Torossian 1

Jérôme Torossian

Dr. Brian Endless

PLSC 316

December 7, 2016

Turkey: A Country in Denial

In the twentieth century, the world has witnessed many horrors led by leaders who were,

unfortunately, successful in propagating their nationalist views and hate towards other ethnic

groups. These atrocities were often made during times of war or tribal conflicts, and when

empires and nations were about to collapse, such as the Ottoman Empire, Nazi Germany, the

Former Yugoslavia, or Rwanda. However, individuals who particularly know about what

happened to the Armenians, Jews, Bosnian Muslims, and Tutsis will not consider the actions

ordered against them as war crimes. In fact, the massacres that these ethnic groups experienced

were the result of a well-planned set of actions that aimed with intent to bring about their own

destruction. The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of

Genocide approved by the UN General Assembly in 1948 defines and considers a slaughter as

genocide if the perpetrators had “the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical,

racial, or religious group.” Often called the crime of crimes, genocide is a denial of the right of

existence of an entire human group by attempting to wipe the people out. Unfortunately, it

happens that those who committed genocide refuse to call their actions as such as well as their

future generations, successor governments, friendly countries, and individuals. After a century

has passed, this is what the Turkish government has been doing concerning the 1915 Armenian

genocide. A massacre that cost the lives of 1.5 million Armenians, and which constituted the first

genocide of the twentieth century. In this essay, I will discuss Turkey’s firm denial of the

Armenian genocide as well as the consequences of this unfortunate phenomenon.

Torossian 2

In order to understand what led to the 1915 Armenian genocide and its denial by Turkey,

I emphasize that an overview of the Armenian people and this historical event is more than

necessary. Armenia is one of the oldest civilization in the world whose population inhabited

territories stretching from modern north-eastern Turkey to Mesopotamia and from the Caspian

Sea to the Mediterranean. These lands were historically known as Greater Armenia. For

thousands of years, the Armenian people were led by their kings either as an independent

kingdom or under the control of its powerful neighbors from the East and West.1 Located

perhaps in one of the most strategic regions in history, the Armenians were not only able to stay

in their lands but also to develop a rich culture with a mix of orient and occident. Armenia, being

the first country in the world to adopt Christianity as a state religion in 301 A.D, its population

was regularly the target of persecutions by non-Christian conquerors. In the early sixteenth

century, the last remaining Armenian kingdom fell under foreign subjugations.2 In fact, parts of

Armenia was occupied by the Ottoman Turks in the West, while its Eastern provinces came first

under Persian rule and then later in the nineteenth century under Russian influence.3

The Armenians inhabiting the lands of Western Armenia were now forced to live in a

multiethnic and multireligious realm known as the Ottoman Empire. In this empire, Armenians,

as well as other Christian minorities and Jews, had to experience daily discriminations and were

often considered second-class citizens. Actually, the fact that the Ottoman Empire comprised of

many ethnic groups is the reason that pushed its leaders to follow the principles of the Islamic

sacred law.4 By relying on these dogmas, they sought to better govern their empire, but also to

1 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.19 2 Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980, p.853 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.204 Shelton, Dinah. Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity. Thomson Gale, 2005, p.69

Torossian 3

proclaim the superiority of the Muslims vis-à-vis the “inferior” non-Muslims.5 Thus, the daily

lives of these “infidels” were quite difficult and intolerable due to the strong inequalities they

had to face. For instance, the Armenians had to pay special taxes, they were not allowed to bear

arms or ride horses, and Muslim law was inapplicable to them.6 In addition, Armenian shoes and

headgears had to be red so that people could know who they were.7 As a result, thousands of

Armenians decided against their will to convert to Islam so that they could live free from these

disadvantages.8 As loyal people, the Armenians made use of their skills and capabilities in

various sectors of the society so to improve and strengthen the Ottoman Empire.9 Indeed, they

hold many important positions that were valuable for the state, such as trader, manager, doctor,

and architect. However, the Armenians in the nineteenth century posed problems to the

traditional hierarchy of the Ottoman Empire as they were getting wealthier and better educated

than the Turks.10 This advancement in the society brought anger and fear to the Muslim

population as they saw it as something that could take away their superiority status.11 The

leadership positions of Armenians particularly triggered dissatisfaction of this ethnic group,

especially after many provincial revolts asking for social change were made by non-Muslims.12

Consequently, these protests not only led to stricter repression but also to the Armenian

massacres from 1894 to 1896.13

5 Shelton, Dinah. Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity. Thomson Gale, 2005, p.696 Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980, p.87-897 Akçam, Taner. A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility. Picador, 2007, p.248 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.209 Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980, p.9710 Bartrop, Paul; Totten, Samuel. The Genocide Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009, p.23511 Akçam, Taner. A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility. Picador, 2007, p.3212 Ibid., p.4313 Ibid., p.43

Torossian 4

In 1908, the Young Turk revolution toppled the ancient regime of Sultan Abdul Hamid II

and replaced it with a new political organization, the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP).14

The organization apparently wanted to change the empire by promoting liberal and democratic

principles.15 Yet, after losing their territories in Europe due to the Balkan Wars, the Young Turks

began to shift their ideologies.16 Indeed, the leaders of the CUP, as well as many Turkish

intellectuals, started to espouse the idea of Pan-Turkism, a xenophobic movement advocating for

a Turkish state that would be unified with all the Turkic peoples and free of ethnic minorities.17

To put it into perspective, these people were ultranationalists and sought to establish a new

glorious Turkey stretching from Anatolia all the way to Central Asia.18 This plan represented a

huge threat to the Ottoman minorities, especially the Armenians. On October 30th, 1914, the

Ottoman Empire joined WWI on the side of Germany.19 During the winter of 1915, Enver Pasha,

the minister of war, ordered an offensive to the Caucasus so the fight against the Russians.20 As

this battle failed as well as many others, Young Turk extremists accused the Armenians for all

their failures and became persuaded that it was time to put an end to their existence. The decision

to annihilate all the Armenians was made by those in power and a careful plan was thought on

how to execute it. In fact, Talaat Pasha, the minister of interior or the Turkish “Hitler,” declared

to a German Embassy official that Turkey “wanted to take advantage of the war in order to

thoroughly liquidate its internal enemies without being disturbed by foreign diplomatic

intervention.”21

14 Bartrop, Paul; Totten, Samuel. The Genocide Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009, p.23515 Ibid., p.23516 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.2717 Rummel, Rudolph. Death by Government. New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers, 1994, p.21218 Bartrop, Paul; Totten, Samuel. The Genocide Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009, p.23519 Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980, p.19820 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.2821 Goldhagen, Daniel. Worse Than War: Genocide, Eliminationism, and the Ongoing Assault on Humanity. New York: PublicAffairs, 2010, p.41-42

Torossian 5

By February 1915, the Armenians fighting on the side of the Ottomans were turned into

labor battalions and were either worked to death or slaughtered.22 Thus, between 200,000 to

250,000 draftees were killed solely because of their ethnicity.23 This marked the first stage of the

genocide perpetrated against the Armenian population. The next stage was to eliminate those

who were capable of organizing a rebellion against the government. The night of April 23/24,

1915, is considered to be the beginning of what would become the first genocide of the twentieth

century. In fact, it is the time when the Turks arrested 235 Armenian leaders in Constantinople,

such as doctors, politicians, academics, lawyers, and resulted in the death of this elite.24 In the

weeks that followed, thousands of more Armenians suffered the same fate. Once all the national

leaders were executed, the Turks were easily able to carry out their plan of deportation and

extermination of the remaining Armenian civilians. On May 15, 1915, the minister of interior

declared on a telegram that “It has been previously communicated that the government by the

order of the Assembly has decided to exterminate entirely all the Armenians living in Turkey

[…] Without regard to women, children and invalids, however tragic may be the means of

transportation, an end must be put to their existence.”25 Many Armenians were deported to the

desert of Syria, which constituted a one-way journey without return. During their long march, the

Armenians would be dehumanized as some would be raped and forced to walk naked under the

burning sun.26 In addition, the Turks developed several methods of torture, such as mutilation of

ear, nose, and eyes; family members were forced to witness the atrocities made to their loved

ones.27 The memory of the Armenian nation was to be forgotten, especially with the destruction

22 Bartrop, Paul; Totten, Samuel. The Genocide Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009, p.23523 Rummel, Rudolph. Death by Government. New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers, 1994, p.21724 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.2925 Rummel, Rudolph. Death by Government. New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers, 1994, p.21526 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.2927 Danielian, Jack. A Century of Silence: Terror and the Armenian Genocide. Ararat Magazine, 2010. Web.

Torossian 6

of many Armenian churches and monuments.28 Moreover, tens of thousands of young Armenians

were forced to convert to Islam and become Turks. They were given Turkish names, taught the

Quran, and were not allowed to speak Armenian. Overall, between 1915 up to 1923, the plan of

the Young Turks cost the lives of 1.5 million Armenians out of a population of 2 million. An act

that clearly constituted a genocide, but which is still denied by the successor of the Ottoman

Empire, Turkey.

Genocide denial usually occurs both during and after the perpetration of the act. This

phenomenon is often characterized as the very last stage of a genocidal process, one that pursues

the genocide even though the slaughters have ended.29 In fact, the perpetrators, their descendants,

and/or successor governments, intentionally hide the truth so to avoid bearing any responsibility

for the actions committed against a group. Indeed, genocide deniers engage themselves in a

struggle in order to show, through false arguments, fabricated facts, and historical distortions,

that what they are accused of never happened or is simply magnified.30 By doing this, deniers try

to protect whatever they have gained through the genocide, such as political and economic

benefits or theft of the victims’ property and land.31 Denial of genocide is dangerous for the

victims and their descendants because this attitude may be translated as something that could

happen once more. George Santayana, a Hispanic-American philosopher, once declared that

“Those who cannot remember their past are condemned to repeat it.”

The denial of the 1915 Armenian genocide is currently the best example of a country’s

refusal to officially acknowledge the dark chapters of its national history. Despite the fact that

28 Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1986, p.2929 Bartrop, Paul; Totten, Samuel. The Genocide Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009, p.12830 Shelton, Dinah. Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity. Thomson Gale, 2005, p.24331 Tolbert, David. The Armenian Genocide: 100 Years of Denial (And Why It’s In Turkey’s Interest to End It). International Center for Transnational Justice, 2015. Web.

Torossian 7

the Armenian genocide is well known and contains lots of evidence, the denial of this genocide

is been used since 1915 up to this day. In fact, the Republic of Turkey strictly denies that the

Ottoman Turks have perpetrated a genocide against its Armenian population. One could say that

Turkey being established in 1923 is not directly responsible for the horrors committed against the

Armenians. I argue that such argument is true, however, the founding fathers of modern Turkey,

notably Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, actually sought to finish what the Young Turks have planned.

Indeed, Ataturk was implicated in the genocide as he not only attempted to create a homogenous

state, but he also ordered the political and physical destruction of the remaining Armenian

nation.32 Had the Armenians failed to throw the Turks back, it is a high possibility that the word

Armenia would be nowadays a historical term.33 In addition, although today’s Turkey did not

plan the Armenian genocide, it is this country that continues to deny it, prevent its worldwide

recognition, and absolve those who are guilty. Moreover, the Turkish Republic, as the successor

state to the Ottoman Empire and the beneficiary of the victim’s wealth and land, is the one that

should acknowledge the genocide and ask for forgiveness to the Armenian people.34 A parallel

can be drawn with today’s Germany, a country that is also not directly responsible for what its

predecessors have done to the Jews. Yet, it is the Federal Republic of Germany that demanded

forgiveness and agreed to compensate all the holocaust survivors as well as their heirs for the

horrors committed by the Nazis.

The statements used by Turkey and the Turkish people has remained the same, a

genocide never happened, Turkey is not the one responsible for the events, and both Turks and

32 Dadrian, Vahakn. Warrant for Genocide: Key Elements of Turko-Armenian Conflict. Transaction Publishers, 2003, p.15933 Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980, p.25434 Theriault, Henry. Theriault: The Global Reparations Movement and Meaningful Resolution of the Armenian Genocide. Armenian Weekly, 2010. Web.

Torossian 8

Armenians were killed because of a civil war.35 Some even go further as to blame the Armenians

for the massacres they were the victims. In fact, deniers justify the crimes by arguing that the

Armenians deserved what happened as they threatened the territorial integrity of the Ottoman

Empire.36 Yet, this is part of the denial strategy as the Armenians never asked for independence,

but rather demanded social changes.37 Moreover, the argument declaring that what happened

between 1915 and 1923 was the result of a civil war is absolutely false. This statement has been

rejected by many intellectuals, such as Christopher Walker. Indeed, Christopher Walker, a

British historian, argues that there was no civil war during that period and that no evidence even

support this claim.38 It is true that some few Armenian armed groups fought against the Ottoman

army, but their acts were purely defensive as they were threatened with death by the

government.39 One such act happened at Musa Dagh in September 1915, which resulted in the

safety of about 4,000 Armenian civilians.40 Walker considers that describing these kinds of

actions as civil war “is a gross abuse of language.”41 Likewise, Turkish deniers of the Armenian

genocide believe that the actions committed against the Armenians were not planned by the

government and that a number of telegrams, notably those from Talaat Pasha, are simply

fabricated by Armenian propagandists.42 However, once again such argument was not accepted

by genocide scholars. Recently, Taner Akçam, one of the first Turkish intellectuals to

acknowledge the Armenian genocide, confirmed once more the authenticity and validity of these

35 Charny, Israel. Encyclopedia of Genocide Volume I A-H. ABC-CLIO, 1999, p.16236 Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980, p.37937 Akçam, Taner. A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility. Picador, 2007, p.4338 Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980, p.38539 Ibid., p.38640 Ibid., p.38641 Ibid., p.38642 Libaridian, Gerard. A Crime of Silence: The Armenian Genocide: The Permanent People’ Tribunal. Zed Books, 1985, p.156

Torossian 9

telegrams.43 As a result, by proving the reality of these orders, Taner Akçam was able to

demonstrate that the minister of interior had the intent to annihilate the Armenian people.

One of the main ways Turkey followed in order to get away with the Armenian genocide

is by pressuring other countries not to recognize it. Currently, 29 nations have officially

acknowledged the actions committed against the Armenians as genocide.44 In some states, such

as France, one can even be penalized for publicly denying the Armenian genocide. Moreover,

Germany’s parliament practically voted unanimously last June in favor of recognizing the 1915

events.45 Despite threats from the Turkish government, Germany stayed strong, and Turkey

consequently decided to recall its ambassador from Berlin.46 Yet, what angers Turkey even more

is that the one who pushed for this resolution is a German politician of Turkish descent, Cem

Özdemir. However, despite some successes from the Armenian side, the Turkish government

also has its own. Indeed, Turkey, being an important country in the international arena, plays

from its status so to achieve its goal. The United States, for instance, is one of the countries that

decides to remain silent on the issue, although the U.S. is home to the second largest Armenian

diaspora in the world.47 One of the reasons is that the United States is active in the middle east,

and Turkey represents a key ally in the region. Actually, the U.S. has an important airbase in that

country, and Turkey has regularly threatened to close it if a recognition was made.48 Therefore,

the United States does not want to harm its diplomatic relations with Turkey as it would go

against its national interests. In addition, a state that has also been reluctant to officially say the

43 Sassounian, Harut. Dr. Akcam Confirms Turk’s Genocidal Intent By Providing Validity of Talat’s Telegrams. Asbarez, 2016. Web.44 Le Genocide Arménien Désormais Reconnu Par 29 Pays. Euronews, 2016. Web. 45 Martirosyan, Lucy. Why Germany’s Recognition of Armenian Genocide Is Such A Big Deal. Public Radio International, 2016. Web. 46 Ibid47 Flanigan, Jake. Here’s Why The US Won’t Recognize The Armenian Genocide. Defense One, 2015. Web. 48 Stanton, Gregory. The Cost of Denial. Genocide Watch. Web.

Torossian 10

“g-word” is Israel. Indeed, Turkey is considered a great political and military ally for the Jewish

State. Thus, Israel certainly does not want an additional enemy in its region by recognizing the

atrocities of the Ottoman Turks. Likewise, Israel has also good ties with Azerbaijan, a rich oil

nation that denies the Armenian genocide and where anti-Armenian sentiment is high due to the

Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.49 Beyond activities by diplomatic leaders, the Republic of Turkey

has provided hundreds of thousands of dollars to foreign universities so that they do not discuss

or hold conferences on the issue.50

The denial of the Armenian genocide has lots of negative consequences on everyone

concerned. An obvious impact done by this phenomenon is that it harms the victims and their

future generations.51 Indeed, Elie Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor, considered Turkey’s denial as a

double killing because it not only slaughters psychologically the survivors and their heirs, but it

also attempts to destroy the remembrance of this crime.52 Genocide denial prevents the

Armenians from overcoming their psychological suffering as it deepens the longevity of their

pain. In addition, the denial of the Armenian genocide hurts Turkey, the Turkish people, and

those who dare to mention the reality of the events. By not recognizing its past, Turkey not only

prevents itself from making a step forward for democracy and the rule of law but also from

becoming a stronger nation. Germany has done it and is currently one of the strongest

democracies in the world.53 The Turkish people are also harmed by this policy because their

government falsies their national history. Indeed, Turkish students are taught that the Armenians

were traitors to the Ottoman Empire and that the Armenian genocide is purely a myth.54 They

49 Moodian, Michael. Why Does Israel Refuse To Recognize The Armenian Genocide?. Huffington Post, 2016. Web. 50 Bartrop, Paul; Totten, Samuel. The Genocide Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009, p.51751 Stanton, Gregory. The Cost of Denial. Genocide Watch. Web.52 Ibid 53 Stanton, Gregory. The Cost of Denial. Genocide Watch. Web.54 Ibid

Torossian 11

also grow with the idea that those who committed the Armenian genocide are national heroes

who defended the Turkish nation. To silence even more the issue, article 301 of the Turkish

Penal Code forbids anyone to insult Turkey, the Turkish nation, and its governmental

institutions. This law restricts freedom of speech as those who recognize the Armenian genocide

are “inflicted imprisonment for between six months and three years.”55 Moreover, denial hurts

the bystanders as they choose to follow a realpolitik policy, although they are aware that a

genocide occurred. Actually, countries that are reluctant to acknowledge the Armenian genocide

make themselves look bad in front of those who chose the moral side. Finally, the Armenian

genocide denial can be a threat to other communities around the world. This is particularly true

as Adolf Hitler learned from the Armenian genocide so to conduct his atrocities during World

War II.56 Indeed, he once declared in 1939: “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of

the Armenians?”57

The Turks find it difficult to talk about this issue because they do not want to be

reminded of their past. Reactions range from “yes we did it and would do it again,” to “both

Turks and Armenians were killed,” to “something occurred but it is preferable not to talk about

it.58 It demonstrates well that Turks prefer to forget the history and move on.59 Their feelings of

guilt deepen as they fear of being punished and forced to pay reparations, whether territorial or

financial. In fact, the following statement is regularly heard in Turkish conversations: “If we

accept the genocide, then the claim for reparations will soon follow.”60 Turks also consider the

55 Wilson, Jonathan. Article 301 Turkish Censorship. Armenian Genocide Debate, 2008. Web. 56 Tolbert, David. The Armenian Genocide: 100 Years of Denial (And Why It’s In Turkey’s Interest to End It). International Center for Transnational Justice, 2015. Web.57 Ibid58 Akçam, Taner. From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide. London: Zed Books, 2004, p.23759 Ibid., p.23660 Ibid., p.237

Torossian 12

subject to be an unfair accusation as they refuse to imagine that their ancestors were killers.

Indeed, the genocide recognition by Turkey would put into question three successive Turkish

regimes. It would mean that the national heroes and the founding fathers of modern Turkey were

in fact criminals, whose national pride and celebrations would have to cease. Thus, every

monument dedicated to their memory would have to be destroyed.

Despite all the evidence and the worldwide recognition of the 1915 Armenian genocide,

Turkey still chooses to deny that what happened to the Armenians constituted genocide. Indeed,

it has engaged itself over a century in a strategy of falsification, minimization, and denial of this

indisputable fact. This Turkish denial policy is certainly not without consequences. In fact, this

strategy obviously harms the survivors and their descendants, but it also unconsciously hurt

Turkey and the Turkish people. By not recognizing the errors of the past, Turkey condemns itself

and its population within a spiral of lies, which in the end prevents it from turning the page and

grow as a better country. Genocide denial may also be a threat to other communities. Moreover,

Turkey’s denial and propaganda regarding the Armenian genocide represents an obstacle to its

worldwide knowledge. In the end, only great nations are capable to recognize their glorious and

shameful acts. Today, Turkey can become one of them if it renounces to its firm denial policy.

Bibliography

Akçam, Taner. A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish

Responsibility. Picador, 2007. Web.

Akçam, Taner. From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide.

London: Zed Books, 2004. Print.

Bartrop, Paul; Totten, Samuel. The Genocide Studies Reader. Routledge, 2009. Print.

Torossian 13

Charny, Israel. Encyclopedia of Genocide Volume I A-H. ABC-CLIO, 1999. Web.

Dadrian, Vahakn. Warrant for Genocide: Key Elements of Turko-Armenian Conflict. Transaction

Publishers, 2003. Web.

Danielian, Jack. A Century of Silence: Terror and the Armenian Genocide. Ararat Magazine,

2010. Web.

Flanigan, Jake. Here’s Why The US Won’t Recognize The Armenian Genocide. Defense One,

2015. Web.

Goldhagen, Daniel. Worse Than War: Genocide, Eliminationism, and the Ongoing Assault on

Humanity. New York: PublicAffairs, 2010. Web.

Hovanissian, Richard. The Armenian Genocide in Perspective. New Brunswick: Transaction

Publishers, 1986. Print.

Le Genocide Arménien Désormais Reconnu Par 29 Pays. Euronews, 2016. Web.

Libaridian, Gerard. A Crime of Silence: The Armenian Genocide: The Permanent People’s

Tribunal. Zed Books, 1985. Print.

Martirosyan, Lucy. Why Germany’s Recognition of Armenian Genocide Is Such A Big Deal.

Public Radio International, 2016. Web.

Moodian, Michael. Why Does Israel Refuse To Recognize The Armenian Genocide?. Huffington

Post, 2016. Web.

Rummel, Rudolph. Death by Government. New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers, 1994. Web.

Torossian 14

Sassounian, Harut. Dr. Akcam Confirms Turk’s Genocidal Intent By Providing Validity of

Talat’s Telegrams. Asbarez, 2016. Web.

Stanton, Gregory. The Cost of Denial. Genocide Watch. Web.

Shelton, Dinah. Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity. Thomson Gale, 2005.

Web.

Theriault, Henry. Theriault: The Global Reparations Movement and Meaningful Resolution of

the Armenian Genocide. Armenian Weekly, 2010. Web.

Tolbert, David. The Armenian Genocide: 100 Years of Denial (And Why It’s In Turkey’s Interest

to End It). International Center for Transnational Justice, 2015. Web.

Walker, Christopher. Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980.

Print.

Wilson, Jonathan. Article 301 Turkish Censorship. Armenian Genocide Debate, 2008. Web.