Conference: New Approaches to Turkish-Armenian Relations (15-17 March 2006, Istanbul University)

The symposium had started with some meaningful gestures. First of all, for all the losses of World War I, the participants attended the stand of respect. Then, the National Anthem of Turkey was read by an Armenian girl, Katya Hallaço?lu, who had recently won a contest on the reading of the National Anthem. Third, there was a small concert, which had started with Armenian songs from the Chorus of Surp Takavor Church and continued with Turkish songs and ended with the Anthem of Tenth Year. All these gestures showed the cultural richness of Turkey to the participants and the world public opinion via press agencies.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül and some other ministers showed their support buy sending telegrams to the opening ceremony of the symposium. In the message sent by Abdullah Gül, it was reflected that in Turkish history there is no single page to be ashamed of and joint researches on the Armenian question is encouraged.

Before the sessions, there happened a minor incident regarding the cover of a book exhibited in front of the conference hall by the Gomidas Institute, in which the crescent of the Turkish flag is depicted as a knife. However, the discussion on that matter did not escalate. Another significant point was the lack of Armenian scholars who studied the so-called genocide and the Turkish scholars who had recently attended the contentious conference organized by Bilgi University. Although many of them were invited, they refused this invitation and they were sharply criticized by Turkish press.

In his inaugural speech, the Rector of Istanbul University, Prof. Dr. Mesut Parlak argued that the date 1915 connotes the concept of ‘genocide’; however the usage of this term impeded the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations. He further stipulated that in the roots of many contemporary conflicts lied fanaticism and the parliamentary resolutions that recognized the Armenian genocide were reflections of this fanaticism.

The first session of the symposium was devoted to the historical dimension of the Armenian Question. In his controversial speech, Yair Auron from Open University of Israel, who was renowned for his support to the Armenian allegations, spoke about the Jewish witnesses to the so-called Armenian Genocide. However, lack of enough authentic evidence as well as his unconditional support to the Armenian allegations makes him a target of several questions from the audience, including Prof. Dr. Yusuf Halacoglu, the President of Turkish Historical Society.

In his speech, Prof. Dr. Mehmet Saray underlined the role of foreign interventions in the evolution of the Armenian question. He argued that Turkish nation, as a ‘great nation’, would never commit such crimes as genocide. Such an articulation was reacted by Prof. Auron, who gave the example of the activities of Yavuz Sultan Selim.

In the light of the Ottoman legal system, Gülnihal Bozkurt argued that non-Muslim communities were given significant rights and used them extensively; however they were quite reluctant when it came to their responsibilities. She further noted that these communities impeded the implementation of reforms that were designed by the Ottoman Empire. Ali Arslan, on the other hand, emphasized the role of Armenian Church, which had been a significant factor in the nation-building process of Armenia and argued that today the Armenian Church could play a more positive role regarding the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations. Assist. Prof. Dr. E. Kürkçüo?lu commented on the Turkish sufferings in this period, whereas Prof. Dr. Servet Mutlu expressed his statistical studies on the Armenian population living in the Ottoman Empire.

The theme of the second session was the deportation itself. While Cem Özgönül tried to show the defacement of documents by Johannes Lepsius in the light of German archival documents regarding deportation, Prof. Dr. Hikmet Özdemir and Assoc. Prof. Dr. Yusuf Sar?nay evaluated the concept of deportation with reference to the Ottoman archival documents. Hilmar Kaiser searched for indications of genocide with reference to the reports of American missionaries in Merzifon, whereas Adam Balcer exposed his findings in the Polish archives, which refuted the genocide allegations.

The first session of the second day of the symposium was on the Armenian atrocities and propaganda. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Betül Arslan commented on the Armenian atrocities in Erzurum province in the light of archival evidence and criticized Prof. Auron’s speech, which lacked enough authentic evidence. Prof. Dr. Enver Konukçu underlined the Armenianization of Eastern Anatolia starting from fifth century onwards. Prof. Dr. Justin McCarthy, on the other hand, argued that Armenian revolts during World War I was organized in line with the Russian strategy, thus he stipulated that the Armenian-Russian connection should not be neglected.

Another discussion was on the famous Blue Book written by Arnold Toynbee. While the publisher of the Blue Book, Ara Sarafian tried to prove that all the documents in the book are authentic. Retired Ambassador and Member of Parliament ?ükrü Elekda? refuted his claims and showed how this book was nothing but a piece of propaganda. Following a speech on the resolution of the Armenian question in the Lausanne Conference by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ömer Turan, the Director of ASAM Research Institute for Crimes against Humanity, Retired Ambassador Ömer E. Lütem showed how this question of history was tried to be revived today with reference to international conjuncture and clash of interests. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sedat Laçiner and Jeremy Salt presented their articles on Armenian lobbying and propaganda activities.

In the second session of the second day regarding the legal aspect of the Armenian question, ASAM Law Advisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sadi Çayc? discussed the problematic usage of contemporary concepts in describing the past events and stipulated that this question could only be resolved legally. Following this, Prof. Dr. Aygün Attar delivered her speech on the Karabagh Question and the atrocities committed by Armenians in Karabagh region. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kamer Kas?m discussed the possible implications of the opening of Turkish-Armenian border, which had been closed for a long time because of Armenian occupation of Kelbecer region. The second day of the symposium ended with a cine-vision spectacle on the Armenian atrocities in Azerbaijan.

In the third day of the symposium the first session was convened to discuss the cultural, psychological, philosophical and humanitarian aspects of the Armenian question. The first speaker was Israel Charny, who made some general evaluations regarding the destructiveness of human beings. His speech was generally tilted towards the Armenians. His advices for Turkish society to understand the sufferings of the Armenians would not suffice, since noone tried to understand Turkish sufferings at that period. In his speech entitled “The Psychological Dynamics of Turkish-Armenian Relations: Psychology of Victimization and Large Group Identity”, Psychologist Sevinç Göral from ASAM analyzed the emergence of large-group identity and victimization psychology as well as their contribution to the ardent faith of the Armenians to the existence of the so called Armenian genocide.

In his emotional speech, a Lebanese Assyrian, Habib Afram, argued that they shared a similar past with the Armenians and that they did not blame Turkey for this problematic past. Bogos Levon Zekiyan, on the other hand, emphasized that the Armenian question was an anthropological and philosophical question, thus its limitation to the concepts of genocide or deportation made its resolution difficult.

ASAM President Rtd. Ambassador Gündüz Aktan dealt with the legal aspect of the Armenian question in a detailed way by articulating that the tragic events of 1915 can neither be accepted of genocide nor be limited only to the Armenians. This speech was a good combination of psychology and law and ended with an invitation that invited the Armenians to apply international courts. In the same session, Pulat Tacar summarizes the basic inter-communal problems and the methods to solve them. These speeches were followed by some other speeches on the role of genocide allegations on the construction of Armenian identity and the international aspect of this question

In an evaluation session presided by Prof. Dr. ?lber Ortayl?, Gündüz Aktan, Israel Charny, Mehmet Saray, Justin McCarthy and ?ükrü Elekda? discussed the uses of such conferences in giving up old traumas and more sound evaluation of historical facts.

As a result, this conference contributed to the emergence of a platform used by scholars having different perceptions, to the desire of Turkish and Armenian scholars to work together and to a more diversified analysis of the Armenian question. It also refuted the allegations against Turkey, which argued that there is no freedom of speech in Turkey. The symposium was quite successful in terms of its academic composition, its novel approach to the question, its timing and the messages given.