Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
04ISTANBUL1074
2004-07-12 09:01:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Consulate Istanbul
Cable title:  

ARMENIAN "GENOCIDE" AND THE OTTOMAN ARCHIVES

Tags:  PREL PGOV AM TU 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ISTANBUL 001074 

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/11/2014
TAGS: PREL PGOV AM TU
SUBJECT: ARMENIAN "GENOCIDE" AND THE OTTOMAN ARCHIVES

Classified By: Consul General David Arnett for Reasons 1.5 (b&d)

This is a joint CG Istanbul/Embassy Ankara message.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 ISTANBUL 001074

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/11/2014
TAGS: PREL PGOV AM TU
SUBJECT: ARMENIAN "GENOCIDE" AND THE OTTOMAN ARCHIVES

Classified By: Consul General David Arnett for Reasons 1.5 (b&d)

This is a joint CG Istanbul/Embassy Ankara message.


1. (sbu) Summary: The lack of agreement and dialogue on the
so-called Armenian "genocide" question remains a major
obstacle to Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. A long-term
resolution of this problematic issue can only be built on an
open dialogue and healthy academic debate. Free and complete
access to the Ottoman archives, one of the primary
repositories for historical evidence during this period, will
be critical to building the mutual trust needed for such a
debate. Although Turkey has made great strides to open the
archives and destigmatize the issue, persistent problems and
doubts about the archives continue to undermine efforts to
bridge the gulf of misunderstanding between Armenians and
Turks on this historical question. End Summary.


2. (u) The most significant obstacle to Turkish-Armenian
reconciliation remains a lack of agreement or even healthy
dialogue on the Armenian "question" or what most Turks refer
to as the "supposed genocide." The accusations, denials, and
counter-accusations on this issue have long obscured most
genuine academic debate. Armenian diaspora scholars have
amassed scores of eyewitness accounts and narratives
detailing the tragic events of 1915-16 that they claim
amounted to a genocide of as many as 1.5 million Armenians
living in the Ottoman Empire. Turkish historians, meanwhile,
have argued that no more than a few hundred thousand
Armenians were killed by bandits, disease, and harsh
conditions when, in response to the threat posed by Armenian
insurgents (and the "massacre" of many Turkish Muslims),much
of the Armenian population was deported to Syria and Lebanon.

A Question of Identity
--------------

3. (sbu) In addition to thousands of years of recorded
history, a rich cultural heritage, and a vibrant Church, for
Armenians around the world the 1915-16 events remain a
crucial component of their modern identity. Although some
Armenians have at times sought retribution through terror and
violence (including ASALA terrorism in the 1970s),focus has
shifted to a tireless political campaign for recognition of
the events as genocide.



4. (sbu) The Turkish approach to the Armenian issue is
complex. From the inception of the Republic, Ataturk and his
establishment heirs have asserted that maintenance of a
"Turkish identity" -- which Ataturk and his circle developed
as an artificial construct and which his political heirs
claim is under threat from domestic and foreign enemies -- is
essential to the preservation and development of the
Republic. Representatives of both the Turkish state and
every government to date believe that acknowledging any
wrongs inflicted on the Armenians would call into question
Turkey's own claims of victimization and its borders, and
would make Turkey vulnerable to claims for indemnity.
Decades of official denial and the absence of historical
accounts or academic debate within Turkey on this taboo issue
have deprived Turks today of an objective context in which to
process assertions of genocide.

Are the Archives Open?
--------------

5. (sbu) Both sides have attempted to use the Ottoman
Archives to support their version of events. The Turks have
published volumes of documents to bolster their case, while
Armenian scholars charge that the Turkish government's
obstruction of free access to the archives suggests that they
are hiding the "smoking gun" that would prove the genocide.
Armenian scholars have long complained that they could not
obtain access permits or were obstructed in their research in
the archives. Others point to long (and, they say,
deliberate) delays in securing permits that often consumed
most or all of the time available on grants or sabbaticals.
Kevork Bardakchian, head of the Armenian Studies program at
the University of Michigan, for example, told poloff that he
and other colleagues were simply denied without explanation
when they applied for access to the archives in the 1970s and
1980s. An Archive Director in this period spoke openly about
the need to "protect" the documents from misuse by hostile
foreigners.


6. (sbu) Turkish and foreign scholars agree that former PM
and President Turgut Ozal made a real push to open the
archives in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The records were
placed under the supervision of the Prime Ministry,
procedures for obtaining research permits were simplified,
and efforts to catalog the 150 million documents were
accelerated. Everyone we have spoken to concedes that this
represented a "sea change" that has continued to this day.
According to Turkish archive officials, permits are usually
granted within a week, archival staff are helpful, and
photocopies of desired documents are readily available at
reasonable fees. When poloff visited the Ottoman Archive
research room earlier this month, the staff showed him a
computerized list of over 300 Americans who have received
permission to conduct research there in recent years (over 30
so far this year alone). The catalogs are also freely
available through the Archive website over the internet.


7. (sbu) Some restrictions on access remain in place.
Turkish officials do not permit access to over 70 million
still-uncatalogued documents and claim that many others are
too damaged for use by researchers. Moreover, some critics
still complain that the Turkish government seeks to block
those researching the Armenian question. Prime Ministry
State Archive Director Yusuf Sarinay pointed out to poloff
that researchers must be legally in Turkey for that purpose,
which requires visa approval by the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs. Some researchers continue to have permits delayed
or denied altogether (Greek researchers have also been
victims of such discrimination in the past). Archive
Director Sarinay said that although many American researchers
have come to the archives, notably not one has come from
Armenia. He speculated that this was because there are no
diplomatic relations between Turkey and Armenia - and because
of a policy of reciprocity for Armenia supposedly not
allowing Turkish researchers into its archives. Turkey's own
preeminent Ottoman historian, Halil Inalcik, criticized the
Archives' lack of openness in a February 2001 editorial for
Radikal daily entitled "The Ottoman Archives Should Be Opened
to the World." Despite the criticism, however, the mantra
today is "openness" and any talk of "protecting" the archives
from foreigners is politically incorrect. Although the
Archives Director still has considerable authority to deny
access, he would be hard-pressed to explain placing such
restrictions on any serious academic researcher.

Have the Archives Been Purged?
--------------

8. (c) Perhaps more important than the question of access,
however, is whether or not the archives themselves are
complete. According to Sabanci University Professor Halil
Berktay, there were two serious efforts to "purge" the
archives of any incriminating documents on the Armenian
question. The first took place in 1918, presumably before
the Allied forces occupied Istanbul. Berktay and others
point to testimony in the 1919 Turkish Military Tribunals
indicating that important documents had been "stolen" from
the archives. Berktay believes a second purge was executed
in conjunction with Ozal's efforts to open the archives by a
group of retired diplomats and generals led by former
Ambassador Muharrem Nuri Birgi (Note: Nuri Birgi was
previously Ambassador to London and NATO and Secretary
General of the MFA). Berktay claims that at the time he was
combing the archives, Nuri Birgi met regularly with a mutual
friend and at one point, referring to the Armenians, ruefully
confessed that "We really slaughtered them." Tony Greenwood,
the Director of the American Research Institute in Turkey,
told poloff separately that when he was working in the
Archives during that same period it was well known that a
group of retired military officers had privileged access and
spent months going through archival documents. Another
Turkish scholar who has researched Armenian issues claims
that the ongoing cataloging process is used to purge the
archives.

Coming to Grips With History
--------------

9. (sbu) Turkish attitudes on the genocide issue have evolved
over time. Although few have the courage to do so publicly,
some intellectuals, academics, and others privately question
the official version of events. Ordinary citizens in central
and eastern Anatolia often openly acknowledge to us what
their grandfathers did to the Armenians. Several visiting
American academics have noted that the subject is no longer
as taboo as it once was. Publicly, the Turkish establishment
(including the nationalist think-tank ASAM, the state Turkish
Historical Association, and even the Archives) continues to
challenge the assertions of the Armenian diaspora and fire
off counter-accusations charging Armenians with having
engaged in massive, wide-spread revolts during the war and
with having perpetrated wholesale massacres on Turkish
Muslims. In recent years the Education Ministry has asked
high-school students to compete in an essay competition to
deny the genocide (note: Berktay claims that this idea
originated with ASAM and was imposed on the Ministry by
ASAM's military contacts). The current government, however,
has been noticeably more quiet on the subject than some of
its predecessors, dutifully repeating the need to "leave the
issue for historians to discuss."

Comment
--------------

10. (c) Although almost a century has passed since the
1915-16 events, the gulf of misunderstanding between the
Armenians and Turks on this issue remains considerable. No
longer as completely closed a subject as it once was,
discussion of the issue in Turkey still remains limited and
dominated by the nationalist/establishment line. Even if the
current government hopes to put this issue behind them, it is
unlikely that they will be able to do more than simply
encourage an environment in which a healthy discussion can
take place. It is doubtful that, in their current state, the
Ottoman Archives will ever deliver a definitive
interpretation of the Armenian question, but they will be a
focal point and key resource for any Turks and Armenians
seeking to engage in genuine research and debate on the
issue. To that end, we should support and encourage
researchers to continue to push for access to the archival
materials and be prepared to approach the Turkish government
to discuss any complaints of official obstruction. We
request that the Department make us aware of any such
complaints.
ARNETT