The French Le Mond newspaper published noted French scholar Yves Ternon’s interview after the Venice scientific conference late in October. Below we present the interview.
– How did it happen that Yves Ternon, the surgeon, became a noted historian studying genocides?
– This is an extensive process that has been continuing for 40 years now. As a surgeon I was worried over the heinous experiments of nazi doctors during the WW II. I found out that they were totally connected with the Jewish Holocaust. I began reviewing into the matter together with my friend Dr. Socrat Hellmann and after having worked for 10 years I switched to the Armenian Cause. I say “Armenian Cause” as I was not sure at the time that I deal with genocide. I could not suppose that I will face the phenomenon of negation that gradually enlarges resulting today in nonsensical situations. Getting deeper into the issue of Armenian Genocide I could not overlook the fact any more. Later on I tried to include the issue of genocide definition into the context of 20-century atrocities. It is obvious that the two mentioned cases (with Armenians and Jews) as well as the actions against Tutsis in Rwanda are undoubtedly described as genocide. Concerning the atrocities committed by Red Khmers in Cambodia and the famine of 1932-33 in Ukraine, I can only say that they need to be investigated. I think that professionalism comes out in tough spheres. That is the reason why I will limit my comparative analysis’ circle with only the three mentioned genocides that will give us the chance for a better understanding of genocides.
– Did not your profession of surgeon enable you do suchlike researches?
– Not at all. By the way, that was due to my friends that I became doctor of history, not out of vanity but wishing to be a reliable specialist.
– Could you please tell about Venice scientific conference that took place at the end of October? Where did the initiative come?
– The conference was held on October 28-30. Father Zekiyan, former member of Mkhitarian Congregation, and Prof. Rigoy of Chini Foundation were the initiators. There were 20 scientists participating. We were hosted in San Giorno Majore Island. The aim of the meeting was to discuss the history of Armenian-Turkish relations. There were participants from Armenia, USA (Ruben Adalian), Canada (Prof. Frank Cholt), Israel (Prof. Charney), France (Ramón Gevorgian and me). There were scientists from Italy as well. Everything would be fine but for few braggart and provoking Turks. I don’t mean Mr. Zaraqolu and Taner Akcam, of course, they are independent historians, but I mean those scientists from Ankara and Istanbul. Hence, Prof. Bektay made a challenging speech saying that the principle of Armenian Genocide is not a subject of discussion. He said that Turkey is not ready to recognize Armenian Genocide, and that only progressive minds in Turkey speak about the Genocide. He said that Turkey needs to become EN member firstly and only then bring up such issues. That was simply a trap. It’s known that anyone mentioning the Armenian Genocide in Turkey is to get 10 years of imprisonment according to the 305 article of the constitution. In my speech I spoke about state negationism comparing Armenian Genocide with the Holocaust and the genocide of Tutsis in Rwanda. Bektay became blush. He showed few documents evidently abridged saying that he does not deny the fact of the Genocide. Whereas, it is banned to talk of Genocide in Turkey’s universities. German Prof. Geunz defended pastor Lepsius’ position. I told one of the professors from Ankara that he does not comprehend the essence of the Genocide. There may be no compromising, either you recognize the Genocide or you do not. I urged Prof. Bektay to inform his masters that denial is not the best way.
We learnt during the conference that there are two positions in Turkey, both governmental. First one is more hard-handed and prohibits any recognition, the second one tends to bury the hatchet but gains time till December 17 when the EU is to publish its report on starting accession talks with Turkey. Such a speculation is very worrying. Many traps have been set.
Despite all these the conference was on a high level. Speeches will be published soon.
– So the conference did not turn into political debate?
– No, our work was intellectual in essence. But there were still two opinions. Firstly, any time we raise the issue of the Armenian Genocide we find ourselves in politics and face hard-edged and dirty negation. Secondly, dialogue with Turkish intelligentsia from Turkey, i.e. people depending on the authorities, became impossible. It’s hard to believe, alas, that there are honest scientists among the Turkish intelligentsia today.
Yorumlar kapatıldı.