Turkey OKs Film on Armenian Deaths

miami.com ^ | Tue, Dec. 30, 2003 | AP

[Destro]

Posted on Tue, Dec. 30, 2003

Turkey OKs Film on Armenian Deaths

Associated Press

ISTANBUL, Turkey - Turkey's Culture Ministry has agreed to allow a movie about the killings of Armenians at the time of World War I to be shown in Turkey but at least one scene will be cut from the film, an official said Tuesday.

The film "Ararat," by director Atom Egoyan, a Canadian of Armenian heritage, recalls the plight of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey at the time of World War I.

Armenians say that a 1915-1923 campaign to force Armenians out of eastern Turkey left 1.5 million people dead and amounted to genocide.

Turkey says the figures are inflated and that Armenians died during civil unrest and not as the result of a planned campaign.

A ministry commission, which reviewed the movie last week, said it was suitable for viewing in Turkey but added that at least one scene depicting the rape of Armenian women by Ottomans would be censored, a Culture Ministry spokesman said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The film is expected to open in Turkey in mid-January.

Culture and Tourism Minister Erkan Mumcu expressed support for showing the movie in Turkey.

Turkey "can easily tolerate such things," Mumcu told reporters on Friday. "Those who want to see it can go and see the movie ... Strong reaction to this movie would only help keep the subject on the agenda."

Former Turkish Culture Minister Istemihan Talay had denounced the movie, which was shown at the Cannes film festal last year, as "propaganda."

Turkey's new government, which assumed power last year, has pledged to expand freedom of expression as part of its bid to join the European Union.

ea-lm

[Destro]

A way for the ruling Islamists to take down the Turkish military establishment down a peg? Just musing.

[Destro]

bump

[Burkeman1]

I am not sure about this Armenian Geonicide charge. Granted they were stripped of land and holdings but I think 1.5 million is a vastley inflated number from what I have read.

[Destro]

I think it is closer to 2 or 3 million if you add the Greeks.

[Burkeman1]

Honestly? I am not well read on this subject. But I suspect there was a bit more Christian solidarity and propaganda back in Europe then, then there is now. If it was that bad there would have been a bigger outcry. Or was it only brought up when England wanted to go to Gallipoli? Wouldn't surprise me.

We go out of our way to manufacture "Muslem victims" in Europe to show how bad we westerners and to show how "bad bad" Christians are now! (Milosevic Calling)?

[Destro]

The proof is in the fact that just like there are few Jews left in Germany and Poland there are few Greek and Armenians left in their lands.

Also you have it backwards. While the genocide began during WWI it did not come to an end until 1923. The Western Powers did nothing to stop this nor did they want to stop it. So unlike the demonization effect to ensure a policy that you are referring to that has happened in Europe during Clinton-no such policy occurred towards Asia Minor.

[Old Student]

The modern Republic of Turkey did not even exist until 1923. That is when they "reconstituted" Turkey from the remains of the Ottoman Empire, after they sided with the Kaiser in WWI. I wouldn't doubt that the numbers are either higher or lower than claimed, myself. A lot of the folks there were illiterate in Turkish and Arabic (they used the same script for both languages then) and record keeping was not a national pastime. Say a ballpark 1 to 3 million?

Most of the Armenians that survived moved to Armenia or Georgia or points east, and quite a few came to the USA. Most Greeks moved to Greece, or, again, moved to the USA. It is quite possible (probable, in fact) that some who moved elsewhere are listed as casualties by their families because they never regained contact. I know there were thousands who came here, anyway, and I seem to remember that even Afghanistan has a small but significant Armenian population. Armenia has a population of a bit more than three million people, so anything resembling those numbers would be catastrophic even at the low end. That said, I'm glad the Turks are finally facing that specter; maybe both parties can get over it, if they can ever discuss it rationally.

[Turk2]

The total number of Armenians in Eastern Anatolia at the time was 1.3 Million. At the end of WWI around 750,000 had migrated to Europe, America and Turkish territories in the south where they were relocated. Several tens of thousands moved westward in Turkey and several tens of thousands moved to Armenia. During the same time period, more than 500,000 Turks were killed by Armenian gangs in Eastern Anatolia adding to the 3-5 million Turks killed between 1908-1918 due to forced migration, disease, famine and massacres at the hands of Serbs, Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians, Russians and Arabs. These are all documented facts and the documents are open for academic scrutiny in the Turkish national archieves.

Link to the national archieves : Turkish National Archieves [English version not up yet]

All the info you need : The Armenian Question

[Turk2]

Your unbelievable remarks about the Turkish War of Independence are an indication of your ignorance. There are fewer Greeks in Anatolia because:

1 - The Greek population in western Anatolia sided with the invading Greek forces after WWI and those who had actively aided them fled while the Greeks were being pushed back to the sea in 1922.

2 - After the signing of the treaty of Lausanne when Turkey's western and eastern borders were set and Turkey waived its rights of compensation for the attrocities committed by the Greeks during their 3 year occupation of western Anatolia in return for Eastern Thrace, Greece and Turkey signed a seperate population exchange aggreement which ended in the migration of 1-1.5 million Greeks from Turkey to Greece and 4-8 hundred thousand Turks from Greece to Turkey.<3> 3 - Most of the Greek population in Istanbul was pressured into migrating to Greece between 1955-1964. The problem began when the government in 1955 needed popular support for the Cyprus issue and organized a series of anti-Greece demonstrations in Istanbul after a staged provocation. The demostrations went out of control and the Greek sector of the city was looted by the demonstrators brought in from the Black Sea region. Several people were killed and the Greek sector of the city was devastated. The government officials responsible for the incident were later executed following the coup d'etat in 1960 for reasons including the pogroms in 1955.

[Destro]

Be they all killed or some killed off and others moved off that is still genocide.

[Destro]

Turkish war of independence from who? Themselves?

[Old Student]

I lived in Turkey for three years. Two years at Incirlik Air Base, 1983-1985, and one year at Pirinclik Air Station, Diyarbakir, 1986-1987. I lived on the economy for most of my tour at Incirlik, met hundreds of Turks, and befriended, and was befriended, by a couple of dozen of them. I have found the Turks to be mostly devout Muslims without being fanatical about it. I found them good friends. I am absolutely certain they would make bad enemies.

All that said, I can believe in the Armenian Genocide, to a point; the Armenians share many characteristics with the Turks, and during a time of upheaval like the period from 1915-1923, I can see a lot of harshness on both sides. Both groups also have long memories, and do not forget insult easily. Even if this film is a total hatchet job, the fact that it is being allowed to play in Turkey is a very good thing. I know for a fact that many Turks don't believe anything like that ever happened, getting another point of view on the subject will be good for them. In the long run, it will be good for them, and for their relations with the Armenians.

I've found Turks to have a significant amount of empathy for others, and this will help them see how some others see them. You might want to consider having some well-respected Turkish director do a movie about the Armenian Genocide from the Turkish point of view; Turkey had a rough time, and with a little help from the Europeans (and Americans, too, for that matter) it could have been the Turkish Genocide. My reading of history tells me that there were those who wanted to see Turkey completely obliterated; Mustafa Kemal was a genius to have prevented that, given his resources. I still have the little figurine of "Memetchik" that I got in the Alley, outside Incirlik. (for others who have no idea who that is, he's the Turkish equivalent of our G.I. Joe, and I don't mean the 12" action figure from the 60's, but the guys who broke the Kaiser and the Third Reich, and stared down the USSR. Like our guys, you might be able to kill him, but that is the ONLY way to stop him.) My dad is a tough old guy, and if I ever have to fight him, I figure I'll need to shoot him three or four times to even things up a little. If we ever have to fight the Turks, I figure we better start by turning their whole country into a glass parking lot. I respect them like I do my dad, and I do NOT want to just piss them off.

[Destro]

At least your number 2 is honest and accurate.

[Old Student]

After WWI, the Europeans tried to destroy the Ottoman Empire. Instead, they provoked a young Turkish Army Colonel, Mustafa Kemal, into leading a war of survival. They drove the occupiers of the heartland of their country right into the ocean, in some places. Much of the empire was partitioned, Iraq, Iran, Palestine, that whole region, was created from bits and pieces of the Ottoman Empire. The Europeans paid no attention at all to what land was occupied by what people, and left us the mix that has resulted in our little difficulties today. Europe, and the Treaty of Versailles, set us up for the War on Terrorism. Those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it. In spades, and with numerous variations on an unpleasant theme.

There is a book called "Grey Wolf" that you should read. It is a biography of Mustafa Kemal, whom they call Attaturk, the Father of the Turks. He is their George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln, all rolled into one.

here is a condensation of his biography, by people who consider him the enemy of Islam.

http://bismikaallahuma.org/History/ataturk.htm

[Destro]

Attaturk is Saddam with good PR. He is not George Washington or any way like our founding fathers because he refused to step down from power, nor did he limit and subordinate the military to the will of the people. The Turkish elite in fact fear the will of the people because the will of the people is not "Turkish". The big dark secret of Turkey is that it is an artificial nation whose people are anything but Turks. It is why those that rule Turkey do not trust the "Turkish" people.

[Old Student]

So? How much time have you spent there? He died in 1939, after saving at least the core of his country from destruction. He held it together practically by force of will for the first decade after the Republic was established, and he only lasted a total of about 16 years after that same date. I suppose he could have gone completely sour, but Saddam STARTED that way.

He started with a bunch of people who barely remembered they were Turks, and literally forged a nation of them. Despite his warts and blemishes, he is still the best thing to ever happen to Turkey, and he is revered there much as George Washington is here. You make that kind of comment over there, don't expect to get out of the country alive, and it won't be the military who does you in, either. In fact, if they don't kill you, you WILL wind up in jail, and the "Midnight Express" movie is not particularly inaccurate as far as its depiction of Turkish prisons. They have an Insult Law there, and insulting Attaturk is very high on their list of bad things to do. He is, in fact, like the three gentlemen I mentioned, because he did what they all did. Built his nation, gave it a constitution, and held it together through adversity. Yes, he could have ruined it, if he had lived long enough, but he didn't. Most Turks will tell you that although they don't agree with everything he did as their leader, he was a strong leader, and they needed one very badly. George Washington wasn't a perfect leader, either. Just the best we had at the time. Mustafa Kemal Attaturk was just exactly that for his people, and deserves the respect he has in his own country.

[Destro]

People forced to be Turks or else. Sounds Stalinistic to me.

[Old Student]

My question to you was what do you know, not what do you think. I've already figured out what you think. I repeat: how much time have you spent in Turkey? How many Turks do you actually know?

I think you don't even have a clue what "Stalinistic" means. Perhaps you can elucidate?

[Beck_isright]

"Attaturk is Saddam with good PR."

Did you ever go over there on duty with the Uncle Sam tour? Unless you've been there, you really don't have a factual basis to speak from.

[Destro]

I have been there. Ever see those Mosques that used to be churches? Those Christian cities that are now empty of Christians? So as long as they are nice to a redneck in uniform we can forgive their tendency to kill Christians of the local variety. I mean those Christians don't look like Americans anyway with their swarthy looks and non Protestant funny looking Christain churches.