!ßÈÀ="justify">Last week nine intellectuals from Turkey published a declaration against a bill presented to the French Parliament to make 'denial of the Armenian genocide' a crime punishable by prison sentences and fines. A sizable part of the declaration was devoted to the criticism of the French approach on the grounds that the bill would restrict freedom of expression, disrupt the climate of debate and harm the efforts being made to create a common memory and history between the Turks and the Armenians. This is all very well. Thanks a lot.

 
  Last week nine intellectuals from Turkey published a declaration against a bill presented to the French Parliament to make “denial of the Armenian genocide” a crime punishable by prison sentences and fines. A sizable part of the declaration was devoted to the criticism of the French approach on the grounds that the bill would restrict freedom of expression, disrupt the climate of debate and harm efforts being made to create a common memory and history between the Turks and the Armenians. This is all very well. Thanks a lot.

  However, a closer look at the carefully written text makes it clear that this is not as innocent an attempt as it seems. Having drawn a lesson from the bitter experiences of the past, our intellectuals have obviously learned to express their views in diplomatic language, if not to conceal them. Without mentioning the word genocide, they say the 1915 incidents were genocide.

  To create that overall effect it was enough for them to use certain phrases in the text. Their first “finding” is that the Ottoman Armenians had met with an “inhuman disaster.” Immediately after that, they say that the “brutality of 1915” cannot possibly be denied by anyone calling himself a human being. Further in the text there are references to the need to fight “crimes committed against humanity” and the (Turkish) state's “policy of denial.”

  The conclusion to be drawn from these sentences of the text is along the following lines: “In 1915 the Ottoman Armenians met with (in other words were unilaterally subjected to) an inhuman disaster.” It is as if the historical facts (the Armenian insurgencies, the way the Armenians fought against the Ottoman armies -- either by joining the Russian armies or by forming bands that engaged in irregular warfare -- and the fact that Turkish and Muslim civilians also massacred by the Armenians in great numbers and that the 1915 incidents were a case of mutual killings between the two sides) are a figment of our imagination. It is as if.

  The reasoning implied in the declaration is as follows: “No decent person can deny the brutal acts committed in 1915. Yet the Turkish state does that. So the persons that make up the Turkish state, these ‘negators' must be considered inhuman.” Naturally, in addition to the state officials there are also those non-officials who support the official ideology. Since they too seem to be part of the “state,” it is dubious whether they are to be considered “human”! It is as if these intellectuals do know that these persons too are “inhuman” but are not saying so out in the open.

  The late Ambassador Kamuran Gürün is obviously to be considered “part of the state” since he had served as the undersecretary of the Turkish Foreign Ministry when he wrote his book titled “The Armenian File.” He did point out, however, that as many as 300,000 Armenians might have died in the incidents. He stressed that that was a tragedy. Obviously, this proves that he was human! Despite that, these intellectuals are accusing the Turkish state of “negation.” Then the only thing left to the state to deny is that the 1915 incidents was genocide. Since these intellectuals are not deniers, they must have recognized genocide.

  There is a reference to the “crimes committed against humanity” in the declaration. Genocide has been taken out of that category of crimes. It was of that specific crime that the Nuremberg tribunal tried and condemned the Nazi leaders.

  The declaration presents the 1915 incidents as genocide -- that is, in the manner the Armenians and the Westerners would understand -- and then proceeds to discuss how the issue should be debated. These intellectuals say that public debate on this issue has begun. They present the much-talked-about “Armenian conference” at Bilgi University as proof of democratization in Turkey. According to them, public opinion had been left in the dark over the past 90 years but now this veil is being ripped off.

  So we are supposed to be grateful for this democratic progress, for the way the republic's attempts to cover up the Armenian incidents are now finally being foiled! Has this republic taught its children about the tragedy of the 5 million Balkan and Caucasian Turks and Muslims who were killed and another 5 million exiled to Anatolia during the final century of the Ottoman era -- while the Armenian deaths were kept secret?

  To sum up, the declaration indicates in an implicit manner that the problem is genocide that the Turkish state denies and conceals. Now let us take a look at the role these intellectuals have undertaken to play in this August struggle. According to them, we are denying the Armenian “genocide” because our democracy is defective. So, to the extent that our democracy progresses, “the inhabitants of Turkey” (maybe in this particular case they mean only the ethnic Turks) will mature and become brave enough to face up to their past. This is similar to the Greek/Greek Cypriot duo's allegation that if we become more democratic we will solve the Cyprus problem and the Aegean issues according to the “highly democratic” Greek/Greek Cypriot demands.

  Who is waging this democratic struggle? Naturally, these intellectuals are. They bravely endure accusations of treason, calumnious remarks and trials. The West is not dumb. They would see this and help them a little, would they not?

  That declaration is -- just as Orhan Pamuk's famous words -- a terrific text that the Armenians and their Western supporters will be able to use for years and years. Our heartfelt congratulations!