the 8 stages of genocide - typepad · · 2013-03-26the 8 stages of genocide by gregory h....
TRANSCRIPT
The 8 Stages of Genocide
By Gregory H. Stanton, President, Genocide Watch Classification Symbolization Dehumanization Organization Polarization Preparation Extermination Denial
Genocide is a process that develops in eight stages that are predictable but not inexorable. At each stage, preventive measures can stop it. The process is not linear. Logically, later stages must be preceded by earlier stages. But all stages continue to operate throughout the process.
1. CLASSIFICATION: All cultures have categories to distinguish people into “us and them” by ethnicity, race, religion, or nationality: German and Jew, Hutu and Tutsi. Bipolar societies that lack mixed categories, such as Rwanda and Burundi, are the most likely to have genocide. The main preventive measure at this early stage is to develop universalistic institutions that transcend ethnic or racial divisions, that actively promote tolerance and understanding, and that promote classifications that transcend the divisions. The Catholic church could have played this role in Rwanda, had it not been riven by the same ethnic cleavages as Rwandan society. Promotion of a common language in countries like Tanzania has also promoted transcendent national identity. This search for common ground is vital to early prevention of genocide.
2. SYMBOLIZATION: We give names or other symbols to the classifications. We name people “Jews” or “Gypsies”, or distinguish them by colors or dress; and apply the symbols to members of groups. Classification and symbolization are universally human and do not necessarily result in genocide unless they lead to the next stage, dehumanization. When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups: the yellow star for Jews under Nazi rule, the blue scarf for people from the Eastern Zone in Khmer Rouge Cambodia. To combat symbolization, hate symbols can be legally forbidden (swastikas) as can hate speech. Group marking like gang clothing or tribal scarring can be outlawed, as well. The problem is that legal limitations will fail if unsupported by popular cultural enforcement. Though Hutu and Tutsi were forbidden words in Burundi until the 1980’s, code-words replaced them. If widely supported, however, denial of symbolization can be powerful, as it was in Bulgaria, where the government refused to supply enough yellow badges and at least eighty percent of Jews did not wear them, depriving the yellow star of its significance as a Nazi symbol for Jews.
3. DEHUMANIZATION: One group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects or diseases. Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder. At this stage, hate propaganda in print and on hate radios is used to vilify the victim group. In combating this dehumanization, incitement to genocide should not be confused with protected speech. Genocidal societies lack constitutional protection for countervailing speech, and should be treated differently than democracies. Local and international leaders should condemn the use of hate speech and make it culturally unacceptable. Leaders who incite genocide should be banned from international travel and have their foreign finances frozen. Hate radio stations should be shut down, and hate propaganda banned. Hate crimes and atrocities should be promptly punished.
4. ORGANIZATION: Genocide is always organized, usually by the state, often using militias to provide deniability of state responsibility (the Janjaweed in Darfur.) Sometimes organization is informal (Hindu mobs led by local RSS militants) or decentralized (terrorist groups.) Special army units or militias are often trained and armed. Plans are made for genocidal killings. To combat this stage, membership in these militias should be outlawed. Their leaders should be denied visas for foreign travel. The U.N.
should impose arms embargoes on governments and citizens of countries involved in genocidal massacres, and create commissions to investigate violations, as was done in post-genocide Rwanda.
5. POLARIZATION: Extremists drive the groups apart. Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda. Laws may forbid intermarriage or social interaction. Extremist terrorism targets moderates, intimidating and silencing the center. Moderates from the perpetrators’ own group are most able to stop genocide, so are the first to be arrested and killed. Prevention may mean security protection for moderate leaders or assistance to human rights groups. Assets of extremists may be seized, and visas for international travel denied to them. Coups d’état by extremists should be opposed by international sanctions.
6. PREPARATION: Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity. Death lists are drawn up. Members of victim groups are forced to wear identifying symbols. Their property is expropriated. They are often segregated into ghettoes, deported into concentration camps, or confined to a famine-struck region and starved. At this stage, a Genocide Emergency must be declared. If the political will of the great powers, regional alliances, or the U.N. Security Council can be mobilized, armed international intervention should be prepared, or heavy assistance provided to the victim group to prepare for its self-defense. Otherwise, at least humanitarian assistance should be organized by the U.N. and private relief groups for the inevitable tide of refugees to come.
7. EXTERMINATION begins, and quickly becomes the mass killing legally called “genocide.” It is “extermination” to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human. When it is sponsored by the state, the armed forces often work with militias to do the killing. Sometimes the genocide results in revenge killings by groups against each other, creating the downward whirlpool-like cycle of bilateral genocide (as in Burundi). At this stage, only rapid and overwhelming armed intervention can stop genocide. Real safe areas or refugee escape corridors should be established with heavily armed international protection. (An unsafe “safe” area is worse than none at all.) The U.N. Standing High Readiness Brigade, EU Rapid Response Force, or regional forces -- should be authorized to act by the U.N. Security Council if the genocide is small. For larger interventions, a multilateral force authorized by the U.N. should intervene. If the U.N. is paralyzed, regional alliances must act. It is time to recognize that the international responsibility to protect transcends the narrow interests of individual nation states. If strong nations will not provide troops to intervene directly, they should provide the airlift, equipment, and financial means necessary for regional states to intervene.
8. DENIAL is the eighth stage that always follows a genocide. It is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres. The perpetrators of genocide dig up the mass graves, burn the bodies, try to cover up the evidence and intimidate the witnesses. They deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims. They block investigations of the crimes, and continue to govern until driven from power by force, when they flee into exile. There they remain with impunity, like Pol Pot or Idi Amin, unless they are captured and a tribunal is established to try them. The response to denial is punishment by an international tribunal or national courts. There the evidence can be heard, and the perpetrators punished. Tribunals like the Yugoslav or Rwanda Tribunals, or an international tribunal to try the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, or an International Criminal Court may not deter the worst genocidal killers. But with the political will to arrest and prosecute them, some may be brought to justice.
Genocide in Darfur
Darfur is in the western part of Sudan, bordering on Libya, Chad, and the Central African Republic.
Darfur is a region in Sudan the size of France. It is home to about 6 million people from nearly 100 tribes. Some
nomads. Some farmers. All Muslims. In 1989, General Omar Bashir took control of Sudan by military coup, which
then allowed The National Islamic Front government to inflame regional tensions. In a struggle for political control
of the area, weapons poured into Darfur. Conflicts increased between African farmers and many nomadic Arab
tribes.
In 2003, two Darfuri rebel movements- the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement
(JEM)- took up arms against the Sudanese government, complaining about the marginalization of the area and the
failure to protect sedentary people from attacks by nomads. The government of Sudan responded by unleashing
Arab militias known as Janjaweed, or “devils on horseback”. Sudanese forces and Janjaweed militia attacked
hundreds of villages throughout Darfur. Over 400 villages were completely destroyed and millions of civilians were
forced to flee their homes.
In the ongoing genocide, African farmers and others in Darfur are being systematically displaced and murdered at
the hands of the Janjaweed. The genocide in Darfur has claimed 400,000 lives and displaced over 2,500,000 people.
More than one hundred people continue to die each day; five thousand die every month. The Sudanese government
disputes these estimates and denies any connection with the Janjaweed.
The Sudanese government appears unwilling to address the human rights crisis in the region and has not taken the
necessary steps to restrict the activities of the Janjaweed. In June 2005, the International Criminal Court (ICC) took
the first step in ending impunity in Darfur by launching investigations into human rights violations in Darfur.
However, the government of Sudan refused to cooperate with the investigations.
On March 4, 2009 Sudanese President Omar al Bashir, became the first sitting president to be indicted by ICC for
directing a campaign of mass killing, rape, and pillage against civilians in Darfur. The arrest warrant for Bashir
follows arrest warrants issued by the ICC for former Sudanese Minister of State for the Interior Ahmad Harun and
Janjaweed militia leader Ali Kushayb. The government of Sudan has not surrendered either suspect to the ICC.
Darfuris today continue to suffer and the innumerable problems facing Sudan cannot be resolved until peace is
secured in Darfur. According to UN estimates, 2.7 million Darfuris remain in internally displaced persons camps
and over 4.7 million Darfuris rely on humanitarian aid. Resolving the Darfur conflict is critical not just for the
people of Darfur, but also for the future of Sudan and the stability of the entire region.
Ukrainian Famine
18/02/11
By: Talar Kossakian
The Ukrainian Famine was dreadful famine premeditated by the Soviet Union, headed by Joseph Stalin during 1932-
1933, as a means to undermine the nationalistic pride of the Ukrainian people. It served to control and further
oppress the Ukrainian people by denying them the basic vital essentials they needed to survive. The Ukrainian
Famine is also known as Holodomor, meaning “death by hunger.”
The Communist Regime sought to eliminate any threat from Ukrainian nationalists, whom they feared had the
potential to form a rebellion and to seek independence from the Soviet Union. More than 5,000 Ukrainian
intellectuals were arrested and later were either murdered or deported to prison camps in Siberia. These individuals
were falsely accused of plotting an armed rebellion; however it was very clear that Stalin’s intentions were to
eliminate the leaders of Ukrainian society, to leave the masses without any guidance or direction.
Stalin regarded the self-sufficient farms of the Ukraine peasants, as a threat to his ideals. He did not want the
Ukrainian peasants to prosper freely from the wealth accumulated from independent farm holdings. The wealthier
farmers were termed as “kulaks”, and became the primary target of “dekulukization,” an effort to eliminate
independent farm-holdings, and create collective farm units. The Communists attempted to gain the support of the
poorer class of peasants, by turning them against the kulak class of farmers. A false image of the Kulak class
portrayed them as a danger to society. Contrary to the expected outcome of the Communists’ plan, the poor farmers
sided with the kulaks, instead of siding with the Soviet authorities. As a result many of them became new targets of
dekulakization. Many other poor farmers unwillingly joined collective farms. Those who attempted to aid a “kulak”
were punished under the law.
The Soviet police confiscated the Ukrainian farmers of their homes, livestock, wheat crops, and valuable
possessions. They imposed heavy grain taxes, deliberately leaving families to starve. Those who resisted giving up
their homes and crops, were violently shot to death or deported to regions in Siberia. Some families and individuals
chose to burn their homes to the ground and kill their livestock, instead of handing it over to Soviet authorities.
Families, who tried to hide grain resources, in order to sustain a source of food, were killed. This campaign of terror
was organized to instill fear within the people, and force them to relinquish all that they had. The ultimate goal was
to have these people embrace Soviet-ism and abandon all nationalistic pride.
A system of internal passports prevented Ukrainians from leaving their towns and villages. Thus villagers were not
able to cross the border and escape the torment by fleeing to other countries. When news of the Famine reached the
Ukrainian Diaspora in the United States and Europe, food supplies were sent to Ukraine to assist the starving people.
However all food shipments were denied at the border by Soviet authorities. Following the Soviet Union’s policy of
denying any allegations having to do with the Famine, all outside assistance was refused. Even journalists were not
allowed in Ukraine, because the Soviet government feared that the media would reveal the perpetrated crimes
against the Ukrainian people. When an individual claimed that there was a famine in Ukraine they were considered
to be spreading anti-Soviet propaganda. Even stating the words “famine” or “hunger” could cause someone to end
up in jail.
All the grain taken from Ukrainian farmers were exported to European countries, and the money generated from
these sales, were used to fuel Stalin’s Five Year Plan for the transformation of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union
purchased many products and weapons from Western countries. Those western countries in return remained silent in
regards to the starving Ukrainians. Grain that was not yet shipped out was reserved in granaries. While the animals
that were needed for work on the farms were fed, the people were left to starve. The granaries were guarded to
ensure no one would steal grain supplies. Anyone who attempted to do so was shot and killed.
It was estimated that about 25,000 Ukrainians were dying every day during the Famine. Desperation and extreme
hunger even lead to cases of cannibalism and consequentially thousands were arrested for this act.
Despite many Ukrainian Communist leaders’ objections to Stalin and his decrees, Stalin continued to raise grain
quotas, which led to worsening of the famine. Many Communists blame the orchestrated famine on an unsuccessful
harvest and crop yield, failing to acknowledge the crimes perpetrated by the Soviet government and authorities It is
estimated that more than 10 million people died as a result of violent executions, deportation, and starvation.
Currently Russia does not recognize the Ukrainian Famine or Holodomor, as genocide. The Russian State Duma
stated that there was starvation in many parts of the Soviet Union, and it is insulting and incorrect for the Ukrainians
to claim that they were directly targeted. Despite Russia’s persistent denial of the Ukrainian Famine, many countries
around the world have recognized the atrocious crimes committed against the Ukrainian people as genocide.
Australia, Brazil, Canada, Columbia, Estonia, Ecuador, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico,
Paraguay, Peru, Poland, and the United States of America regard the Ukrainian Famine from 1932-1933 as
genocide. Argentina, Czech Republic, Chile, Slovakia, Spain, Balearic Islands, Spain, and Vatican consider
Holodomor as a deliberate act of famine.
On November 28, 2006 the Parliament of Ukraine adopted a law that recognized the artificial famine in Ukraine as
genocide committed against the Ukrainian people. The law also made public denial of the Ukrainian Genocide
illegal. Ukrainian Genocide commemoration day is on November 26.
The Palestinian Conflict
21/11/10
A Palestinian protester holding his national flag confronts an Israeli soldier during a
demonstration against Israel's separation barrier in the West Bank village of Maasarah near
Bethlehem on November 12, 2010.
In 1850, the population of Palestine was estimated at 500,000, of whom approximately 80% were Muslim, 15%
Christian and 5% Jewish. The current conflict is not ancient, but began in the late 19th-century when the Zionist
movement in Europe decided to create a Jewish state in Palestine. Since Jews constituted a small minority in
Palestine, implanting a Jewish majority state would by definition require the displacement of the non-Jewish
majority.
In Palestine, a national liberation movement was already taking place. Palestinians were seeking independence from
occupation by the Ottoman Turks and then by the British.
When the Ottoman Empire fell after WWI, the victorious European powers created new artificial boundaries and
Palestine became a mandate territory of Britain in 1922. Tensions had increased in November 1917 when the British
Foreign Office Secretary announced his governments support for the establishment of ‘a Jewish national home in
Palestine.’ The number of Jewish settlers in Palestine grew tenfold during the three decades of British rule.
Palestinian Arabs resisted using both non-violent means and armed revolt.
On November 29, 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 181, which recommended dividing Palestine
into two states; one Palestinian and one Jewish. Although Jews constituted 33% of the total population, and owned
6.59% of the land, the U.N. resolution allocated 54% of the territory for a Jewish state.
Palestinians did not accept the partition of their homeland and continued to demand independence. Immediately
after the resolution was announced, fighting broke out between Zionist Jews and Palestinian Arabs.
By May 1948 Zionist forces had already captured substantial portions of Palestine outside the U.N. defined Jewish
state, and at least 200,000 Palestinians had been expelled from their homes in what became Israel. On May 14th
Great Britain officially declared the end of British Mandate rule in Palestine. That same day, Zionist leaders
declared the state of Israel, and the U.S. government recognized it within hours. On May 15, Jordan, Syria, and
Egypt entered the war. Fighting continued until armistice agreements were signed in January 1949. The new state of
Israel had conquered 78% of Palestine, with Jordan taking control of the West Bank and Egypt taking control of
Gaza.
The Zionist forces launched a systematic plan, Plan Dalet, for the expulsion of Palestinians, which included
destruction of villages, mass expulsion, imprisonment, massacres and rape.
By 1949, close to 800,000 Palestinians had been driven out of their homes and 531 villages were destroyed.
Palestinians are one of the largest and longest suffering groups of refugees in the world. Over 4.5 million Palestinian
refugees are registered with the U.N., and many more remain unregistered. Many still carry keys to their homes
from which they were expelled.
In 1967, border skirmishes and instability increased and Israel launched a surprise attack on Egypt. Just 5 days after
the attack, Israel had achieved all its territorial objectives, including Gaza and the West Bank. 300,000 more
Palestinians were driven out of Palestine to become refugees. Israel immediately began to demolish their hoes for
Israeli settlements.
After the 1967 victory, Israel illegally annexed East Jerusalem to become part of the State of Israel. The other
conquered areas- Gaza and the West Bank- have never formally been annexed and so the 3.5 million Palestinians
who remain there are not citizens of any country but have remained subjects of an illegal military occupation.
The West Bank and Gaza are still under military occupation. Palestinians are subject to Israeli military laws much
like apartheid laws of old South Africa. They have no right to free speech or a fair trial, they have no freedom of
movement between towns, they can be expelled from the country without due process and they have no right to
privacy. Although the pay taxes, they are not allowed to vote in Israeli elections.
The Israeli military continues to invade Gaza, bombard civilian neighborhoods and infrastructure, and carry out
targeted assassinations, all the while strengthening the military occupation of the West Bank with an ever-increasing
network of checkpoints, walls and illegal settlements.
The Genocide in Rwanda
26/05/09
In 1994, Rwanda’s population of seven million was composed of three ethnic groups: Hutu (approximately 85%), Tutsi (14%)
and Twa (1%). In the early 1990s, Hutu extremists within Rwanda’s political elite blamed the entire Tutsi minority population for
the country’s increasing social, economic, and political pressures. Tutsi civilians were also accused of supporting a Tutsi-
dominated rebel group, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). Through the use of propaganda and constant political maneuvering,
Habyarimana, who was the president at the time, and his group increased divisions between Hutu and Tutsi by the end of 1992.
The Hutu remembered past years of oppressive Tutsi rule, and many of them not only resented but also feared the minority.
On April 6, 1994, a plane carrying President Habyarimana, a Hutu, was shot down. Violence began almost immediately after
that. Under the cover of war, Hutu extremists launched their plans to destroy the entire Tutsi civilian population. Political leaders
who might have been able to take charge of the situation and other high profile opponents of the Hutu extremist plans were killed
immediately. Tutsi and people suspected of being Tutsi were killed in their homes and as they tried to flee at roadblocks set up
across the country during the genocide. Entire families were killed at a time. Women were systematically and brutally raped. It is estimated that some 200,000 people participated in the perpetration of the Rwandan genocide.
In the weeks after April 6, 1994, 800,000 men, women, and children perished in the Rwandan genocide, perhaps as many as three
quarters of the Tutsi population. At the same time, thousands of Hutu were murdered because they opposed the killing campaign and the forces directing it.
The Rwandan genocide resulted from the conscious choice of the elite to promote hatred and fear to keep itself in power. This
small, privileged group first set the majority against the minority to counter a growing political opposition within Rwanda. Then,
faced with RPF success on the battlefield and at the negotiating table, these few power holders transformed the strategy of ethnic
division into genocide. They believed that the extermination campaign would reinstate the solidarity of the Hutu under their
leadership and help them win the war, or at least improve their chances of negotiating a favorable peace. They seized control of the state and used its authority to carry out the massacre.
The civil war and genocide only ended when the Tutsi-dominated rebel group, the RPF, defeated the Hutu perpetrator regime and President Paul Kagame took control.
Although the Rwandans are fully responsible for the organization and execution of the genocide, governments and peoples
elsewhere all share in the shame of the crime because they failed to prevent and stop this killing campaign.
Policymakers in France, Belgium, and the United States and at the United Nations were aware of the preparations for massive
slaughter and failed to take the steps needed to prevent it. Aware from the start that Tutsi were being targeted for elimination, the
leading foreign actors refused to acknowledge the genocide. Not only did international leaders reject what was going on, but they
also declined for weeks to use their political and moral authority to challenge the legitimacy of the genocidal government. They
refused to declare that a government guilty of exterminating its citizens would never receive international assistance. They did
nothing to silence the radio that televised calls for slaughter. Even after it had become indisputable that what was going on in Rwanda was a genocide, American officials had shunned the g-word, fearing that it would cause demands for intervention.
When international leaders finally voiced disapproval, the genocidal authorities listened well enough to change their tactics
although not their ultimate goal. Far from cause for satisfaction, this small success only highlights the tragedy: if weak protests produced this result in late April, imagine what might have been the result if in mid-April the entire world had spoken out.
The Armenian Genocide (1915-1923)
10/05/09
The Armenian Genocide, the first genocide of the 20th Century, occurred when two million Armenians living in
Turkey were eliminated from their historic homeland through forced deportations and massacres between 1915-
1918.
The Ancient Armenians
For three thousand years, a thriving Armenian community had existed inside the vast region of the Middle East
bordered by the Black, Mediterranean and Caspian Seas. The area, known today as Anatolia, stands at the
crossroads of three continents; Europe, Asia and Africa. Great powers rose and fell over the many centuries and
the Armenian homeland, when not independent, was at various times ruled by Persians, Greeks, Romans,
Byzantines, Arabs and Mongols.
Despite the repeated invasions and occupations, Armenian pride and cultural identity never wavered. The snow-
capped peak of Mount Ararat became the focal point of this proud people and by 600 BC Armenia as a kingdom
sprang into being.
The First Christian Nation
Following the advent of Christianity, Armenia became the very first nation to accept it as the state religion. A
golden era of peace and prosperity followed which saw the invention of a distinct alphabet, the flourishing of
literature, art, commerce, and a unique style of architecture. By the 10th century, Armenians had established a
new capital at Ani, affectionately called the ‘city of a thousand and one churches.’
Under Muslim Rule
In the eleventh century, the first Turkish invasion of the Armenian homeland occurred. Thus began several
hundred years of rule by Muslim Turks. By the sixteenth century, Armenia had been absorbed into the vast and
mighty Ottoman Empire. At its peak, this Turkish empire included much of Southeast Europe, North Africa, and
almost all of the Middle East.
But by the 1800s the once powerful Ottoman Empire was in serious decline. For centuries, it had spurned
technological and economic progress, while the nations of Europe had embraced innovation and became industrial
giants. Turkish armies had once been virtually invincible. Now, they lost battle after battle to modern European
armies.
As the empire gradually disintegrated, formerly subject peoples including the Greeks, Serbs and Romanians
achieved their long-awaited independence. Only the Armenians and the Arabs of the Middle East remained stuck
in the backward and nearly bankrupt empire, now under the autocratic rule of Sultan Abdul Hamid.
An Ottoman Civil Rights Movement
By the 1890s, young Armenians, educated in the universities of Europe began to press for political reforms in the
Ottoman Empire, calling for a constitutional government, the right to vote and an end to discriminatory practices
such as special taxes levied solely against them because they were Christians. The despotic Turkish Sultan
responded to their pleas with brutal persecutions and massacres. Between 1894 and 1896 over 100,000
inhabitants of Armenian villages were slaughtered during widespread pogroms conducted by the Sultan’s special
regiments.
But the Sultan’s days were numbered. In July 1908, reform-minded Turkish nationalists known as ‘Young Turks’
forced the Sultan to allow a constitutional government and guarantee basic rights. The Young Turks were
ambitious junior officers in the Turkish Army who hoped to halt their country’s steady decline.
Armenians in Turkey were delighted with this sudden turn of events and its prospects for a brighter future. Both
Turks and Armenians held jubilant public rallies attended with banners held high calling for freedom, equality and
justice.
The Rise of Turkish Nationalism
However, their hopes were dashed when three of the Young Turks seized full control of the government via a coup
in 1913. This triumvirate of Young Turks, consisting of Mehmed Talaat, Ismail Enver and Ahmed Djemal, came to
wield dictatorial powers and concocted their own ambitious plans for the future of Turkey. They wanted to unite
all of the Turkic peoples in the entire region while expanding the borders of Turkey eastward across the Caucasus
all the way into Central Asia. This would create a new Turkish empire, a ‘great and eternal land’ called Turan with
one language and one religion.
But this new empire would have to come at the expense of the Armenian people, whose traditional historic
homeland lay right in the path of the Young Turks’ plans to expand eastward. And on that land was a large
population of Christian Armenians totaling some two million persons, making up about 10 percent of the Empire’s
overall population.
Along with the Young Turk’s newfound ‘Turanism’ there was a dramatic rise in Islamic fundamentalist agitation
throughout Turkey. Christian Armenians were once again branded as infidels (non-believers in Islam). Young
Islamic extremists, sometimes leading to violence, staged anti-Armenian demonstrations. During one such
outbreak in 1909, two hundred villages were plundered and over 30,000 persons massacred in the Cilicia district
on the Mediterranean coast. Throughout Turkey, sporadic local attacks against Armenians continued unchecked
over the next several years.
Fueling hatred toward Armenians within the Empire were the significant cultural differences between Armenians
and Turks. Though a majority of the Armenian population in Turkey lived in poverty and despair, a small minority
had excelled as best they could within their second class status, with many serving as professionals, businessmen,
lawyers, doctors, artists, architects and skilled craftsmen.
Armenians had also, by and large, been well educated compared to their Turkish counterparts, who were largely
illiterate peasant farmers and small shopkeepers. The leaders of the Ottoman Empire had traditionally placed little
value on education and not a single institute of higher learning could be found within their old empire. The various
autocratic and despotic rulers throughout the empire’s history had valued loyalty and blind obedience above all.
The Young Turks decided to glorify the virtues of simple Turkish peasantry at the expense of the Armenians in
order to capture peasant loyalty. They exploited the religious, cultural, economic and political differences between
Turks and Armenians so that the average Turk came to regard Armenians as strangers among them.
The Outbreak of War
When World War I broke out in 1914, leaders of the Young Turk regime sided with the Central Powers (Germany
and Austria-Hungary). The outbreak of war would provide the perfect opportunity to solve the ‘Armenian
question’ once and for all for the Young Turks. The world’s attention became fixed upon the battlegrounds of
France and Belgium where the young men of Europe were soon falling dead by the hundreds of thousands. The
Eastern Front eventually included the border between Turkey and Russia. With war at hand, unusual measures
involving the civilian population would not seem too out of the ordinary.
As a prelude to the coming action, Turks disarmed the entire Armenian population under the pretext that the
people were naturally sympathetic toward Christian Russia. Every last rifle and pistol was forcibly seized, with
severe penalties for anyone who failed to turn in a weapon. Quite a few Armenian men actually purchased a
weapon from local Turks or Kurds (nomadic Muslim tribesmen) at very high prices so they would have something
to turn in.
The Genocide Begins
At this time, about forty thousand Armenian men were serving in the Turkish Army. In the fall and winter of 1914,
all of their weapons were confiscated and they were put into slave labor battalions building roads or were used as
human pack animals. Under the brutal work conditions they suffered a very high death rate. Those who survived
would soon be shot outright. For the time had come to move against the Armenians.
The decision to annihilate the entire population came directly from the ruling triumvirate of ultra-nationalist Young
Turks. The actual extermination orders were transmitted in coded telegrams to all provincial governors throughout
Turkey. Armed roundups began on the evening of April 24, 1915, as 300 Armenian political leaders, educators,
writers, clergy and dignitaries in Constantinople (present day Istanbul) were taken from their homes, briefly jailed
and tortured, then hanged or shot.
Next, there were mass arrests of Armenian men throughout the country by Turkish soldiers, police agents and
bands of Turkish volunteers. The men were tied together with ropes in small groups then taken to the outskirts of
their town and shot dead or bayoneted by death squads. Local Turks and Kurds armed with knives and sticks often
joined in on the killing.
Then it was the turn of Armenian women, children, and the elderly. On very short notice, they were ordered to
pack a few belongings and be ready to leave home, under the pretext that they were being relocated to a non-
military zone for their own safety. They were actually being taken on death marches heading south toward the
Syrian Desert.
Muslim Turks who assumed instant ownership of everything quickly occupied most of the homes and villages left
behind by the rousted Armenians. In many cases, local Turks who took them from their families spared young
Armenian children from deportation. The children were coerced into denouncing Christianity and becoming
Muslims, and were then given new Turkish names. For Armenian boys the forced conversion meant they each had
to endure painful circumcision as required by Islamic custom.
Turkish gendarmes escorted individual caravans consisting of thousands of deported Armenians. These guards
allowed roving government units of hardened criminals known as the ‘Special Organization’ to attack the
defenseless people, killing anyone they pleased. They also encouraged Kurdish bandits to raid the caravans and
steal anything they wanted. In addition, an extraordinary amount of sexual abuse and rape of girls and young
women occurred at the hands of the Special Organization and Kurdish bandits. Most of the attractive young
females were kidnapped for a life of involuntary servitude.
The death marches during the Armenian Genocide, involving over a million Armenians, covered hundreds of miles
and lasted months. Indirect routes through mountains and wilderness areas were deliberately chosen in order to
prolong the ordeal and to keep the caravans away from Turkish villages.
Food supplies being carried by the people quickly ran out and they were usually denied further food or water.
Anyone stopping to rest or lagging behind the caravan was mercilessly beaten until they rejoined the march. If they
couldn’t continue they were shot. A common practice was to force all of the people in the caravan to remove
every stitch of clothing and have them resume the march in the nude under the scorching sun until they dropped
dead by the roadside from exhaustion and dehydration.
An estimated 75 percent of the Armenians on these marches perished, especially children and the elderly. Those
who survived the ordeal were herded into the desert without a drop of water. Being thrown off cliffs, burned alive,
or drowned in rivers.
During the Armenian Genocide, the Turkish countryside became littered with decomposing corpses. At one point,
Mehmed Talaat responded to the problem by sending a coded message to all provincial leaders: ‘I have been
advised that in certain areas unburied corpses are still to be seen. I ask you to issue the strictest instructions so
that the corpses and their debris in your vilayet are buried.’
But his instructions were generally ignored. Those involved in the mass murder showed little interest in stopping to
dig graves. The roadside corpses and emaciated deportees were a shocking sight to foreigners working in Turkey.
Eyewitnesses included German government liaisons, American missionaries, and U.S. diplomats stationed in the
country.
Western Response
During the Armenian Genocide, the Christian missionaries serving in the Empire were often threatened with death
and were unable to help the people. Diplomats from the still neutral United States communicated their blunt
assessments of the ongoing government actions. U.S. ambassador to Turkey, Henry Morgenthau, reported to
Washington: ‘When the Turkish authorities gave the orders for these deportations, they were merely giving the
death warrant to a whole race”
The Allied Powers (Great Britain, France, Russia) responded to news of the massacres by issuing a warning to
Turkey: ”the Allied governments announce publicly’that they will hold all the members of the Ottoman
Government, as well as such of their agents as are implicated, personally responsible for such matters.’
The warning had no effect. Newspapers in the West including the New York Times published reports of the
continuing deportations with the headlines: Armenians Are Sent to Perish in the Desert ‘ Turks Accused of Plan to
Exterminate Whole Population (August 18, 1915) ‘ Million Armenians Killed or in Exile ‘ American Committee on
Relief Says Victims of Turks Are Steadily Increasing ‘ Policy of Extermination (December 15, 1915).
Armenian Self-Defense
Temporary relief for some Armenians came as Russian troops attacked along the Eastern Front and made their way
into central Turkey. But the troops withdrew in 1917 upon the Russian Revolution. Armenian survivors withdrew
along with them and settled in among fellow Armenians already living in provinces of the former Russian Empire.
There were in total about 500,000 Armenians gathered in this region.
In May 1918, Turkish armies attacked the area to achieve the goal of expanding Turkey eastward into the Caucasus
and also to resume the annihilation of the Armenians. As many as 100,000 Armenians may have fallen victim to the
advancing Turkish troops.
However, the Armenians managed to acquire weapons and they fought back, finally repelling the Turkish invasion
at the battle of Sardarabad, thus saving the remaining population from total extermination with no help from the
outside world. Following that victory, Armenian leaders declared the establishment of the independent Republic of
Armenia in a small portion of their historic homeland in the Caucasus.
War Trials
World War I ended in November 1918 with a defeat for Germany and the Central Powers including Turkey. Shortly
before the war had ended, the Young Turk triumvirate; Talaat, Enver and Djemal, abruptly resigned their
government posts and fled to Germany where they had been offered asylum.
In the months that followed, repeated requests by Turkey’s new moderate government and the Allies were made
asking Germany to send the Young Turks back home to stand trial. However all such requests were turned down.
As a result, Armenian activists took matters into their own hands, located the Young Turks and assassinated them
along with two other instigators of the mass murder.
Meanwhile, representatives from the fledgling Republic of Armenia attended the Paris Peace Conference in the
hope that the victorious Allies would give them back their historic lands seized by Turkey. The European Allies
responded to their request by asked the United States to assume guardianship of the new Republic. However,
President Woodrow Wilson’s attempt to make Armenia an official U.S. protectorate was rejected by the U.S.
Congress in May 1920.
But Wilson did not give up on Armenia. As a result of his efforts, the Treaty of Sevres was signed on August 10,
1920 by the Allied Powers, the Republic of Armenia, and the new moderate leaders of Turkey. The treaty
recognized an independent Armenian state in an area comprising much of the former historic homeland.
Justice Denied
However, Turkish nationalism once again reared its head. The moderate Turkish leaders who signed the treaty
were ousted in favor of a new nationalist leader, Mustafa Kemal, who simply refused to accept the treaty and even
re-occupied the very lands in question then expelled any surviving Armenians, including thousands of orphans.
No Allied power came to the aid of the Armenian Republic and it collapsed. Only a tiny portion of the easternmost
area of historic Armenia survived by being becoming part of the Soviet Union.
After the successful obliteration of the people of historic Armenia during the Armenian Genocide, the Turks
demolished any remnants of Armenian cultural heritage including priceless masterpieces of ancient architecture,
old libraries and archives. The Turks even leveled entire cities such as the once thriving Kharpert, Van and the
ancient capital at Ani, to remove all traces of the three thousand year old civilization.
Referring to the Armenian Genocide, the young German politician Adolf Hitler duly noted the half-hearted reaction
of the world’s great powers to the plight of the Armenians. After achieving total power in Germany, Hitler decided
to conquer Poland in 1939 and told his generals: ‘Thus for the time being I have sent to the East only my ‘Death’s
Head Units’ with the orders to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of Polish race or language.
Only in such a way will we win the vital space that we need. Who still talks nowadays about the Armenians?’