30/5/2008 - And the Moslem Victims?

Excerpts from the book:A Myth of Terror
Armenian Extremism:Its Causes and Its Historical Context
An Illustrated Expose by Eric Feigl

In the entire, very extensive literature published by the Armenian and pro-Armenian side concerning the tragic events, of World War I, one searches in vain for a single word of sorrow for the many the innocent Moslems who lost their lives during and after the Armenian uprising.

According to the reliable research findings of Professor Justin McCarthy, approximately 600,000 Armenian lost their lives as a result of uprisings, war, epidemics, relocation, flight, and starvation. At the same time, the same factors caused the deaths of two and a half million people on the Moslem side in the same regions. Most of these people were Turks.

It has only been recently, since the appalling assassinations of Turkish diplomats around the world, that the Turkish government has begun to pity more attention to the records of the atrocities perpetrated by Armenian fanatics.

The truth can occasionally be found by reading between the lines, as in Christopher Walker's book Armenia-The Survival of a Nation. On page 247, he writes of the bitter fighting between Turks and Armenians and its horrible consequences for the civilian population: "Atrocity and counter-atrocity by Turk and Armenian alike had brought tilt, situation to flash point, particularly at Erzinjdan. Wherever file truth about the atrocity stories lay (and it seems probable that the Armenians, seeking to avenge the genocide, were killing Turks without compunction)..."

As always in these cases, Armenians, or authors who sympathize with the Armenians, overlook the fact that the tragedy was largely brought on by the ruthless fanaticism of Armenian agitators who saw their people as "de facto belligerents". That is how the 1eader of the "Armenian Delegation", Boghos Nubar, expresses it in his letter of December 3, 1918 to the French foreign minister, Stephen Pichon.

To put this Armenian "war of liberation" into perspective, we can imagine what would have happened if the Albanians as the descendants of the Illyrians, had tried to regain control of the entire Balkan region and central Europe. They could have engaged in uprisings, bombings, murders, and assassinations, as well as the formation of volunteer units to fight in the war, all based on the "historical foundation" that the Illyrians had ruled over all of central and southeastern Europe before the invasion of tile Celts.

Armenian terrorism reached a new climax after the war. Its purpose was no longer merely the re-creation of "Greater Armenia" on the "historical territory of Greater Armenia", a kingdom that existed for a few decades two thousand years ago on lands that never in their history, contained a majority of Armenians. The new purpose also included revenge-on the Turks in general and on the leaders of the Turkish people in particular. After World War I the Armenian agitators kept pestering the allies and furnishing them with denunciations until the British finally decided to transport more than 140 Ottoman dignitaries-high officials, officers, cabinet members-to Malta. There they wanted to have a Malta Trial - almost like an attempted anticipation of the Nuremberg Trials.

With fine British humor, the prisoners were lined up for a group photograph in the splendid Ottoman cemetery of Malta, as if the British wanted to foreshadow the certain death sentence. Were these men who had been shipped off to Malta not mass murderers, armchair villains, and madmen? Were there not masses of concrete documents and testimony?

The Ottoman prisoners were held on Malta for more than two years. For more than two years, the winners of the war -especially the, British - searched feverishly for evidence. Neither in Paris nor in Istanbul nor in Anatolia could any evidence be found to support the charge that the Ottomans had planned a mass slaughter of the Armenians. Now it was up to the Americans. In America there were already powerful Armenian lobbies. In America, certain protestant circles had been carrying on an anti-Turkish smear campaign for decades. Surely in America there would be something to unearth, evidence to be found.

The answer from Washington read: "I regret to inform Your Lordship..." His Majesty's Ambassador in Washington had to inform His Lordship that the Americans could not produce any evidence against the prisoners in Malta either. Shortly thereafter, the Ottoman dignitaries were released.

On October 25, 1921, after more than two years of imprisonment, the accused Ottomans left the British colony of Malta as free men.

Outwardly, the British acted as if nothing had happened. The departure of the former prisoners was not mentioned anywhere. In the local press, there was nothing but a note in the "Sailed" column announcing that the H.M.S. Chrysanthemum and Montreal had left the harbor of Valletta bound for Istanbul. The Chrysanthemum was the yacht of the Maltese governor, and aboard were the freed Ottoman dignitaries - as the governor's honored guests - on their way home.

Unfortunately, the days of the "interregnum" (between the withdrawal of the Russian troops and the arrival of the Ottoman army) were used by Armenian terrorists as a last chance to "get even" with the Islamic population. Entire districts were wiped out. The terrorists apparently thought there was still something to "salvage" for the cause of "Greater Armenia".

The terrorists in Erzurum and Erzindjan were the worst: ". . . it seems probable that the Armenians, seeking to avenge the genocide, were killing Turks without compunction . . ." writes Christopher Walker on this subject. The Armenian national convention in Gumru-Alexandropol (today called Leninakan) was also held in April and was heavily influenced by these dramatic events. The convention rejected the terms of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and resolved at the same time to "carry on the war" single-handedly.

Only when their military position became untenable did the Armenians bow to the necessity of the hour. It was then that the "Seim" (Assembly) of the Transcaucasian Republic decided to negotiate with the Ottomans in Trabzon and recognize the decisions of Brest-Litovsk. That was no longer enough for the Ottomans, however.

The parties finally came together at the conference of Batum, on May 11, 1918, where Halil Pasha insisted that Akhaltsikhe, Akhalkalak, and Gumru be surrendered. The hostilities threatened to break out anew as Armenian units pillaged Moslem villages in the vicinity of Karakilisa. On May 26, amidst general turmoil and mutual dissatisfaction, the United Transcaucasian Republic disbanded. On the same day, Georgia declared its total independence. Azerbaijan followed suit.

Late in the night, between the 28th and 291h of May, 1918, the Armenian National Council declared Armenia an independent republic.

On June 4, 1918, peace appeared to be coming to this war-weary region, The Ottomans signed in Baku an agreement with Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan. They were joined four days later by Daghestan. Nakhichevan remained Ottoman, After all the rioting and unrest which had reigned in the Caucasian and eastern' Anatolian regions since the arrival of the Russians, after all the wars between the little nations, which only served the interests of the big nations, it appeared as if finally peace and understanding might come to the area.

In connection with the unfolding situation in the Caucasus and eastern Anatolia, there is one significant episode which should not be overlooked. It arose in the wake of the conference of Batum (May 11, 1918) and the founding of the Republic of Armenia, which had been made possible by the conference. The Ottoman delegates in Batum had promised that they would intervene to obtain a peace settlement between the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Bulgaria) and the new countries of the Caucasus region. That would mean recognition for Armenia as well. In the course of preparing for such a truce, a delegation of representatives form these lands came to Istanbul. The spokesmen for the Armenians were Messrs. Aharonian and Hadissian. They were received by Sultan Mehmed IV Vahdeddin after the Friday prayer (Selamlik) on September 6, 1918. On September 9, Mr. Aharonian sent the following telegram to Prime Minister Kachaznuni in Armenia:

On September 6th, after we were in the "Selamlik" we had an audience. We presented our congratulations on his accession to the throne. We submitted our best wishes for the development of the Empire and its well-being. We stated that the Armenian nation would never forget that it was the Ottoman Government which first conceived the idea of founding an independent Armenia, and recognized it, that the Armenian Government would do everything possible to protect friendly relations between the two countries and to strengthen them. His Majesty thanked us. He stated that he was very happy at seeing the envoys of independent and free Armenia, that lie wished not only her development, but that she be strong in order to retain her independence. His Majesty is entirely convinced that friendly relations will always exist between the two neighbouring countries, Turkey and Armenia, in order that both of them may develop. He concluded his remarks by stating that he was very happy to see that Armenia had the strength to found an independent state which was able to send envoys to Istanbul, and repeated his best wishes for our country.

reference; ataa.org