Fisk is still angry about the UK's
calculated denial of the Armenian genocide
"It is difficult to stop the
gorge rising at such revolting remarks. Because of Turkey's military
power, its so-called "democracy", its bulwark against
"Islamic radicals", its desire to join the EU and its
cheap, exploited labour market, we must censor out of history one of
the most terrible atrocities to have been committed. This is what
lies behind President Clinton's cowardly remarks to the US Senate.
This is what lies behind President Chirac's refusal to comment
publicly on the French Senate resolution. And this is what lies
behind the weasel words of Mr Frater's letter.
What next? In 50 or 80 years' time,
will a new, more right-wing, resurgent Germany expect the same
exemption from the Jewish Holocaust? Will we have to indulge the
likes of Mr Irving suggesting that "contentious scholarly
debate" renders the Shoah historically questionable? Will we be
told by Mr Frater's successor that more recent genocides mean that
the Jewish Holocaust cannot be acknowledged?"
Peter Hall
=================================================
Only a handful of elderly Armenians now
exist as witnesses to the modern era's first act of genocide
By Robert Fisk - INDEPENDENT
NEWSPAPER
27 November 2000
Last week, the British Government said it would refuse to acknowledge
the Holocaust. Only a few days earlier, President Clinton pleaded
with the US Congress to ignore calls to commemorate the Holocaust
because, if they did so, "American lives" would be at risk.
Whether the victims of the Holocaust were really killed "because
of a deliberate policy of extermination", The Wall Street
Journal told us last week, "is a matter of contentious scholarly
debate". How David Irving and the Holocaust deniers must be
rubbing their hands with delight.
But no need to fear. The Holocaust in question was not the Jewish
Holocaust but the Armenian Holocaust. The dead amount not to six
million but to a mere one and a half million. It's not a resurgent,
militarised Germany we are frightened of but a resurgent militarised
Turkey. While thousands of survivors of the Jewish Holocaust remain
to tell us of their suffering, only a handful of very elderly
Armenians now exist as witnesses to the modern era's first act of
genocide. The Jewish organisations that rightly remind the world of
their people's slaughter, are powerful. The Armenian groups that wish
to commemorate their own bloodbath are weak and scattered. Their
Holocaust is now to be airbrushed from history.
Is there any limit to our gutlessness? Take that letter from the Home
Office's "Race Equality Unit" - first revealed in The
Independent last week - refusing to acknowledge the Armenian
Holocaust at Britain's Holocaust Memorial Day on 27 January. Its
author, Neil Frater, told the Armenian Assembly of America that
"the massacres [sic] in Armenia, like many other atrocities
before the Holocaust and the Nazi era, were brought to our attention
in response to last year's consultation exercise", on the
memorial day. The dishonesty of this sentence is almost breathtaking.
At no point does Mr Frater even say that the Armenians suffered a
genocide - let alone a holocaust - and he then lumps this
appalling crime against humanity with "many other atrocities
before the Nazi era". But no other atrocity before the
"Nazi era" comes anywhere close to the extermination of the
Armenians.
And note that happy-clappy phrase "consultation exercise".
How typical of the Blair government to have a "consultation
exercise" to decide which ethnic group would have the privilege
of having its suffering memorialised and which would be ruthlessly
excised from the history books. "The massacres of 1915-16 were
an appalling tragedy condemned by the British government of the
day," Mr Frater tells the Armenians. But he fails to add that
the "British government of the day" produced a 677-page
book - the Bryce Report for the Foreign Office - whose meticulous
testimony and eye-witness accounts of Turkish mass-slaughter,
organised rape and ethnic cleansing persuaded that same government to
demand war-crime trials for the Turks.
Now let's turn to those meretricious - nay, outrageous -
statements in the 20 November edition of The Wall Street Journal, a
newspaper whose voice has never been silent on the truths of the
Jewish Holocaust. In an editorial which might have been written by
the Turkish foreign ministry, it sneers at the French Senate for
daring to recognise the Armenian genocide, asking whether the British
and French should not also apologise for the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres
which betrayed Armenia's remaining claims to statehood in mainland
Turkey.
"These suggestions," it says cloyingly, "are not put
forward to diminish, much less relativize [sic] the historical fact
that during the First World War, an estimated 600,000 Armenians,
possibly more, lost their lives, many in forced deportations to Syria
and Palestine orchestrated by Ottoman armies." The editorial, of
course, neatly changes the casualty figures. And note how we are told
that they "lost their lives". No mention of the fact that
the majority of Armenia's manhood were killed either by Turkish
firing squads or in mass knifings, or by being burned alive or
asphyxiated in caves in 1915 (the world's first gas chambers).
Even more insulting to the cities of dead, the Journal refers to
doubts about the genocide caused by "serious scholarly
debate". Now it happens that this "serious" debate is
led by an American academic called Heath Lowry, whose Chair of
Ottoman Studies in the US is funded by Turkey and who also works in
an advisory capacity to the Turkish ambassador in Washington on ways
to deny the Armenian Holocaust. A draft letter Lowry wrote for the
ambassador was accidentally enclosed in a note from the Turkish
diplomat in which he denied the genocide.
But the paper goes on to outline all the reasons why President
Clinton - and our own government - now seek to deny the truth of
history. Acknowledging the Armenian genocide would "needlessly
jeopardise US-Turkish relations". Turkey is a strategic Western
ally, "the only secular democracy in the Middle East", the
second largest army in Nato. Turkey wants to join the EU.
"Europe could take full advantage of Turkey's low cost of
labour, just as the US has in Mexico." Europe "sorely needs
the vast labour pool Turkey has to offer, as many European employers
will attest".
It is difficult to stop the gorge rising
at such revolting remarks. Because of Turkey's military power, its
so-called "democracy", its bulwark against "Islamic
radicals", its desire to join the EU and its cheap, exploited
labour market, we must censor out of history one of the most terrible
atrocities to have been committed. This is what lies behind President
Clinton's cowardly remarks to the US Senate. This is what lies behind
President Chirac's refusal to comment publicly on the French Senate
resolution. And this is what lies behind the weasel words of Mr
Frater's letter.
What next? In 50 or 80 years' time, will a
new, more right-wing, resurgent Germany expect the same exemption
from the Jewish Holocaust? Will we have to indulge the likes of Mr
Irving suggesting that "contentious scholarly debate"
renders the Shoah historically questionable? Will we be told by Mr
Frater's successor that more recent genocides mean that the Jewish
Holocaust cannot be acknowledged?
For that is the terrible implication of
the grotesque response we are now making to Turkey's Ottoman
brutalities. The Armenians have long commemorated their Holocaust on
24 April each year - the date in 1915 when the first Armenian
intellectuals were rounded up and liquidated by Turks in
Constantinople. The Armenians wished to be included in the 27 January
commemoration. They have been turned away. Which is why 27 January
will represent a truth - the facts of the Jewish genocide. But why
it will also represent a lie - because, for cheap economic,
political and military reasons, it will fail to address the genesis
of Jewish suffering: the deliberate destruction of one and a half
million Armenian men, women and children.