Admiration to Truth
If you read the posts from my other blog then you would probably think I revere Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. For a time, I did revere this man; he pulled up Turkish nation from almost certain disaster after World War I. It was largely through his iron fist that Turkey became a strong competitor of the western powers. Now even today they have one of the largest militaries in the world and complex economy many countries cannot match. However, while Mustafa Kemal may have believed he was doing the right thing, he did it through unethical means. I know that this post will be very controversial, and I ask for patience while reading it.
Ataturk (Father of the Turks) was an Ottoman soldier that became legendary after the Battle of Gallipoli and led Ottoman forces successfully throughout the rest of the war. Then he led Turkish forces against the imperialist powers of Greece, Great Britain, France, and Armenia. However, Armenia is a different story which I will go into more detail in a moment. He defeated these powers and established the Turkish Republic. He implemented a number of reforms including full suffrage for women, changing their alphabet from Ottoman to Latin, and many successful educational reforms. Nonetheless, the myth and cult of personality Ataturk has blinded many people surrounding the truth of how he obtained and maintained power.
During World War I the Ottoman government took part in the ethnic cleansing of Christian Assyrians and Armenians. Turkish people still deny this event because their argument involves the fact that there are still Armenians living within Turkey, and it was the war that killed these people. I do think one great argument that they do have is, "would there have been a genocide if WWI had broken out?" This is a great question that some ask. I would argue that it was already taking place with the Hamidian Massacres of 1894. These massacres continued on until the establishment of the Republic of Turkey in 1923. I cannot tell you numbers, but I feel like numbers do not matter. The people that were murdered in cold blood should not be designated a number. They were people and even if one person died as a result of discrimination against them then that is one too many. The phrase, "the ends justify the means" has been overused. The picture below is the result of that phrase.
These were people that wanted their own independence from the Ottoman Empire. They had a different culture, language, and religion. They fought alongside the Russians with tenacity and bravery. They tried to save the people they could before being "deported" by Ottoman forces. Now after World War I Talat and Enver Pasha (the main co-conspirators of the this travesty) were killed one by an Armenian and the other in battle. The vacuum of power was left open. Mustafa Kemal took advantage of the deteriorating Ottoman state under the Sultan Mehmed VI. What is not talked much about in Kinross's book is Mustafa's demands for the perpetrators of the Armenian genocide to be released. Let me be clear, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk did not directly take part in the Armenian Genocide. He was fighting at the Battle of Gallipoli when the majority of killing took place; nevertheless, while he never condoned the indiscriminate killing of Armenians, he never condemned it either. The evidence lies in his actions; he never punished those that did take part in extermination of Assyrians and Armenians. Instead, some were put in high positions of power within the new government. Old Armenian property was liquidated by the new government and other atrocities took place during the Turkish War of Independence.
At the Battle of Marash, by this time Mustafa Kemal was the leader of revolutionary forces, thousands of Armenian civilians perished. While some Armenians did live in Turkey peaceful even after the war, there is no doubt that they were specifically targeted by Turkish forces. Mustafa Kemal was an exceptional politician and understood who could take part in the future government and who could not. He condemned political "enemies" in his most famous speech "Nutuk." There he condemns many politicians that did not fall in line with his core beliefs or took some part in the Armenian genocide. He also had a bodyguard, Topel Osman, that carried out a murder on a political opponent (quite possibly), but he ordered his arrest when the murder took place and he and his men would die in a firefight. Topel Osman was directly responsible for murdering innocent Armenians and a known sociopath. However, Ataturk knew he could use him for a short period of time. Then he realized he had no place in the new order. He killed two birds with one stone.
Ataturk's cunning ability to use those that took part in this atrocity makes him at least partially responsible for the denial of genocide that is so prevalent today. This does not even begin to account for his brutal oppression of the Kurdish people when he was president. I am not trying to diminish this man's importance to Turkish Independence, but it does destroy its myth of glory. Ataturk was maybe the only one who could have saved Turkey, but he knew there was a high price to pay for it, and once Turkey recognizes its true past then maybe it can come to terms with a better more democratic future. One that is filled with less autocratic rule.
As someone that did admire Turkey and Ataturk for a long time, it was very disturbing and upsetting for me to understand the truth. I did not want to hear I did not want to believe it; I did everything I could to try and prove myself wrong, but I only found more evidence along the way. This is probably how we feel about ourselves when there is a vice we carry with us in every day life. We hate interventions and we do not want to hear from others that we are making a mistake, because that will destroy our belief that we are special and we are perfect in our own way. However, mistakes are meant to be pointed out. They should not be pointed out in some crude unemotional response, but through conversation. By the recognition of mistakes can people and individuals make themselves better. It is a learning process; no one is perfect. Everyone including nations make mistakes. It is important to never forget those you hurt, but also to ask for forgiveness is one of the greatest strengths someone can wield. We all want to have a past that we can lean on in times of despair and one that brings us joy and hope for the future. Nevertheless, the only thing that can change the future is the here and now. Once I realized that I cannot have some perfect ten year plan my life changed dramatically. It has better taught me to adapt to my circumstances and ask for forgiveness. I needed mainly to forgive myself, and I am still working on that one. It takes time and is process, but as of right now my only advice to Turkey would be try and accept what little truth you can. And it is a lot to ask of Armenia, Assyrians, and the Kurds for patience, but Turkey is still too nationalistic for that road of full acceptance. It is not fair what they did, but I do believe when they come to accept the truth, it will hurt deeply. Every country has their heroes and glorious pasts, it does not have to be for one specific time period. Remember Turkey, you used to rule one of the most accepting empires in the world in the 16th century.
For anyone interested in where I received this information I recommend checking out these two books. Also, I went ahead and placed more statistics regarding the Armenian genocide below.
1. Ataturk: The Biography of the Founder of Modern Turkey by Andrew Mango
2. Ataturk: An Intellectual Biography by M. Sukru Hanioglu
3. They Can Live in the Desert but Nowhere Else: History of the Armenian Genocide by Ronald Suny and Eric Weitz.
Ataturk (Father of the Turks) was an Ottoman soldier that became legendary after the Battle of Gallipoli and led Ottoman forces successfully throughout the rest of the war. Then he led Turkish forces against the imperialist powers of Greece, Great Britain, France, and Armenia. However, Armenia is a different story which I will go into more detail in a moment. He defeated these powers and established the Turkish Republic. He implemented a number of reforms including full suffrage for women, changing their alphabet from Ottoman to Latin, and many successful educational reforms. Nonetheless, the myth and cult of personality Ataturk has blinded many people surrounding the truth of how he obtained and maintained power.
During World War I the Ottoman government took part in the ethnic cleansing of Christian Assyrians and Armenians. Turkish people still deny this event because their argument involves the fact that there are still Armenians living within Turkey, and it was the war that killed these people. I do think one great argument that they do have is, "would there have been a genocide if WWI had broken out?" This is a great question that some ask. I would argue that it was already taking place with the Hamidian Massacres of 1894. These massacres continued on until the establishment of the Republic of Turkey in 1923. I cannot tell you numbers, but I feel like numbers do not matter. The people that were murdered in cold blood should not be designated a number. They were people and even if one person died as a result of discrimination against them then that is one too many. The phrase, "the ends justify the means" has been overused. The picture below is the result of that phrase.
These were people that wanted their own independence from the Ottoman Empire. They had a different culture, language, and religion. They fought alongside the Russians with tenacity and bravery. They tried to save the people they could before being "deported" by Ottoman forces. Now after World War I Talat and Enver Pasha (the main co-conspirators of the this travesty) were killed one by an Armenian and the other in battle. The vacuum of power was left open. Mustafa Kemal took advantage of the deteriorating Ottoman state under the Sultan Mehmed VI. What is not talked much about in Kinross's book is Mustafa's demands for the perpetrators of the Armenian genocide to be released. Let me be clear, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk did not directly take part in the Armenian Genocide. He was fighting at the Battle of Gallipoli when the majority of killing took place; nevertheless, while he never condoned the indiscriminate killing of Armenians, he never condemned it either. The evidence lies in his actions; he never punished those that did take part in extermination of Assyrians and Armenians. Instead, some were put in high positions of power within the new government. Old Armenian property was liquidated by the new government and other atrocities took place during the Turkish War of Independence.
At the Battle of Marash, by this time Mustafa Kemal was the leader of revolutionary forces, thousands of Armenian civilians perished. While some Armenians did live in Turkey peaceful even after the war, there is no doubt that they were specifically targeted by Turkish forces. Mustafa Kemal was an exceptional politician and understood who could take part in the future government and who could not. He condemned political "enemies" in his most famous speech "Nutuk." There he condemns many politicians that did not fall in line with his core beliefs or took some part in the Armenian genocide. He also had a bodyguard, Topel Osman, that carried out a murder on a political opponent (quite possibly), but he ordered his arrest when the murder took place and he and his men would die in a firefight. Topel Osman was directly responsible for murdering innocent Armenians and a known sociopath. However, Ataturk knew he could use him for a short period of time. Then he realized he had no place in the new order. He killed two birds with one stone.
Ataturk's cunning ability to use those that took part in this atrocity makes him at least partially responsible for the denial of genocide that is so prevalent today. This does not even begin to account for his brutal oppression of the Kurdish people when he was president. I am not trying to diminish this man's importance to Turkish Independence, but it does destroy its myth of glory. Ataturk was maybe the only one who could have saved Turkey, but he knew there was a high price to pay for it, and once Turkey recognizes its true past then maybe it can come to terms with a better more democratic future. One that is filled with less autocratic rule.
As someone that did admire Turkey and Ataturk for a long time, it was very disturbing and upsetting for me to understand the truth. I did not want to hear I did not want to believe it; I did everything I could to try and prove myself wrong, but I only found more evidence along the way. This is probably how we feel about ourselves when there is a vice we carry with us in every day life. We hate interventions and we do not want to hear from others that we are making a mistake, because that will destroy our belief that we are special and we are perfect in our own way. However, mistakes are meant to be pointed out. They should not be pointed out in some crude unemotional response, but through conversation. By the recognition of mistakes can people and individuals make themselves better. It is a learning process; no one is perfect. Everyone including nations make mistakes. It is important to never forget those you hurt, but also to ask for forgiveness is one of the greatest strengths someone can wield. We all want to have a past that we can lean on in times of despair and one that brings us joy and hope for the future. Nevertheless, the only thing that can change the future is the here and now. Once I realized that I cannot have some perfect ten year plan my life changed dramatically. It has better taught me to adapt to my circumstances and ask for forgiveness. I needed mainly to forgive myself, and I am still working on that one. It takes time and is process, but as of right now my only advice to Turkey would be try and accept what little truth you can. And it is a lot to ask of Armenia, Assyrians, and the Kurds for patience, but Turkey is still too nationalistic for that road of full acceptance. It is not fair what they did, but I do believe when they come to accept the truth, it will hurt deeply. Every country has their heroes and glorious pasts, it does not have to be for one specific time period. Remember Turkey, you used to rule one of the most accepting empires in the world in the 16th century.
For anyone interested in where I received this information I recommend checking out these two books. Also, I went ahead and placed more statistics regarding the Armenian genocide below.
1. Ataturk: The Biography of the Founder of Modern Turkey by Andrew Mango
2. Ataturk: An Intellectual Biography by M. Sukru Hanioglu
3. They Can Live in the Desert but Nowhere Else: History of the Armenian Genocide by Ronald Suny and Eric Weitz.
Comments
Post a Comment