‘No party would accept joining a debate where defeat is certain beforehand. Both parties should appropriate a partial defeat as well as a partial predominance for itself,’ Mahçupyan said. He emphasized governments should be able to voice loudly that building the future is their business in spite of whatever happened in history
EMİNE KART
ANKARA – Turkish Daily News
The Turkish government has recently taken steps aimed at resolving a matter that has long been a barrier overshadowing its international relations, namely Armenian allegations of genocide at the hands of the Ottoman Empire during World War I, and called on Yerevan to set up a joint scholarly research committee in order to discuss and investigate events.
It is still unclear whether Ankara and Yerevan will be able to sit around the same table, but both capitals have given positive signals. And yet, Armenia that places “genocide” as a grounds for its own existence doesn’t actually want to argue whether genocide actually occurred or not, while Ankara, on the other hand, calls on Yerevan to put to one side its genocide claims in order to create an appropriate environment to start a political relationship.
Turkey categorically denies Armenian charges alleging that 1.5 million Anatolian Armenians were killed during a genocide campaign between 1915 and 1918; while Armenian diaspora has unleashed its press on the international community to pressurize Turkey to accept their allegations as truth. Turkish proposals for an expert and authoritative research of the relevant history are unacceptable to Armenians who claim that “genocide” is a historical fact and sees debate over the issue as anathema.
Vicious circle around a definition:
Despite an optimistic and confident image — strengthened by the international community’s applause for the recent initiative launched by Ankara — that Turkey has projected, one cannot keep asking where such discussions may lead to, given that the entire discussion has been revolving around a single definition — “genocide.” A definition that, of course, is patently indispensable for Armenia, while being totally unacceptable to Turkey.
“The genocide question has become a foreign policy issue and has entered into common parlance in both the nationalistic movements in both Turkey and Armenia, indeed, such a situation shifts the emphasis of the whole issue. However, what Turkey has been doing is neither a proper study of history nor is it a real political initiative,” Zaman daily columnist Etyen Mahçupyan said in a telephone interview with the Turkish Daily News.
Genocide is a legal term, whereas law is not the only aspect of the issue concerning the tragic events during World War I that took place in Anatolia. Furthermore, there are two more indispensable aspects in discussing such an issue; its impact upon the two nations and the two people’s relationship while trying to understand the non-existence of any relationship between those countries and peoples.
Mahçupyan believes that any discussion conducted under the banner of “genocide” will lead nowhere, but will serve as a tool for nationalist movements in both Turkey and Armenia. Regarding those aspects of the issue, Turkey should develop a policy concerning the aspect in which it really has power, he said.
Focusing on where you have power:
“Turkey, as a nation state, has the right to deny or accept genocide allegations. But Turkey doesn’t have the right to conduct flawed policies that may lead itself into a quagmire.”
What Mahçupyan perceives as wrong policy for Turkey is “Turkey trying to create an alternative history, instead of focusing on the essential aspect of the issue of which Turkey has power, namely, its political aspect.” He suggests that Turkey should conduct a pro-active policy concerning its relations with Armenia by distancing history and politics from each other.
“No party would accept joining a debate where defeat is certain beforehand. Both parties should appropriate a partial defeat as well as a partial predominance for itself,” Mahçupyan said. He emphasized governments should be able to voice loudly that building the future is their business in spite of whatever happened in history.
It may as well be the starting point for the individuals of Turkey, noticing that the tragic events of 1915 are not solely a matter related to Turkey’s or Armenia’s history as the issue is a part of the common history of Turks and Armenians. In Mahçupyan’s own words; the tough question in front of Turkey now is whether it will be able to give up “imprisoning history in legal terms.”
Yorumlar kapatıldı.