.
Particularly after the emergence of Istanbul as a religious center for
Armenians, Armenians who suffered inter-tribal conflicts in their home
country began to migrate there for a more peaceful life[12].
In 1514, Ottoman Sultan, Selim I, defeated the Safavid Empire and occupied
the western and southern regions of Armenia. Particularly, the Armenian
artisans and craftsmen of Tabriz were brought back to Istanbul. In 1516,
Jerusalem was also conquered by Selim I, and the Armenian Patriarchate in
Jerusalem was granted with religious freedom, which it had assumed since the
conquest of Jerusalem by Caliph Omar in 7th century. In 1534, Suleyman I the
Lawgiver occupied the cities, such as Van, Revan and Nakhichevan, where
Armenians had been living, in his campaign towards Safavid Iran. Likewise
his father, Selim I, Suleyman brought the most talented artisans and
craftsmen to Istanbul.
As a result of all these population movements, by 1554, the population of
the Armenian community in Istanbul reached to 60.000[13]. In 1567, the first
Armenian printing house was established by an Armenian, Apkar Tıbir, who
fled to İstanbul because of the repression he had faced in Italy. The first
Armenian book, published in this printing house was called “Pokır
Keraganutyun Gam Ayppenaran (Little Grammar or Alphabet). This was followed
by many religious texts[14].
By that time, Armenians could also be seen in the ruling circles. Even it
was argued that Mehmed Pasha of Armenian origin, who had formerly been the
head of falconers (doğancıbaşı) of the Sultan Murad III, was appointed as
the Grand Vizier in 1581[15].
In the mid-17th century, Southern Caucasus was once more portioned between
the Ottoman and Safavid Empires with the Treaty of Kasr-ı Şirin in 1639.
From that time, up until 19th century, Armenians lived under the rule of
these two empires.
Armenian community contributed much to the Ottoman culture. Not only
Armenian craftsmen and artisans revived urban economies in major cities of
the Empire, but also several Armenian families were given significant
responsibilities, such as coinage and gunpowder production[16]. In the major
cities of the Ottoman Empire such as İstanbul, Bursa, Tokat, Ankara,
Erzurum, Nakhichevan, Yerevan, or Kayseri, they composed one of the most
significant economic classes through their artisans, craftsmen and
merchants[17].
What is more, Armenian artists contributed much to the Ottoman music and
architecture. For example, it would have been impossible for the works of
many Ottoman musicians, including famous İsmail Dede Efendi, to survive, if
an Armenian musician, Hamparsum Limoncuyan, had not introduced some kind of
a solfége. What is more, those Armenian musicians, such as Tatyos Efendi or
Bimençe, created significant artworks. In terms of architecture, nineteenth
century was generally dominated by the works of Armenian architects, the
most famous of which was the Balyan family. Even the imperial palaces of
Dolmabahçe and Beylerbeyi, as well as several significant mosques
surrounding Bosphorus were designed by the members of this family.
Ottoman Armenians were also brought to the key positions in bureaucracy as
well. Particularly in the 19th century, twenty-nine Armenians achieved the
highest governmental rank of Pasha. There were twenty-two Armenian
ministers, including the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Finance, Trade and
Post, with other Armenians making major contributions to the departments
concerned with agriculture, economic development, and the census. There also
were thirty-three Armenian representatives appointed and elected to the
Ottoman parliaments, seven ambassadors, eleven consul-generals and consuls,
eleven university professors, and forty-one other officials of high rank.
All in all, Ottoman rule provided Armenians with welfare and peace. However,
these relations were first strained and then collapsed particularly in the
late 19th century due to various reasons. The next part of the article will
deal with these factors.
Emergence of Armenian Resistance against the Ottoman Empire (1800-1878):
There are several factors, both internal and external, for the deterioration
of Ottoman-Armenian relations. First of all, Ottoman decline and
insufficiency of reforms to make the conditions of Ottoman subjects, both
Muslim and non-Muslim, better, resulted in a discontent in the public
opinion. Particularly, in Eastern Anatolia Ottoman authority and control was
nominal, in practice the region was ruled by provincial authorities and even
sometimes by Kurdish tribes. There emerged several clashes between the
Armenian and Kurdish peoples which resulted in a severe discontent among
Armenians.
Secondly, religious strife among various sects of Armenians reached its
zenith in the 19th century. Although, Gregorian Armenians continued to hold
their predominance, a significant Catholic Armenian community was
established so strongly that they were recognized by the Ottoman Sultan
Mahmud II in 1831 with the auspices of French ambassador in Istanbul and
founded a separate church in the Ottoman Empire[18]. From that point on,
Armenian and European Catholics were instrumental in bringing Western
education to the Armenians. However, a greater force in educating Armenians
and advancing their nationalist feelings was the American Protestant
missionaries[19]. Therefore, particularly soon after the emergence of these
missionaries in the Ottoman Empire, a Protestant Armenian community was
organized under a religious authority called “Protestant Governing Board”
under the auspices of British Embassy in 1846[20]. Protestant Armenians were
also able to establish their own church in Istanbul. In all, Armenians were
internally divided as well and Gregorian Armenians, who were still the big
majority in the Empire, became reactant to the Ottoman rule because of its
recognition of different sects.
Third, the decline of Ottoman Empire, coincided with the ideas spread from
Europe after the French Revolution, such as freedom, equality, and
nationalism, hit the Empire in the 19th century. Indeed, starting from the
last quarter of the 18th century, particularly with the defeat of the Empire
by Russia in 1774 and subsequent Kuchuk Kainarja Treaty, Ottoman decline
entered into a phase that was impossible to recover. This decline would
create a significant power vacuum in one of the most strategic regions of
the world where all Great Powers of the time had an interest. The result of
Ottoman decline would be a fierce rivalry among the Great Powers of the
time, which came to be known as the ‘Eastern Question’.
Particularly, with the spread of nationalist ideas within the Empire, first
uprisings emerged in the Balkans. Serbian revolt of 1804 was somehow
suppressed; however, subsequent Greek revolt resulted in a fierce
Ottoman-Russian War, at the end of which Greece acquired its independence in
1829. On the other hand, in these years, Russians not only defeated the
Ottoman Empire but also Iran. After the Russo-Iran War of 1828, Russian
armies not only passed Armenian territories but also crossed the Aras River
into Iranian territory and threatened Tabriz. The Shah sued for peace and
signed the Treaty of Turkmenchai, which brought Eastern Armenians under
Russian control, drew the border at-the Arax River, and provided for the
transfer of a large number of Armenians from northern Persia to Russian
territory. This was the beginning of the population transfers that would
give the Armenians a majority in the territories of today’s Armenia. From
then on, Russians began to interfere in the Armenian affairs and claimed
themselves as the protector of the Armenian population living in the Ottoman
Empire as well.
As it can be seen, one of the most significant characteristics of this
period was increasing foreign intervention in the internal affairs of the
Ottoman Empire. In other words, the interests of the Great Powers of the
time clashed on the Empire. On the one hand Russia tried to reach warm seas
via Balkans and Caucasus, on the other hand Britain tried to prevent this
threat to his dominions in Asia. Thus, while Russia supported the
nationalist tendencies in the Balkans, Britain aimed to preserve territorial
integrity of the Ottoman Empire.
In order to prevent a sudden break-up of the Empire, all Great Powers agreed
that the Sultan must grant more rights to the non-Muslim subjects of the
Empire, in order to make them tied to the framework of the Empire. In
support of this goal they constantly demanded privileges, autonomy and
independence for the Ottoman Christians. With the Tanzimat reforms, several
rights were granted to the non-Muslim communities of the Ottoman Empire.
However, neither Great Powers nor non-Muslim communities satisfied with
these reforms.
The year 1856 is a decisive turning point in the course of Ottoman history.
It marked the end of the Crimean War (1853-56), in which the Ottoman Empire,
sided with Great Britain, France and the newly-established Sardinia (in some
sources Piedmont), and defeated Russia. This war was not only significant
because it demonstrated a temporary bulwark against Russian expansionism,
but also because of the Treaty of Paris (30 March 1856), ending the war
among the Great Powers of the period.
In the Article 7 of this Treaty, signatories “…declare the Sublime Porte
admitted to participate in the advantages of the public law and system
(Concert) of Europe [and they accepted]…to respect the independence and the
territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire”[21]. In other words, with this
Treaty, the Ottoman Empire was admitted to The Concert of Europe, and its
independence and territorial integrity was guaranteed by the Great Powers.
This article is so significant that it is even used by many contemporary
historians and political scientists as an indication of the acceptance of
Turkey as a European state. Still, however, the Treaty of Paris would
survive only two decades and this period of temporary relief ended with the
disastrous War of 1877-78 between the Ottoman Empire and Russia.
The year 1856 is not only remarkable because of the end of the Crimean War
and the Treaty of Paris. On 18 February 1856, just one week before the
convention of the Congress of Paris to discuss the situation after the
Crimean War, the Ottoman Sultan Abdülmecid (reigned between 1839 and 1861)
declared a Hatt-ı Humayûn (an imperial edict), which was later called
Islahat Fermanı (The Imperial Edict of Reform). This ferman granted many
rights to the non-Muslim communities living under the Ottoman rule: Muslims
and non-Muslims were accepted as equal before the law; nobody would be
forced to convert from his/her religion to another one; there would be no
difference among the people on the basis of ethnicity, religion or religious
sect; Muslims and non-Muslims would be admitted to public and military
services equally[22]. Considering the British presence in India or the
French presence in Algeria, it can easily be seen that this edict was beyond
its time in granting such extensive rights to the non-Muslim communities
living in the Ottoman Empire. Neither the British, nor the French, at that
time, had adopted such an ambitious document to grant several rights to the
minorities living in their colonies.
Ironically, this Imperial Edict was a European project. It was designed as a
part of the negotiations among Britain, France and Austria during 1855 in
Vienna, through which it was agreed that the Ottoman Empire should be forced
to grant some rights to the non-Muslim communities living in the Empire.
Therefore, Islahat Fermanı was also cited in the Article 9 of the Treaty of
Paris as follows[23]:
“His Imperial Majesty the Sultan having, in his constant solicitude for the
welfare of his subjects, issued a Firman, which, while ameliorating their
condition without distinction of Religion or of Race, records his generous
intentions towards the Christian population of his Empire, and wishing to
give a further proof of his sentiments in that respect, has resolved to
communicate to the Contracting Parties the said Firman, emanating
spontaneously from his Sovereign will.”
As it can be seen in the text of this article, it was aimed to establish
full equality between Muslim and non-Muslim communities of the Ottoman
Empire. However, the result would be quite the opposite. Non-Muslim
communities generally abused these extensive rights, and due to Great Power
protection, the Ottoman Empire could do nothing to prevent these abuses. As
a result, from 1856 onwards, non-Christian communities gradually bettered
their positions vis-à-vis and sometimes even at the expense of the Muslim
communities. Economically, they eventually became the dominant groups
residing within the Ottoman Empire despite the fact that their numbers were
proportionally much less than the Muslims. In political terms, they became
bureaucrats, diplomats, and even ministers. In other words, the relationship
between the ruler and the ruled transformed dramatically.
Although many rights were granted to the Armenians within the framework of
this Edict of Reform, they were not content with these rights. Therefore in
1862, they demanded more from the Ottoman Empire and sent a draft law to the
Ottoman government. This draft law was evaluated and later adopted as
“Armenian Millet Law” (Ermeni Milleti Nizamnamesi – Nizamname-i Ermeniyan).
According to this law an assembly of 140 representatives would be
established in order to discuss the internal affairs of the Armenian
community and only 20 of them would be elected from the Patriarchate. The
remaining representatives would be elected from the Armenian community in
Istanbul and other parts of the Empire. As it can be seen, this law was
significant in the sense that it revealed the disputes within the Armenian
community. It was prepared by the leaders of the Armenian community against
the suppressive administration of the Patriarchate[24].
Although Ottoman-Armenian relations were somehow strained in this period,
there was no full-scale strife between Armenians and the Muslims.
Nationalist ideas were spread through the Armenian population and this
resulted in Armenian demands for reform and the Ottomans tried to respond
these demands. However, these relations would deteriorate more and more and
turn out to be a civil war by the last quarter of the nineteenth century.
4. Armenian Revolutionary Movements and Rebellions (1878-1915)[25]
It was the Ottoman-Russian war in 1877–1878 that awakened Armenian dreams
for independence with Russian help and under Russian guidance. Toward the
end of the war, when it was evident that the Ottoman armies would be
defeated, Armenian Patriarch of Istanbul, Nerses Varjabedian, communicated
with the Russian Czar, asking Russia not to return to the Ottomans the East
Anatolian lands occupied by Russian forces. Immediately after the war, the
Patriarch went to the Russian camp located in the suburbs of Istanbul, and
in an interview with the Russian Commander, Grand Duke Nicholas, he demanded
that the Russian forces should not be withdrawn until changes favoring the
Armenians were introduced into the governmental and administrative
organization and regulations of these provinces. The Russians agreed to this
demand, which was incorporated as Article 16 of the Treaty of San Stephano,
signed after the war between Ottomans and Russians. However, this treaty did
not constitute the final settlement of the Russo-Turkish war. Britain feared
that its provisions for a ‘Greater Armenia’ in the East would inevitably not
only establish Russian hegemony in those areas but also in the Ottoman
Empire, and through “Greater Armenia”, Russia could easily reach to the
Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, where they would threaten the British
possessions in India. In return for an Ottoman agreement for British
occupation of Cyprus, Britain agreed to use its influence in Europe to
change the provisions of San Stephano. Hence the Congress of Berlin was
gathered. As a result of this Congress, Russia was compelled to evacuate all
of Eastern Anatolia with the exception of the districts of Kars, Ardahan and
Batum, with the Ottomans agreeing to designate several reforms in the
Eastern provinces where Armenians lived under the guarantee of the five
signatory European powers.
It had been British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli and the Conservatives
who had defended Ottoman integrity against Russian expansion at the Congress
of Berlin. But with the assumption of power by William E. Gladstone and the
Liberals in 1880, British policy toward the Ottomans changed drastically to
one which sought to protect British interests by breaking up the Ottoman
Empire and creating friendly small states under British influence in its
place, one of which was to be Armenia. In pursuit of this policy, the
British press began to encourage referring Eastern Anatolia as ‘Armenia’;
the numbers of Protestant missionaries sent to the East was substantially
increased; and in London an Anglo-Armenian Friendship Committee was created
to influence public opinion in support of this new endeavor.
The 1877-78 War was a turning point in terms of Ottoman-Armenian relations
since Armenian rebellions against the Ottoman Empire started after this
period. Starting from 1879 onwards particularly Britain and Russia began to
send notes to the Ottoman government for the effective implementation of
reforms in Eastern Anatolia[26]. However, Ottoman governments preferred not
to go further about the reforms, since effective implementation of them
would facilitate the disintegration of the Empire. What is more,
particularly after this war, almost all Great Powers opened consulates in
many cities of Eastern Anatolia which complicated the issue more. These
consulates began to act as mediators in the disputes between Muslim and
non-Muslim Communities; but they were almost always on the side of the
non-Muslim communities. This further disturbed inter-communal relations.
Another significant development of this period was the mushrooming of some
Armenian political and social organizations. Indeed, since 1860s, local
Armenian organizations were formed, particularly in Adana, Van and Muş,
which were later united in 1880 under the name of ‘United Armenian
Organizations’ (Miyasiyal Enikerotyon Hoyotis)[27]. What is more, in this
decade, some more revolutionary organizations were established as well, such
as the Black Cross and Armenian societies in Van and the National Guards in
Erzurum.
Perceiving that they would be more influential abroad with the active and
direct support of the Great Powers, Armenian nationalists decided to center
their organizations outside Ottoman territory, therefore establishing the
Hinchak Committee at Geneva in 1887 and the Dashnak Committee at Tbilisi in
1890, both of which declared to be their basic goal the ‘liberation from
Ottoman rule of the territories of Eastern Anatolia and the Ottoman
Armenians’[28].
According to Louise Nalbandian, a leading Armenian researcher into Armenian
propaganda, the Hinchak program stated that[29]:
“Agitation and terror were needed to "elevate the spirit" of the people. The
people were also to be incited against their enemies and were to "profit"
from retaliatory actions of these same enemies. Terror was to be used as a
method of protecting the people and winning their confidence in the Hinchak
program. The party aimed at terrorizing the Ottoman government, thus
contributing toward lowering the prestige of that regime and working toward
its complete disintegration. The government itself was not to be the only
focus of terrorist tactics. The Hinchaks wanted to annihilate the most
dangerous of the Armenian and Turkish individuals who were then working for
the government as well as to destroy all spies and informers. To assist them
in carrying out all of these terrorist acts, the party was to organize an
exclusive branch specifically devoted to performing acts of terrorism. The
most opportune time to institute the general rebellion for carrying out
immediate objectives was when Turkey was engaged in war.”
Dashnak Party’s program was not much different from that of Hinchak Party.
K. S. Papazian wrote of the Dashnak Party as such[30]:
“The purpose of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnak) is to
achieve political and economic freedom in Turkish Armenia, by means of
rebellion ... terrorism has, from the first, been adopted by the Dashnak
Committee of the Caucasus, as a policy or a method for achieving its ends.
Under the heading “means” in their program adopted in 1892, we read as
follows: The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnak), in order to
achieve its purpose through rebellion, organizes revolutionary groups.
Method no. 8 is as follows: To wage fight, and to subject to terrorism the
Government officials, the traitors ... method no. 11 is: To subject the
government institutions to destruction and pillage.”
Soon after the establishment of these two effective political institutions,
Armenian riots began. In the twenty years between 1889 and 1909 there were
almost 40 Armenian rebellions or terrorist activities. Below there is a
general list of these rebellions and terrorist activities:
· Musa Bey Event (August 1889),
· Erzurum Revolt (20 June 1890),
· Kumkapı Demonstrations (15 July 1890),
· Merzifon, Kayseri, Yozgat Demonstrations (1892- 1893),
· First Sasun Revolt (August 1894),
· Zeytun (Süleymanlı) Revolt (1-6 September 1895),
· Divriği (Sivas) Revolt (29 September 1895),
· Babıali Demonstrations (30 September 1895),
· Trabzon Revolt (2 October 1895),
· Eğin (Mamuratü’l Aziz) Revolt (6 October 1895),
· Develi (Kayseri) Revolt (9 October 1895)
· Akhisar (İzmit) Revolt (9 October 1895),
· Erzincan (Erzurum) Revolt (21 October 1895),
· Gümüşhane (Trabzon) Revolt (25 October 1895),
· Bitlis Revolt (25 October 1895),
· Maraş (Halep) Revolt (27 Ekim 1895),
· Urfa (Halep) Revolt (29 Ekim 1895),
· Erzurum Revolt (30 Ekim 1895),
· Diyarbakır Revolt (2 November 1895),
· Siverek (Diyarbakır) Revolt (2 November 1895),
· Malatya (Mamuratü’l- Aziz) Revolt (4 November 1895),
· Harput (Mamuratü’l- Aziz) Revolt (7 November 1895),
· Arapkir (Mamuratü’l- Aziz) Revolt (9 November 1895),
· Sivas İsyani (15 November 1895),
· Merzifon (Sivas) Revolt (15 November 1895)
· Ayintab (Halep) Revolt (16 November 1895),
· Maraş (Halep) Revolt (18 November 1895),
· Muş (Bitlis) Revolt (22 November 1895),
· Kayseri (Ankara) Revolt (3 December 1895),
· Yozgat (Ankara) Revolt (3 December 1895),
· Zeytun Revolt (1895-1896),
· Birinci Van Revolt (2 June 1896),
· The Attack on Ottoman Bank (14 June 1896),
· İkinci Sasun Revolt (July 1897),
· Assasination Attempt towards Sultan Abdülhamid II (21 July 1905),
· Adana Revolt (14 April 1909)
· Bayburt (Erzurum) Revolt (26 October 1895)
In all, all these revolts and riots were presented by the Armenian
revolutionary societies in Europe and America as the killing of Armenians by
Turks, and with this sort of propaganda message they stirred considerable
emotion among Christian peoples. As a result of this disinformation, Great
Powers decided to increase the pressure on the Ottoman government about the
implementation of existing reforms and introduction of the new ones. Britain
sent a memorandum about the condition of the Armenians in 11 May 1895, in
which they wanted the government to release all Armenian rebels, to appoint
a high commissioner for the control of implementation of the reforms, to pay
reparations to the Armenians in Sason, Zeytun and other places, and many
other new administrative regulations which would result in full autonomy of
Eastern Anatolia from the Empire. Ottoman Empire accepted these demands;
however, they can never be implemented not only because of Ottoman
unwillingness due to her concern for survival, but also because of the
continuous revolts of the Armenians[31]. Accordingly, Russian Consul-General
in Bitlis and Van, General Mayewski, wrote in 1912 that[32]:
“In 1895 and 1896 the Armenian revolutionary committees created such
suspicion between the Armenians and the native population that it became
impossible to implement any sort of reform in these districts. The Armenian
priests paid no attention to religious education, but instead concentrated
on spreading nationalist ideas, which were affixed to the walls of
monasteries, and in place of performing their religious duties they
concentrated on stirring Christian enmity against Muslims. The revolts that
took place in many provinces of Turkey during 1895 and 1896 were caused
neither by any great poverty among the Armenian villages nor because of
Muslim attacks against them. In fact these villagers were considerably
richer and more prosperous than their neighbors. Rather, the Armenian
revolts came from three causes: (1) their increasing maturity in political
subjects; (2) the spread of ideas of nationality, liberation, and
independence within the Armenian community; (3) Support of these ideas by
the western governments, and their encouragement through the efforts of the
Armenian priests.”
In 1908, with almost a bloodless coup d’etat, the Party of Union and
Progress was able to dethrone Sultan Abdülhamid II and install Sultan Mehmed
Reshad to the Ottoman throne. From then on, the Party turned out to be the
most significant political actor in the Empire; and gradually, foreign
policy orientation of the Empire changed from a relative balance among Great
Powers to an inclination towards Germany. The result would be the entrance
of the Ottoman Empire to World War I together with the Germans. Now, a new
phase about the Ottoman-Armenian relations would be opened.
World War I (1914-1918) and Armenian Relocation (1915-1916)
The beginning of World War I and the Ottoman entry into the war on November
1, 1914 on the side of Germany and Austria - Hungary against the Entente
powers was considered as a great opportunity by the Armenian nationalists.
Indeed, before the war began, in August 1914, the Ottoman leaders met with
the Dashnaks at Erzurum in order to get their support for the Ottoman war
effort when it came. The Dashnaks promised that if the Ottomans entered the
war, they would do their duty as loyal countrymen in the Ottoman armies.
However they failed to live up to this promise, since even before this
meeting took place, a secret Dashnak Congress held at Erzurum in June 1914
had already decided to use the oncoming war to undertake a general attack
against the Ottoman state[33].
When Russia declared war against the Ottoman Empire, immediately, the
Russian Armenians joined the Russian army in preparing an attack on the
Ottomans. The Catholicos of Echmiadzin assured the Russian General Governor
of the Caucasus, Vranzof-Dashkof, that “…in return for Russia's forcing the
Ottomans to make reforms for the Armenians, all the Russian Armenians would
support the Russian war effort without conditions”. As soon as Russia
declared war on the Ottoman Empire, the Dashnak Committee ordered its cells
that had been preparing to revolt within the Ottoman Empire.
The Hinchak Committee instructed to its organizations in the Ottoman
territory to revolt against the Empire as well. In an instruction pamphlet
it was written that[34]: “The Hinchak Committee will use all means to assist
the Entente states, devoting all its forces to the struggle to assure
victory in Armenia, Cilicia, the Caucasus and Azerbaijan as the ally of the
Entente states, and in particular of Russia.”
These bellicose proclamations were not peculiar to the Armenian political
organizations. Even the Armenian representatives in the Ottoman Parliament
such as Papazyan, Pastirmajian and Boyaciyan soon turned out to be leading
guerilla fighters against the Ottomans. In a declaration to the Armenian
community, Papazyan wrote that: “The volunteer Armenian regiments in the
Caucasus should prepare themselves for battle, serve as advance units for
the Russian armies to help them capture the key positions in the districts
where the Armenians live, and advance into Anatolia, joining the Armenian
units already there.”
As the Russian forces advanced into Ottoman territory in Eastern Anatolia,
they were led by advanced units composed of volunteer Ottoman and Russian
Armenians, who were joined by the Armenians who deserted the Ottoman armies
and went over to the Russians. Many of these also formed bandit forces with
weapons and ammunition which they had for years been stocking in Armenian
and missionary churches and schools. Within a few months after the war
began, these Armenian guerilla forces, operating in close coordination with
the Russians, were savagely attacking Turkish cities, towns and villages in
the East; massacring their inhabitants without mercy, while at the same time
working to sabotage the Ottoman army's war effort by destroying roads and
bridges, raiding caravans, and doing whatever else they could to ease the
Russian occupation. The atrocities committed by the Armenian volunteer
forces accompanying the Russian army were so severe that the Russian
commanders themselves were compelled to withdraw them from the fighting
fronts and send them to rear guard duties. The memoirs of all too many
Russian officers who served in the East at this time are filled with
accounts of the revolting atrocities committed by these Armenian guerillas,
which were savage even by the relatively primitive standards of war then
observed in such areas[35].
In March 1915 the Russian forces began to move toward Van. Immediately, on
April 11, 1915 the Armenians of Van began a general revolt, massacring all
the Turks in the vicinity so as to make possible its quick and easy conquest
by the Russians. The Armenian newspaper Gochnak, published in the United
States, also proudly reported on May 24, 1915 that “only, 1,500 Turks remain
in Van”, the rest having been slaughtered[36].
Even after the revolt and massacres at Van, the Ottoman government made one
final effort to secure general Armenian support for the war effort,
summoning the Patriarch, some Armenian Members of Parliament, and other
delegates to a meeting where they were warned that drastic measures would be
taken unless Armenians stopped slaughtering Muslims and working to undermine
the war effort. When there was no evident lessening of the Armenian attacks,
the government finally acted. On April 24, 1915 the Armenian revolutionary
committees were closed and 235 of their leaders were arrested for activities
against the state. It is the date of these arrests that in recent years has
been annually commemorated by Armenian nationalist groups throughout the
world in commemoration of the “massacre” that they claim took place at this
time.
Following these arrests, Ottoman government adopted a decree on May 27,
1915, ordering for the relocation of the Armenians living in the war
regions. This decree was perceived by the Armenians as a deliberate attempt
of genocide. However, closer examination of its articles shows that it was
only a temporary precaution for the survival of the Empire and the
relocation would be realized with utmost care for the Armenians. Some
articles of this decree are presented below[37]:
When those of the Armenians resident in the aforementioned towns and
villages who have to be moved are transferred to their places of settlement
and are on the road, their comfort must be assured and their lives and
property protected; after their arrival their food should be paid for out of
Refugees' Appropriations until they are definitively settled in their new
homes. Property and land should be distributed to them in accordance with
their previous financial situation as well as their current needs; and for
those among them needing further help, the government should build houses,
provide cultivators and artisans with seed, tools, and equipment.
This order is entirely intended against the extension of the Armenian
Revolutionary Committees; therefore do not execute it in such a manner that
might cause the mutual massacre of Muslims and Armenians.
Make arrangements for special officials to accompany the groups of Armenians
who are being relocated, and make sure they are provided with food and other
needed things, paying the cost out of the allotments set aside for
emigrants.
The food needed by the emigrants while traveling until they reach their
destinations must be provided ... for poor emigrants by credit for the
installation of the emigrants. The camps provided for transported persons
should be kept under regular supervision; necessary steps for their well
being should be taken, and order and security assured. Make certain that
indigent emigrants are given enough food and that their health is assured by
daily visits by a doctor... Sick people, poor people, women and children
should be sent by rail and others on mules, in carts or on foot according to
their power of endurance. Each convoy should be accompanied by a detachment
of guards, and the food supply for each convoy should be guarded until the
destination is reached... In cases where the emigrants are attacked, either
in the camps or during the journeys, all efforts should be taken to repel
the attacks immediately.
In all, many precautions were taken for the safety and comfort of the
relocated Armenians. However, still, under war circumstances, there were not
sufficient food supplies, hygienic conditions as well as transportation
facilities. What is more, there was not enough security on the road to the
destination of relocated Armenians. Banditry was a significant threat and
the convoys were attacked by Kurdish as well as Turkish bands. Together with
famine and epidemic diseases, which the Muslim community had also suffered
much, many Armenians died during this process of relocation.
The number of deaths turned out to be a significant matter of debate. It
varies between 250.000 and 3.000.000. Especially, Armenian propagandists
claim that as many as 1, 5 to 2 million Armenians died as the result of
organized “massacres”. However, these numbers are mere exaggerations
compared with the population statistics of the Ottoman Empire, in which the
census bureau was presided by either Armenians or non-Muslim subjects of the
Empire. Accordingly, Toynbee estimates the number of the Armenian losses as
600.000. The same figure appears in the Encyclopedia Britannica's 1918
edition. Armenians had also claimed the same number before. Bogos Nubar,
head of the Armenian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference, declared that
after the war 280.000 Armenians were living in Turkey and 700.000 Armenians
have immigrated to other countries. According to the estimation of Bogos
Nubar, the total number of the Armenian population before the war was
1.300.000[38]. In all, it is estimated that the number of Armenian
sufferings in World War I was not more than 500.000.
After the Russian revolution in 1917, Russia signed Brest-Litovsk Treaty and
evacuated Eastern Anatolia. They left the region to the administration of
Armenian bands and provided them with weapons and ammunition. These bands
attacked many cities, towns and villages and massacred thousands of Muslims,
in order to facilitate incorporation of Eastern Anatolia to a prospective
‘Greater Armenia’. According to the archival documents, the number of
massacred Muslims between 1914 and 1921 reached to 518.000. Later Ottoman
forces were able to repel the Armenians and they took many Eastern Anatolian
lands up until Baku with the exception of Yerevan and Etchmiazin. However,
after the signature of the Armistice of Mudros in 1918, they had to retreat
once again. Now, Armenian question would be resolved on the table in the
subsequent diplomatic conferences.
Armenian Attempts to Establish a ‘Greater Armenia’ (1918-1922)
When the World War I ended, all the actors of the war gathered in Paris to
discuss the post-World War I situation of Europe as well as of the Ottoman
Empire. In 1919, Paris Peace Conference was organized and Armenians also
participated to this conference with a delegation presided by Bogos Nubar.
In the conference Bogos Nubar demanded almost whole Eastern Anatolia to
establish an Armenian state. The provinces that were demanded by him
included Artvin, Kars, Rize, Trabzon, Giresun, Tokat, Sivas, İçel, Adan,
Kahramanmaraş, Adıyaman, Malatya, Elazığ, Tunceli, Gümüşhane, Erzincan,
Bayburt, Erzurum, Ağrı, Van, Diyarbakır, Batman, Siirt and Muş. The area
that he considered reached to 390.000 km2, which comprised almost half of
whole Anatolia. Even Lloyd George, an ardent opponent of the Ottoman Empire,
argued that this was unacceptable and these designs of Bogos Nubar were
merely ‘fairytales’.
In 1920, Ottoman Empire was forced to accept the Treaty of Sevres, which
would never be implemented. In this Treaty, a section (Section 6) was
devoted to the matters regarding Armenia. With Article 89, Turkey and
Armenia would submit to the arbitration of the President of the United
States the question of the frontier to be fixed between Turkey and Armenia
in the provinces of Erzurum, Trabzon, Van and Bitlis, and to accept his
decision thereupon, as well as any stipulations he may prescribe as to
access for Armenia to the sea, and as to the demilitarisation of any portion
of Turkish territory adjacent to the said frontier[39]. As a result,
President Wilson decided to give 120.000 km2 of lands in Eastern Anatolia to
the Armenians, including the provinces Van, Ağrı, Kars, Artvin, Erzurum,
Bingöl, Muş, Bitlis, Siirt, Erzincan, Gümüşhane, Bayburt, Trabzon, Rize and
part of Sivas.
After the Treaty of Sevres, Armenians attacked Eastern Anatolia once more to
occupy the lands that they were promised. However, they were defeated by the
forces of Kazım Karabekir. In December 1920, Turkish nationalist forces and
Armenians signed the Treaty of Gumru, with which contemporary
Turkish-Armenian borders were almost determined. However, in these days,
Armenia was incorporated to the Soviet Union, thus the Treaty of Gumru could
not be ratified. However, in 1921, first with the Treaty of Moscow with
Russia, and then with the Treaty of Kars with Armenia, Georgia and
Azerbaijan, the borders determined by the Treaty of Gumru were accepted by
all parties.
With the Turkish victory in the War of Liberation, a new phase was opened
regarding the Armenian question. Particularly, this question was resolved
with the Treaty of Lausanne. However, closer examination of this Treaty
extends the scope of this article and would be the subject of another
article written by Rtd. Ambassador Gündüz Aktan, which is also available in
this CD.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Expert, ASAM, Institute for Armenian Research, mspalabiyik@eraren.org
[2] Genelkurmay Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı, Belgelerle Ermeni
Sorunu, (Ankara: Başbakanlık Basımevi, 1992), p. 3
[3] Pars Tuğlacı, Tarih Boyunca Batı Ermenileri: Cilt I (287-1851),
(İstanbul: Pars Yayın, 2004), s. 1
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid., p. 9
[6] Ibid., p. 17
[7] Ibid., p. 24
[8] For a detailed account of Seljuk-Armenian relations see, Ali Sevim,
‘Selçuklu ve Ermeni İlişkileri’, (Yeni Türkiye, Vol. 7, No. 38, Special
Issue on Armenian Question, pp. 595-601)
[9] For a detailed account of Mongol-Armenian relations see, Mehmet Ersan,
‘Selçuklular Döneminde Türk Ermeni İlişkileri’, (Yeni Türkiye, Vol. 7, No.
38, Special Issue on Armenian Question, ss. 603-615), particularly 611 ff.
[10] Ibid., p. 143
[11] İlber Ortaylı, ‘Osmanlı Ermenileri’, (Yeni Türkiye, Vol. 7, No. 38,
Special Issue on Armenian Question, pp. 630-632), p. 631
[12] Two of these significant migrations were realized in 1486 and 1487,
Tuğlacı, op. cit., p. 164
[13] Ibid., p. 178
[14] Ibid., p. 187
[15] Tülay Reyhanlı, İngiliz Gezginlerine göre XVI: Yüzyılda İstanbul’da
Hayat (1582-1599), (Ankara: Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Yayınları, 1983),
cited in Tuğlacı, p. 191
[16] Ercüment Kuran, ‘Tarihte Türkler ve Ermeniler’, (Yeni Türkiye, Vol. 7,
No. 38, Special Issue on Armenian Question, pp. 616-620), p. 617
[17] Enver Konukçu, ‘Osmanlılar ve Millet-i Sadıka’dan Ermeniler’ (Yeni
Türkiye, Vol. 7, No. 38, Special Issue on Armenian Question, pp. 621-629),
p. 623
[18] Genelkurmay Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 26
[19] Justin McCarthy and Caroline McCarthy, Turks and Armenians: A Manual on
the Armenian Question, (Washington D.C.: Committee on Education, Assembly of
Turkish American Associations, 1989), p. 31
[20] Genelkurmay Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 26
[21] For the full text of the Treaty of Paris, see
www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/wilkinson/ps123/ treaty_paris_1856.htm
[22] For the full text of this Imperial Edict, see Enver Ziya Karal, Osmanlı
Tarihi, (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1977, Volume 5), p. 266
[23] See, www.polisci.ucla.edu/faculty/wilkinson/ps123/
treaty_paris_1856.htm
[24] Turgay Uzun, ‘Osmanlı Devleti’nde Milliyetçilik Hareketleri İçinde
Ermeniler’, in Hasan Celal Güzel (ed.), Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Ermeni Sorunu,
(Ankara: Yeni Türkiye Yayınları, 2001), p. 167
[25] In this section of the article, the web site of Ministry of Foreign
Affairs is mainly referred. URL:
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MainIssues/ArmenianAllegations/ARMENIANCLAIMSANDHISTORICALFACTS.htm
[26] Recep Karacakaya, A Chronology of the Armenian Problem with a
Bibliography (1878-1923), (Ankara: Directorate of State Archives
Publication, 2002), pp. 4-5
[27] Genelkurmay Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 73
[28] For a compact information about these political parties see Turgay
Uzun, op. cit., pp. 170-172
[29] Taken from the URL:
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MainIssues/ArmenianAllegations/ARMENIANCLAIMSANDHISTORICALFACTS.htm.
For a more compact analysis of the Hinchak Party program, see Genelkurmay
Askeri Tarih ve Stratejik Etüt Başkanlığı, op. cit., pp. 77-82
[30] Taken from the URL:
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MainIssues/ArmenianAllegations/ARMENIANCLAIMSANDHISTORICALFACTS.htm
[31] Musa Şaşmaz, ‘Ermeniler Hakkındaki Reformların Uygulanması’, in Hasan
Celal Güzel (ed.), Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Ermeni Sorunu, (Ankara: Yeni Türkiye
Yayınları, 2001), p. 173
[32] Taken from the URL:
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MainIssues/ArmenianAllegations/ARMENIANCLAIMSANDHISTORICALFACTS.htm
[33] Taken from the URL:
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MainIssues/ArmenianAllegations/ARMENIANCLAIMSANDHISTORICALFACTS.htm
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Ibid.
[37] Ibid.
[38] Ibid.
[39] For the full text of the Treaty of Sevres, see
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/versa/sevres1.html
Konrad Adenauer Caddesi No: 61 06550 Yıldız – Çankaya ANKARA
Tel: +90 312 491 60 70 Fax: +90 312 491 70 13
e-mail:
info@eraren.org web:
http://www.eraren.org/