Monthly Archives: March 2010

ARMENIANS IN THE ECONOMY OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE – 2010-1

Economic reasons as influencial factors in the Armenian Genocide

Summary

Anahit Kh. Astoyan
As the ruling ethnic group in the Ottoman Empire, the Turks left the main spheres of the economy to the experienced representatives of the indigenous, civilized peoples of the countries they had conquered. Because of their skill, entrepreneurial mind, and diligence, Armenians, as the oldest bearers of the Western Asia’s civilization, gradually began to take up influential positions in the management of agriculture, foreign and internal large-scale trade, crafts, industrial production and finances in the Empire. They controlled the important elements of the Empire’s economy. Compared to the Armenians, the Turkish affluent class was peripheral and did not represent as an important element in the Ottoman economy. The Young Turk government, the organizer of the Armenian Genocide, besides their Pan-Turkic political goals, also intended to get rid of the Armenian economic competition.

After the deportation and massacre of Armenians, the Empire’s economy collapsed. By annihilating the Armenians living in Western Armenia and Armenian Cilicia, as well as in other parts of the Ottoman Empire, the Young Turk government eliminated its powerful competitor and was able to cover enormous war expenses and pay up its foreign debts simply at the expense of the Armenian wealth and belongings they had confiscated.

THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE – 2010-1

On the Applicability of the Fundamental Tenets of the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide“ adopted by UN on December 9, 1948

Summary

Vladimir D. Vardanyan
The article is dedicated to the issues of applicability of the 1948 UN Genocide Convention to the events constituting the Armenian Genocide. The international legal development of the prohibition of the crime of genocide in the framework of the United Nations is one of the focal aspects of the paper.

Having analyzed the controversial points of view on possibility of the retroactive application of the Genocide Convention author comes to the conclusion that there is no official position on that matter. The issue of retroactive application of the Genocide Convention as an issue of legal interpretation is exclusively under the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in accordance with Article IX of the Convention. Since there is no Court jurisprudence on the issue of its retroactive application, any statement for or against its retroactivity will remain non binding and disputable.

THE WORD ԵՂԵՌՆ (YEGHERN) AND THE SEMANTIC FIELD OF ITS EQUIVALENCE IN ENGLISH – 2010-1

Recommended for publication by the Department of Contemporary Armenian, Institute of Language, Armenian National Academy of Sciences

Summary

Seda Gasparyan
The article deals with the study of the Armenian word եղեռն (yeghern) and the semantic field of its equivalence in English. Proceeding from the well-established statement of the dialectical correlation between language and speech the author carries out the research on both the emic level (i.e. the language system) and the etic one (i.e. from the point of view of its functioning in speech). The study of the field of equivalence in the language system is based on different data registered in Armenian and English monolingual and bilingual dictionaries.

The confrontative study of these data reveals the presence of a common dominant seme (crime) in the semantic structure of the majority of them, as well as the possibility of rejecting some of the semantic equivalents offered.

By the research carried out on the etic level it is established that full equivalence is provided not only by semantic but also stylistic and pragmatic adequacy of linguistic elements. The role of the horizontal and vertical contexts, as well as the speech situation cannot be underestimated.

In the closing part of the article, the results of the investigation are summed up graphically presenting the constituent semes in the semantic globality of the word genocide ­ the only internationally established term, equivalent to the Armenian word եղեռն (yeghern).

THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IN KHOREN TER-HARUTYAN’S ART – 2010-1

Summary

Arthur A.Hovhannisyan
The article is a brief study of the famous Armenian sculptor-painter Khoren TerHaroutyan’s works of art echoing the cataclysmic events of 1915. Such works as “Deir El-Zor”, “In the waves of the Euphrates”, “I’ll curse the day when I was born,” encapsulating the artist’s childhood memories and tragic experiences, permeate with a deep feeling of suffering and pain. On the other hand, “Van” (“Partisan”), “The Vulture and the Skeleton,” “Little Mher,” and few others are varigated in style, demonstrating a particular trait in Khoren Ter-Haroutyan’s approach to sculpture and graphic art.

A HEROIC ATTEMPT TO SAVE THE WESTERN ARMENIAN SPIRITUAL TREASURES – 2010-1

On the expedition of Ervand Lalayan (September, 1915-March, 1916)

Summary

Alvard S.Ghazinyan, Lilit E.Mkrtumyan
The article is devoted to the activities of the folkloric expeditions headed by the famous ethnographer-folklorist, archeologist, pedagogue and public figure, E. Lalayan, in the years between 1915 and 1916. In the course of these expeditions, the team has been able to interview Armenian refugees forcibly deported from different parts of Western Armenia and record rich and valuable ethnographic materials which greatly enrich the spiritual treasury of the Armenian culture.

THE ETHNIC IDENTITIES OF MINORITIES IN TURKEY. A CHALLENGE AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT’S POLICY OF TURKIFICATION – 2010-1

Summary

Rubina Peroomian, Ph.D., California, Los Angeles
After a period of confusion at the end of World-War I, the Turkification of the ethnic and religious minorities in Turkey resumed in the Republican era. Kemalist secularization downplayed religion, but as soon as the days of Ismet Inönü, Islam began to slowly make its way into the center of the Turkish national discourse.

The policy of Turkification was pursued across all ethnic groups, in many instances resulting in persecutions and discriminatory treatment of the non-Muslim minorities. The 1934 decree to abolish non-Turkish surnames was a powerful strategy of Turkifying and homogenizing the diverse society. So was the 1942 wealth tax (varlık vergisi) which forced non-Muslims out of business by disproportionate and discriminatory taxes. Those who could not pay were exiled to labor camps. Then, it was the 1955 pogrom, organized in response to the Cypress issue. Greeks were the intended target, but Armenians and Jews too suffered the angry mob’s looting, raping, killing, burning of houses, and destruction of properties. As Rober Haddejian puts it, more painful than all that wreckage, was the shattering of Armenian hopes for a better future in Turkey. Adnan Menderes, the main organizer of these pogroms, was convicted and put to death for accusations unrelated to these pogroms and the tremendous destruction and death they caused. The next peak event in the process of Turkification and the government’s trampling on the rights of ethnic minorities was the 1960s campaign to prohibit the use of any language but Turkish. Significantly, beginning in 1965 the State Institute of Statistics omitted the question from the census concerning a person’s mother tongue.

The suppression of minorities in Turkey amplified by the rise of ultranationalist, Islamist elements and their involvement in the republic’s political process as well as their clandestine terrorist activities. Their covert manipulations and coercions in the name of nation’s interests are referred to as the workings of the deep state (derin devlet). The Islamist movement was briefly halted by the 1980 coup, but was resumed and, as Perry Anderson puts it, was reinforced by the Turkish Islamic synthesis as textbook doctrine. In the aftermath of the 1980 coup, repression against the Kurds took a new dimension: martial law in the south-east, a ban on using the Kurdish language and any cultural or political expressions of Kurdish identity spread over the entire country. This augmented repression pushed the Kurdish Workers party, towards paramilitary activities and an insurgence in 1984.

Acceptance in the European Union has brought about the government’s change of attitude toward minorities, especially Kurds who are in the spotlight more than others. Alevis remain in a worse condition. They are accused of “heterodoxy worse than Shiism,” even atheism. All the ethnic and religious minorities together figure one third of the entire population, and thus, as Perry Anderson puts it, one third of the population in Turkey is under systematic discrimination. Forced assimilation into the mainstream Turkish society—identity, culture, language, ethnicity—is in process engulfing all citizens of Turkey, be they non-Turk Muslims—Kurds, Lazs, Arabs, Circassians, Chechens—or non-Muslims such as Armenians, Greeks, and Jews.

In the case of the Armenian minority, the change to the worse occurred in the last two or three decades, and that is because of the political activities and armed struggle (the so called terrorist actions) of Diaspora Armenians for the world recognition of the Armenian Genocide. To counter these activities, the Turkish government fed its citizens with lies denying the Armenian claims, teaching them to hate Armenians. Taner Akçam, Osman Köker and many other Turkish intellectuals are trying to persuade the government to recognize the diversity of the Turkish society. Orhan Pamuk tries to show the importance of the multiethnic, multicultural society that existed in Turkey and the successive governments have tried to kill that. These intellectuals are digging for the truth in the past and are consequently harassed and persecuted. Hrant Dink’s assassination is a sad proof of that.

Moderate approaches to the history of Modern Turkey constitute the inclusion of the Armenian experience in the Turkish republican history, albeit showing the Armenian Genocide as forced migration. Significant among these publications is From Subject to Citizen in 75 Years (1999).

Contrary to the present day show of leniency toward minorities, however, the Erdogan-Gül government follows the criteria of Turkification. “One Flag, One Nation, One Language, One State” continues to be the slogan and the ideology enforced on Turkish society. Digression from that ideology is considered a criminal offense and is prosecuted under article 301.

Despite the fact that discriminatory treatment of ethnic and religious minorities is still a continuing reality in Turkey, the ever deepening of the sense of ethnic and religious identity is also a reality which has no doubt created a crisis in the Turkish supra-identity. The policy of Turkification has failed, and the government is no longer able to distort and falsify the diversity and enforce its own prescribed “national identity”.

THE POLICY OF TURKIFICATION OF THE ARMENIAN TOPONYMS IN THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY – 2010-1

The decree issued by Enver Pasha, the Minister of War, January 5, 1916 

Summary

Lusineh S. Sahakyan
Toponyms represent linguistic characteristicsw with important historical and political significance. The Young Turk rulers in 1916 Ottoman Empire and those in the Republic of Turkey realized the strategic importance of the toponyms and persistently implemented policies of distortion and appropriation. With the aim of assimilating the toponyms of the newly conquered territories, the Ottoman authorities translated them into Turkish from their original languages or transformed the local dialectal place-names by way of distortion to make them sound like Turkish wordforms. Yet another method of appropriation was that of the etymological misinterpretation of the toponyms in question. A widespread method was also renaming the places and discarding the former place-names altogether. The focus of the present article is the place-name transformation policy of the Ottoman Empire as well as the Republic of Turkey; the Ottoman (Latin-transcript)-Armenian translation of the decree, dating January 5, 1916, issued by Enver Pasha, the Minister of War, is presented in this article for the first time in English, Armenian and Russian translations. It concerns the transformation of “non-Muslim” place-names. The article also deals with the artificial term of “Eastern Anatolia”that was coined to replace Western Armenia, the political objectives of the pro-Turkish circle, as well as the aftermath of putting the mentioned ersatz term into circulation.

THE MEMORY OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IN VAHAGN DAVTYAN’S POETRY – 2010-1

Summary

Seyran Z.Grigoryan
The author of this article analyses works of Vahagn Davtyan that deal with the Armenian Genocide. He brings to light their historical and biographical background, artistic value, and relations to the poet’s time. The author uses Davtian’s poetic creations, as well as his memoirs, articles, and interviews to conclude that the poet’s creative works are important contributions to the legacy of the literary representations of the Armenian Genocide.

Vahagn Davtyan’s creative works with new motifs and interesting, specific solutions added to the poetic traditions created by Hovhannes Shiraz, Paruyr Sevak, Silva Kaputikyan and others.

THE PROBLEM OF CIVILIZATION HOMEOSTASIS IN GREAT ARMENIA – 2010-1

Part 2. The Extra-Social Civilization Homeostasis of Great Armenia: Tigran II.

Summary

Albert A. Stepanyan
The paper looks at the problems of extra-social homeostasis incorporated by the empire of Tigran the Great (80-60-s B.C.). Scholars define it as global civilization (Pax armenica) consisted of three basic elements. The first was Great Armenia, the core state. The second was “the visible empire” from Caucasian mountains to Egypt. The third represented “the charismatic empire” up to the borders of India.

The empie fell under pressure of Rome, and Great Armenia changed her status into the centre of the region “from Caucasus to North Mesopotamia”.The central issue of the metamorphosus the treaty of Artaxata has been detalized in the paper from the point of view of international right of the time.

THE QUESTION OF THE TURKEY’S INTERNATIONAL-LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY – 2010-1

(Conclusion and proposals)

Summary

Armen Ts. Marukyan
The Armenian Genocide is a historical reality awaiting today its internationalpolitical and international-legal resolution. Armenian historians have done a great job studying and presenting that crime of genocide committed against the Armenian people. Now it is high time to transfer the issue onto the international legal ground and, based on irrefutable facts, present well founded demands from the Republic of Turkey, the legal successor of the Ottoman Empire.

There are, of course, problems and complications of international-legal, as well as of political character involved; however, with the formulation of “a pan-Armenian conception concerning the elimination of the aftereffects of the Armenian Genocide,” it is possible to overcome these difficulties and achieve the restoration of the rights and interests of the Armenian people, and the elimination of the aftereffects of the Armenian Genocide.