Those territories and nations that were ruled rather peacefully for many centuries under the Ottoman millet system seem to have plunged into an endless cycle of military and/or social conflicts since they became independent: the Balkans, the Cacasus, the Middle East, North Africa, central Asia… While the genie is out of the Ottoman bottle and cannot be put back in, and I am not advocating such an archaic and obsolete idea anyway, there is still something to be said about this millet system. Some Western writers even suggested recently that the millet system deserves another look as it could solve many of the problems and violent conflicts around the globe today, including but not limited Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Israel-Palestinian, former Yugoslavia and former Soviet republics, and others. (Armenian aggression and ethnic cleansing in Azerbajan, however, must be stopped and the situation rolled back to pre-war conditions first to benefit from the magic touch of the millet system.)

My intention in this essay is not to propose the Ottoman Millet System as a cure-all remedy for all the current conflcts around the world (though that idea definitely deserves another look), but to share with you the fact that the written archives of that magnificent empire are maintained meticulously by The Turkish State Archives since 1923.

The Ottoman Imperial Archives is one of the richest in the world and, naturally, the most frequently consulted colection of written sources with regard to the 1915 events. Any research that failed to consult the Turkish State Archives in matters relating to the common histories of Middle and Near East, Balkans, Mediterranean, North Africa, Arabic countries, Caucasus, and beyond, would simply be incomplete. It would be like trying to solve a dispute bwteen two parties by hearing only one of those parties. It would be unfair, incorrect, unscholarly, and unethical.

The General Directorate of State Archives under Turkish Prime Ministry, located in Ankara, Turkey, has taken all the necessary measures to enable the fast and effective availability of documents to researchers. Turkish State Archives have been brought in line with European Union regulations, which means relevant laws have been amended to enable the same-day-issuance of the research permits. A comprehensive web page (www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr) has been created to include digital copies of classified documents and their translation into contemporary Turkish. Inclusion of English translations of the authentic documents is underway. These initiatives have already resulted in scholars from 80 countries to engage themselves in the archives since 2003.

CLAİMS OF THE ARMENİAN LOBBY

The Armenian lobby which pushes hard for the recognition of their claim of genocide continue to also allege that the Turkish State archives are not open at all, not open fully, have been cleansed of certain documents; or that the archives belonging to Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa (Ottoman Intelligence Agency) or to the Ottoman Army are hidden; or that Talat Paşa had sent to his officials, two conflicting orders at the same time, carrying the same document number, the evil one of which was to be destroyed upon reading… Let us analyze those accusations one by one.

ARMENIAN ALLEGATİONS OF CLEANSED ARCHİVES

The Ottoman Empire has one of the most developed and rooted archiving traditions in the world. This system, which is still being used, requires each and every document to have a distinct document and file number. Furthermore, a copy of the identical document is possessed by several government institutions and relevant bodies, as well as international interlocutors, depending on the content. In this system, it is almost impossible to fail to notice the absence of a particular document as the document numbers progress consecutively. Moreover, the same document would have to be removed from ALL institutions archives, with a hopefully-very-lucky prediction of which institutions, besides the actual addressee, might have received a copy a hundred years ago.

It is for this reason that the order of temporary resettlement (May 27, 1915) , order for the arrest of the leaders of Armenian revolutionary committees (April 24, 19915), orders regarding the measures taken for the protection of Armenian orphans and properties (throughout 1915 and 1916) , are to be found in matching copies in various different subarchives of the Ottoman system. It is simply impossible to carry out a perfect cleansing of hundreds of thousands of documents spread to thousands of known and unknown institutions over many years ) to a degree that not one scholar, researcher, or historian in the past 90+ years was able to come up with a single evidence that shows the alleged Ottoman intent to exterminate Armenians.

In the absence of the possibility of the complete destruction of any particular document, a second option of cleansing would be to replace or revise a document, which again seems rather risky in today’s techniques of identifying the authenticity of any artifact.

ARMENIAN ALLEGATİONS THAT TESKILAT-I MAHSUSA AND MILITARY ARCHİVES ARE NOT OPEN

The Ottoman Military archives documents are under the supervision of Turkish Chief of Staff and available, along with the Collection of First World War, including the correspondence of the TESKILAT-I MAHSUSA, to those interested researchers.

ARMENIAN ALLEGATİONS THAT İTTİHAT VE TERAKKİ ARCHİVES ARE NOT OPEN

Allegations that İttihat ve Terakki (Union and Progress Party in Power at the time) archives are not open:

The correspondence by the leaders of the İttihat ve Terakki Partisi ( The Party of Unıon and Progress) from the dates of the party’s ascendance to power to the end of their rule, have been included and classified in the Ottoman Archives and made available with unlimited access to those interested sholars.

ARMENIAN ALLEGATİONS THAT TALAT PASHA SENT DOUBLE TELEGRAMS, ONE CONFLICTING WITH THE OTHER

Allegations that �Talat Paşa had sent two conflicting orders under the same document number: the good one to be kept ın fıles for all to see, and the evıl one to be destroyed after enacted:

This far-fetched argument can be held against any document of any archive in the world. It is indeed a challenge that would bring into question the validity of all archives in the world and the whole idea of archiving.

Furthermore, it would be unrealistic to assume that Talat Paşa, in 1915, predicted that some thirty years later, a crime called genocide would be invented and that he, himself, would be accused of it; and that for this reason he had to create a secondary system of communication, in the heat of a war when the very survival of the state was in question.

Leave it to Armenians, like Andonian, to fabricate, lie, distort, allege, and do everything else to defame, but still produce no evidence. There are sayings for just this kind of behavior:

Throw the mud on the wall; even if it is washed away, there will still be a stain.

If enough people tell the same lie enough times, people will eventually start believing.

***

WHAT EXACTLY ARE WE LOOKİNG FOR İN THE ARCHİVES?

In 1919, 140 of Turkish prominent figures of the time were arrested and deported to Malta by Great Britain, with 58 of these being charged with outrages to Armenians both in Turkey and Southern Caucasus. Upon the British government�s initiative to bring these officials before a tribunal, the Law Officers of the Crown, in a memorandum to the Cabinet dated August 4, 1920, documented that no material evidence existed about such “massacre” although they had free access to the Ottoman archives in İstanbul that was under Allied occupation- and abstained from accusing any of the Turkish deportees. Attorney General refused to get involved in such a case, where he carefully avoided the usage of the term massacre, which was frequently referred to by Allied wartime propaganda machines. Consequently, all Turkish deportees in Malta were returned safely to Turkish soil October 31, 1921.

What is even more ironic is the fact that the British prosecutors had the �Blue Book� in their hands, a wartime propaganda book compiled by Bryce and Toynbee listing Armenian tall tales fabricated by Armenian nationalists, clergy and circulated by the U.S. Protestant missionaries, which book convicted and condemned the Turks in its first page and every page aftre that… Imagine that! The British legal experst would dismiss a British-written book, the main pillar on which the Armenian lobby base their claim of genocide even to this day! And the Armenian attempts to document such a grave accusation as “genocide”, to this day, remain in vain.

The permanent failure of the Armenian lobby to find any proof of their false accusations of genocide in the Ottoman Archives would understandably direct the partisans of the official Armenian position, to question the reliability of a centuries old tradition of state archiving, instead of the reliability of the Armenian accusations.

Yet, it is high time that somebody reminds the archive-bashers that the Armenian archives in Yerevan, and Tashnak and Armenian Republic Delegation Archives in Boston have been kept behind closed doors altogether. Talk about shameful double standards.

If information is power, then the awesome power of the Turkish archives still await their unleashing…

And those partisans who love to claim that the alleged Armenian Genocide is an open and shot case, might as well prepare for the ultimate humiliation. The truth is already bringing the Armenian house of cards tumbling down…

- Why armenia archives don’t open?
Because genocide is a big LIE.

1.   The Turks occupied Armenia and deported the Armenians.

2.   The Turks systematically massacred the Armenians from after Russo-Ottoman War in 1877-78.

3.   From the beginning of 1915, the Turks methodically annihilated the Armenians.

4.   Talat Pasha gave secret commands for the annihilation of the Armenians.

5.   1.5 million of Armenians had been killed in the genocide.

All these claims can be vanished with an objective research:

- When the Turks came to Anatolia, an independent Armenia did not exist; thus, it is impossible to say that the Turks occupied the Armenian lands.

- The Armenian riots following the Russo-Ottoman War in 1877-78 are mentioned above. Today it is clearly known that the Armenians revolted to attract the attention of the European Powers.

- Events of 1915 were just a measure taken by the Ottoman government to provide security in its territories against the Armenians who stabbed the Ottoman Army from its back. Besides United Nations describes genocide as a government’s intention to annihilate a race. There is no evidence to prove such an intention of the Ottoman government. The Ottoman archives are opened to the historians and any further investigation would reveal the facts.

- Armenian historian Andonyan claimed that he found the confidential documents of Talat Pasha and for many years these documents used as the evidence of so-called genocide. However, two Turkish historians researched those documents and proved they are counterfeit.

- These telegrams were published in British “Daily Telegraph” in 1919. It was believed that during the occupation of Aleppo forces of General Allenby had found some documents remained from the Ottoman government. When the British Foreign Affairs Bureau have investigated this issue, they have learnt that the documents belonged to an Armenian group in Paris. The original documents of this investigation are still in the British archives.

Talat Pasha was killed by an Armenian terrorist called Tehliryan, in Berlin. During Tehliryan’s trial in Berlin, five of those counterfeit telegrams adduced to the court although their nullity was proven. The language and the paper of the telegrams were not in the Ottoman style and the experts have clarified this fact.

The number of the Armenian casualties does not have any valid basement. It is said that 1.5 million Armenians were killed but, according to the Ottoman records, there were 1.3 million Armenian habitants. If the total Armenian population was, 1.3 million it is impossible to kill 1.5 million Armenians. However, there is neither a method nor a record to count the Armenian casualties. For example, the president of the Armenian delegate in the Lausanne Conference Bogos Nubar stated that, in that time, 700.000 Armenians migrated to other countries and there were only 280.000 Armenians in Turkey. If these numbers are correct and the Armenian population was 1.3 million, the casualties should be 300.000 including the ones joined the Russian Army and died in the First World War.

In 1918 edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica the number of the Armenian casualties is 600.000 but in its 1968 edition, the number is 1.5 million. As seen the casualties increase on paper.

After the war, in Istanbul, Mustafa Pasha Council was formed and the remaining members of Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) were arrested. The list of the suspects were given by the British and four group of people were arrested:

1. The people who harmed the Armenians and the Greeks during the war.

2. The people who disobeyed the war rules.

3. The people who disobeyed the armistice.

4. The people who disobeyed the allies in Caucassia (these are the Azerbaijani Turks).

At first, the trial was planned to be holding in Istanbul but later the suspects were taken to Malta. Most of them would have been judged from the Armenian genocide. The court took more than a year and the British made long investigations. The arrests were made usually on denunciations, which still exist in the files. The British government asked the Royal Attorney if it is possible to suit against these people but the response was negative, because there were not enough evidence to trace a trial. Britain then asked for evidence to the Embassy in Washington but the response was the same, there was no proof of genocide in the American archives.

The telegrams which, Andonyan mentioned in his book were in Britain at that time. If they were real the British government would have absolutely revealed them to the court and sentence the suspects. If the most keen, Turk opponent Lloyd George’s government did not prove anything, it means there is no proof to condemn Turkey.

During the displacement, the Ottoman government associated with Armenian Relief Society and USA. USA distributed aids to the refugees. In this respect, it is illogical to accuse the Ottoman government by a methodical annihilation movement.

To conclude, it is irrational to accept a counterfeit genocide.

In the period 1973-1985, during the New Armenian Terror, congresses under such titles as “The International Armenian Groups” were held in Paris in 1979, Lausanne in 1983 and Sevres in 1985. At these congresses attempts were made to address world public opinion, as well as the various Armenian communities and members of the Armenian terror groups. At the congress held in 1985 under the chairmanship of a priest, James Karauzian, the text of an “Armenian Constitution” was accepted. The declared aims of the congresses held during this period were “to foster unity and co-operation among Armenians”, “to form a centre for the formulation of political demands and aspirations”, and “to combine the various Armenian terror groups in a single organization”. Priority was given to a massive propaganda and psychological campaign to inform international public opinion of their activities. Attempts were also made to interest Armenians in the work of the various groups and to involve them in terror or other operations. Another aim of these congresses was to ensure harmony and co-operation between the various separate Armenian terror groups. Thus all terror and other activities could be presented as the common policy of the international Armenian community, and the various elements brought together in a united front.

These congresses had a number of characteristics in common:

a)   In all of them priority was given to discussions concerning armed struggle. Disagreements between those who supported armed struggle and those who opposed this strategy finally led to splits in the Armenian terror groups. ASALA refused, or was not allowed, to participate in any of the congresses held after the Paris Congress of 1979.

b)   It was decided that the texts of all decisions taken at these congresses should be forwarded to the various international bodies and that these decisions should be considered and discussed at various levels in the international forums. Means were also discussed by which this decision could be put into effect.

c)      One of the most important topics of discussion was the union of all Armenians in a single organization, but no agreement could ever be reached on how this aim was to be achieved. The text known as the “Constitution” accepted the idea of a preparatory period.

d)      The number of participants at these congresses steadily diminished.

e)   No effective measures were taken to remove the differences of opinion that were very clearly revealed at these congresses.

Impartial observers announced that, in the event of this Constitutions being put into effect, “all groups and organizations engaged in the struggle for the victory of the Armenian cause would be gathered together under the aegis of the Armenian Congress”.

The main aims of the Armenian Congress as reflected in the Armenian Constitution were as follows:

a. To unite the Armenians scattered throughout the world into a single body.

b. To disseminate information throughout the world concerning the work of the Congress.

c. To make use of all political and diplomatic means at their disposal to liberate Armenian territory now under Turkish occupation.

d. To organize the return of the Armenians to their homeland and to make the necessary preparations for this.

In order to realize these aims, the Congress would seek ways of ensuring the participation of other groups, without, however, sacrificing anything of their independence and autonomy. Every group of ethnic Armenians composed of over twenty members should have the right to representation in the Congress in accordance with democratic principles, thus accepting the principle of a wide popular base.

According to the Constitution the work of the Congress centre should be based in Switzerland.

Traditional bodies such as the “Armenian National Council” should be divided into organizations such as the “General Council” and “Executive Council”.

CONCLUSIONS

What is the truth concerning the “Armenian Problem” and the “Armenian Question” that lies behind the renewal of terrorist activity in the years between 1973 and 1985?

What are the lessons to be learned from this terrorist activity, which far surpasses in ruthlessness the work of any of the Armenian terrorist groups of the past?

What light can be shed on future developments by an evaluation of the events of that period?

As a conclusion to this comprehensive study, almost entirely based as it is on Armenian publications or on works deriving from sources sympathetic to the Armenian cause, we believe a satisfactory reply can be given to all these questions.

1.      The propaganda formerly used to exploit the various interests, aims and expectations of the Armenians living within the Ottoman Empire, and at converting these minority groups into a problem for the Ottoman State, is still being propagated under the guise of an “Armenian Cause” in various countries in the world, including the Armenian Republic, which now forms part of the USSR. It is now no longer a question of an “Armenian Problem” but of an “Armenian Cause”, a concept that is now being thrust upon world public opinion, international organizations, and various parliaments and senates. The new Armenian terrorism of 1973-1985 employs weapons, crimes, massacres and attacks as propaganda aimed at enforcing acceptance of the justice of this “cause”. In other words, all these massacres, crimes and attacks have a single aim – to publicize the “Armenian Cause”, to emphasise its scope and dimensions, and so arouse fear and apprehension regarding the lengths to which this terror could well be taken.

2. There are certain lessons to be learned by humanity as a whole, as well as by the Armenians themselves, whose names have become associated with a terrorist activity in which they have been in no way involved, from the new wave of Armenian terrorism of 1973-1985. The use of terror as a means of propaganda and psychological pressure is a question of concern to all states, and it from this point of view that the 1973-1985 era must be evaluated. States founded on principles of law and order find their field of activity restricted or even rendered utterly powerless in the face of a terror that acknowledges no law and regards all means as legitimate. Even more important, some states sympathise with this terrorism and even support it on geopolitical grounds, failing to realize that one day the same weapon may be turned against themselves. From this point of view, the new wave of Armenian terrorism contains a number of very valuable lessons.

From another angle, the apparent differences, conflicts and even divisions between the various Armenian terrorist groups are purely superficial. As a means of propaganda for the propagation of the “Armenian cause”, whatever the method of application, range or scope, all these apparently discrete elements complement each other in their work towards the achievement of a common aim. And the expert in the use of psychology in political struggle is presented with clear evidence of terror as one aspect of psychological warfare.

3. Future developments will be determined by the attitudes adopted by states who see in the acceptance or rejection of the “Armenian Cause” the realisation of the geopolitical expectations of international organizations, states, parliaments and senates in the field of international relations, and they will increase commensurately in importance.

The acceptance of the “Armenian Cause” in the form in which it is now presented, means the advance acceptance of an attitude that will not be content with sporadic massacres, crimes and attacks, but which will inevitably turn towards the waging of a regular war.

If the “Armenian Cause” is interpreted as being the preservation and development of the Armenian language, religion and culture, this will result in the complete rejection of terrorism, and will liberate the Armenian people from a situation which is causing them great anxiety and apprehension. Otherwise, they will finally become the victims of a steadily increasing anarchy and the incriminations of others.

The Armenian terrorist groups did not participate in this congress. The question of Dashnak representation gave rise to protracted disputes. ASALA was not represented at this congress and was exposed to violent criticism.

The following proposals were put forward:

a. The slogan “One Armenianism, one goal, one struggle and one voice” was proposed and accepted.

b. It was proposed that the Congress of Sevres was to be accepted as valid and the Congress of Lausanne as invalid.

c. The proposal that no support should be given to ASALA was accepted.

d. It was proposed and accepted that the struggle against Turkey should be continued.

e. It was proposed and accepted that support should be given to the struggle being conducted by Greece and the Greek Cypriots against Turkish expansionist policy.

f. It was proposed that the Congress should bear a character similar to that of the “Palestine National Congress in Exile”, and this was accepted on the basis of observation of the required developments.

The congress decisions are as fallow:

      a.      The Congress accepted the text of an “Armenian Constitution”.

      b. The Congress accepted the application of a many-sided strategy for the achievement of their aims.

aa. It was decided that collaboration should be established between progressive and revolutionary movements in Turkey and the Armenian nationalist movement, as well as between the Armenians and the various other peoples engaged in the struggle against Turkish oppression and exploitation, and that recognition should be given to the inevitably close links between the struggle of the Armenian people and that of other oppressed peoples.

bb. The International Armenian Congress decided that although it was in no way connected with any state or power, it would accept aid and assistance from any country that respected and supported the Armenian cause.

c. It was decided to send a note to the United Nations, the USA, the USSR, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Armenia, the Council of Europe, the unaligned states and all signatories of the Lausanne Agreement bringing to their attention the fact that the Armenians were the only people who had failed to profit from the abolition of colonialism.

      d.      The Congress, convinced that Turkey should be compelled to admit its involvement in the genocide of 1915 and that such an admission would open the way to the liberation of Armenian territory, decided to disseminate information on this question and to have recourse to the necessary quarters.

The USSR was praised for its recognition of the genocide of 1915 and for the publication of an article on this subject in Pravda in April 1985, while at the same time criticism was levelled at the American administration for having failed to ensure the passage through the US Congress of a genocide bill.

The following were the most important of the proposals put forward and the topics discussed:

a. A constitutional council should be established to decide upon basic politics, to determine and formulate views with regard to territorial claims, and to establish such claims on a sound basis.

b. A national liberation movement should be established on the basis of nationalism and democracy.

c. These congresses should be similar to the International Jewish Congresses and display a strongly democratic, parliamentarian character.

The following decisions were taken:

a. Measures should be taken to ensure that the congresses should possess a democratic, parliamentarian character, and that a “Constitution” should be drawn up.

b. The Constitution should be drawn up by a constitutional council, which should also be responsible for the preparation of a text presenting a synthesis of the various political views held.

c. The work of the council should be published and distributed to the international public.

This congress ended in disagreement and great confusion. The moderates proved dominant but were unable to achieve any notable proved dominant but were unable to achieve any notable results. The conflict continued after the close of the congress, and the factions and splits referred to above began to make their appearance.

The most important proposals put forward at this congress were the following:

a. An end should be put to party and sectarian squabbles and a “Central Committee” established.

b. Measures should be taken to prevent the assimilation of Armenians in the Diaspora.

c. Military theoreticians and tacticians should be employed in their operations.

The decisions taken were as follows:

a. Extra impetus should be given to the Pan-Armenian movement. In the diaspora the concept of Armenianism should be politicised and importance given to the organization of an international “Armenian Front”.

b. An investigation should be made into the possibility of help for the Armenian cause by Armenians living in the USSR and measures should be taken to facilitate such assistance.

c. Territorial claims should be made directly to Turkey.

d. The Armenian Church should be given a national character.

e. Work should be begun on the foundation of an Armenin bank.

f. Central Bureaus should be established and publication and communication facilities developed.

The Paris Congress resulted in an increase in violence and terror. ASALA was strengthened by the introduction of fresh blood. Military training was increased in a number of centres.

Ter — Petrosyan is the chief organiser who has flamed the Nagorno Karabakh matter and the demonstrations that were intensified from 1987 onwards in Armenia. The “ Nagorno Karabakh Committee “ which was founded by him in February 1988, for the connecting of Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia after it is separated from Azerbaijan, has changed its name as “ Armenian National Movement “ in November 1989.

After he won the elections, and within the process of becoming a party, Ter — Petrosyan, who collected the majority of the votes, and who was elected as the President Armenian Supreme Soviet on August 1990, has declared the independence of Armenia on August 4, 1990. Armenia has signed the Alma — Ata (Almatı) Declaration on December 21, 1991 and then became a member of AGİK (AGİT) and United Nations.

In the same period, Armenia has violated the international agreements, its own commitments, Helsinki and AGİT principles and actually invaded the Nagorno Karabakh, which is an autonomous region connected to the Republic of Azerbaijan. Armenia has applied a clear genocide against the Azerbaijani people here, apart from invading. (2)

Ter — Petrosyan, in his first speech in the 1990 elections, has made the call for the recognition of so-called genocide of 1915 to the international organisations. (3)

Ter — Petrosyan visited US President Bill Clinton on August 8, 1994 in The White House. The members of the Armenian Church, Priest Rafael Andonyan, Chief Bishop Mesrob Aşçıyan, Chief Bishop Hayag Barsamyan and Chief Bishop Vahe Hovsepyan were present among those who participated the meeting along with the Taşnak Party leaders. Here the weighted subjects that were discussed, were the difficulties shown to Armenia by Turkey and Azerbaijan, and the recognition of the so — called Armenian genocide. (4)

The Clinton visit of Ter — Petrosyan was attracting attention. Because, such kind of a meeting; was made for the first time within the last 10 years; by an US President. Apart from this, the discussing of the so — called genocide in between a President of USA and Armenian leaders has been evaluated as a new situation.

FOOTNOTES

(1)Armenian Communist Party has changed its name in the year 1993 as Armenian Democratic Party. Claims related to the making the world to accept the independency of Nagorno Karabakh and the claims related to the soils that remain in Turkey; do take place within the ideological properties of the party.

(2)      Katliam / Massacre (Album), Istanbul 1993; The Tragedy of Nagorno Karabakh, Ankara 1993, p. 13, 15 -* 16, Yankı / Echo, 3. 7. 1995, p. 36.

(3)      Yankı / Echo, 3. 7. 1995.

(4)      The Armenian Reporter, 13. 8. 1994.