CAMBRIDGE, Mass. – On May 20, an overflow, standing room only, audience of 250 filled Harvard University”s Kennedy School of Government”s Starr Auditorium for a highly anticipated address by Turkish scholar Taner Akçam. The event, co-sponsored by the Zoryan Institute, the National Association for Armenian Studies and Research (NAASR), the Mashtots Chair of Armenian Studies at Harvard University and the Harvard Armenian Society drew members of the Armenian community, academics and a sprinkling of Turkish students.
Akçam, who is well known for his acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide, is a rarity amongst Turkish scholars, being willing to speak publicly about the Armenian version of the events that took place in what is now modern Turkey from 1915-1923. He was been praised by Armenian scholars of the Genocide such as Vahakn Dadrian who has said, “[Akçam] is one of the first Turkish academics to acknowledge and discuss openly the genocide of the Armenians by the Ottoman Turkish government in 1915.”
Akçam’s thesis is that the gap between Turks and Armenians concerning the subject of the Genocide must be bridged through discussion. And he made significant point in his presentation, commenting that neither side ever looks at the other”s point of view. Armenians focus only on the Genocide, asking, in effect, “Why did this happen to us?”
Said Akçam, “The studies carried out by most Genocide scholars are done from the victim”s perspective. I approach the events from the point of view of the perpetrator. For the Armenians, the Genocide is seen as an exceptional event, an isolated accident of history, whereas the perpetrator sees it as an explainable product of a cultural process.”
Historians who take the Turkish view analyze the period in question as a period of “partition and decline of the Empire. They make no reference to the massacres or to the Genocide, or to the mistakes of the war.
And they feel that the Great Powers intervened too much. These historians are in a love relationship with Turkey ” they are Turkophiles,” said Akçam.
The other side, the historians who take the Armenian point of view, the victim groups, “emphasize the Genocide but you cannot find the story of the partition in their accounts. This side feels that the Great Powers did not intervene enough.”
The problem said Akçam is that these are two sides of the same coin, they deal with the very same events of history. “A balanced perspective must incorporate both views.”
Drawing from his new book, From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide, Akcam argued that Turkey”s transition from empire to nation state produced violence against Armenians and others, as Turks perceived that the Empire was in decline.
“Turks experienced social and political rage, a feeling of political collapse and a shaking of confidence in their society. The Empire”s members doubted the values that had been held until that point. This led to social disruptions, a feeling of defeat and decline, a massive internal trauma,” said Akçam. He continued, “Delusions of greatness gave way to feelings of helplessness, because Turkey could not realize its fantasy of greatness or devise a realistic solution to its problem. The resort to violence was inescapable.” In societies, said Akçam, “Individual instincts must be put under social control. There must be a reward for suppressing violence, and a feeling of pride in national identity is the reward.”
Akçam also insisted that the Genocide is not a problem in Turkey”s past but in its present. “It is a current problem, because if a country cannot face the fact of wrongdoing in the past, it cannot have a democratic future,” he said. Akçam argues that Turkey is facing the same problems it faced at the beginning of the 20th century. It wishes to be accepted as a great power, but still fears for its existence. The decline of the USSR has once again awaked Turkey”s fear of partition.
Turning to the question of available documents, Akçam conceded that any study of the Ottoman archives easily demonstrates the genocidal intent of the Ottoman authorities. Furthermore, said Akçam, “The views of Turkish society do not equal the views of the Turkish state. There is a large gap between what the Turkish state and Turkish society regarding the denial of the Armenian Genocide. These subgroups in Turkish society have their own collective memory,” he said.
The perpetration of the official Turkish state”s position of denial is perpetrated by the “continuity of the Turkish ruling elite. It is the same elite who founded the modern Turkish republic, and it is not easy for these people to call the founders “murderers and thieves,”” said Akçam. “The Genocide remains taboo because of this ruling elite, but Turkey wishes to be democratic, it wants to join the European Union, and knows that there must be a change in the ruling elite. Only a democratic country can discuss the past truthfully. And only if Turkey discusses the past can it become democratic.”
This was Akçam”s first appearance in Boston. He has not resided in Turkey for a number of years and is currently a visiting professor of history at the University of Minnesota. Prior to his most recent academic appointment, Akçam lived in Germany where he received a PhD from Hanover University. He was born in northeastern Turkey, became active in politics at an early age and eventually fled to Germany as a political refugee.
While Akçam did not fully address the issue of how private opinion sympathetic to the Armenian view can become part of public dialogue if that dialogue is constantly suppressed by the state, he is clearly committed to dialogue. The questions that followed his presentation, some from the Armenian community, and at least one, respectfully raised by a Turkish student, are evidence that the dialogue has begun. (ADL, May 27, 2004)
Yorumlar kapatıldı.