This is obviously an extremely controversial topic. Even more than usual, I would ask that people watch the entire video before jumping in to the discussion - one way or another. But it does raise important questions about whether - and how - countries are coming to terms with past atrocities. I would be really interested to hear from viewers about debates in their own countries about the past.
Good day, I'm Turkish and if you want to know the facts about the so-called armenian genocide, I recommend this video. ruclips.net/video/QQg9OQ5TLdM/видео.html
It is slow and bringing it up is stokes up emotions - especially amongst those who identify themselves as 'nationalists'. I identify myself with two states with which I am having close connection (one having had an empire and another being under an empire in the past) and in either, the levels of acknowledgement of past atrocities is a touchy subject at both social and political levels.
German civilians who were killed during Holocaust? Zero. Russian civilians who were killed during Circassian or Crimean genocides? Zero. Japanese civilians who were killed during ''war crimes'' in China? Zero. Belgian civilians who were killed during Congolese genocide? Zero. Spanish civilians who were killed during Aztec genoice? Zero. British civilians who were killed during 1857 rebellion of India? Few hundred. American civilians who were killed during Native American genocide? Few thousand. Turkish civilians who were killed during ''Armenian genocide''?? HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS... This alone shows how insanely the subject is politicized, in fact often Turkish casualties are completely ignored or worse even called ''Armenian resistance'' like it was women and children were targeting them so they got killed!!! Then how Russian empire invaded entire eastern Turkey in 1914 and encouraged Armenians to revolt is often ignored so they could claim Ottoman targeted ''peaceful'' and ''harmless'' people while in reality they revolted a year before their deportation. ''Armenian genocide'' is only an example of wicked politics, nothing else and Turkey will not recognize anything until Turkish/Muslim casualties are recognized from Balkans to Anatolia from Crimea to Caucasus but im pretty sure Crimean genocide will remain as ''Crimean deportation'' even if it wasn't any different than so called Armenian genocide...
I'm sorry, but it's naive to treat the issue as if it's really only about the Armenian Genocide and has no wider implications. Turks have developed and carefully cultivated a national psychosis around the idea that They are trying to break up their country - "They" being a roster of villains that always includes the Armenians (both the diaspora and the government of Armenia) and often also includes the United States. The idea being that recognition of the Armenian Genocide would be only a first step towards forcing Turkey to cede eastern Anatolia to Armenia. This is both completely reasonable and utterly bonkers. Completely reasonable in that plenty of Armenians and non-Armenians really do think like that: probably most of the politically-engaged members of the Armenian diaspora; plenty of Armenians in Armenia itself and Artsakh, presumably alongside their elected representatives; and the sort of people who generally don't care for the Turks to begin with, from Breivik types and Greek ultra-nationalists on the right to Che wannabes and PKK supporters on the left. Utterly bonkers in that there is no grandiose anti-Turkish conspiracy to achieve this. Most of the people pursuing this objective are very open about it; if anything, you can't get them to shut up about it. And they're not in positions of power from which to make any of it happen. But then, as one of the many secret, well-placed members of that conspiracy, of course I'd say that, wouldn't I? Anyway, a cold, calculated analysis of the current situation would reveal that Turkey's policy on this is counterproductive. The sort of people who believe Turkey should pay reparations in the form of territory aren't waiting for a Turkish recognition, as they already believe the Genocide happened. The sort of people who believe Turkey's denial do so because they are predisposed to take its side on this, not because they find its arguments compelling, so a reversal would mean little to them. Where the denial makes a difference is with people who both believe that the Armenian Genocide happened and have no quarrel with the Republic of Turkey. With them, continued denial does nothing but harm Turkish reputation and credibility.
@@eflvin You have to invoke karma because you've nothing else. The pursuit of territorial expansion while awaiting divine intervention has already proven catastrophic. Your solution seems to be waiting for an even bigger divine intervention.
@@Solus94 Recognition of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish authorities could be a powerful step towards normalizing relations between Turkey and Armenia, as well as normalizing relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan
Why "Armenian Genocide" cannot be recognized. "Armenian Genocide" is a subject of history, it should not be a subject of politics. Western nations try to use this subject to exert pressure on Turkey. European nations should recognize their own responsibility for millions of deaths during the destruction of the Ottoman Empire by Western empires and during the colonization of the former Ottoman provinces by Western empires. 1. Ottoman Empire doesn't exist anymore. Turkey is a different country. Ottoman Empire was belonged to the Ottoman dynasty, not the Turkish nation. Ottoman Empire suppressed the Turkish nation in favor of the ideology of Islamic Caliphate. So the Ottoman Empire was finally recognized as a suppressor of Turkish nation. All members of Ottoman dynasty were deported from Turkey and never allowed to go back. 2. Blaming Turkey for "Armenian Genocide" is the same thing as blaming France for St. Bartholomew's Day massacre. 3. There wasn't a legal concept of genocide and there weren't any laws against genocide in 1915. Genocide wasn't considered as a crime according to international laws of that period. Nobody can be accused of violating non-existent laws or principles. 4. "600'000 or 1.5 million Armenian victims" is a pure nonsense. The whole Armenian population of Anatolia was 1.0-1.2 million. 350'000 Armenians migrated to Russia, 150'000 to France, 100'000 to the North America etc. Approx. 950'000 Armenians migrated from Anatolia during the WW1. 5. The only "evidence" that the Ottoman government intended to exterminate Armenian nation is the "telegrams of Talaat Pasha" written by Armenian journalist by his own hand. He said that Ottoman postal officer showed him the original telegrams but he couldn't prove it. That Armenian journalist was deported from Istanbul during "the day of Armenian genocide" (April 24th, 1915), went back to Istanbul, was captured and deported again. He had contacts with Ottoman officials and spied against the Ottoman Empire but nobody tried to kill him. 6. 950'000 Armenians left Ottoman Empire during the WW1. They wouldn't be able to cross the borders if the government actually issued an order to "kill all Armenians". 7. There was a lot of violence between Muslim and Christian population of Ottoman Empire when Muslim population was forced to leave the Balkans and the northern Black Sea region and move to Anatolia after the 1877-78 war. A lot of Muslim civilians were killed. Muslim refugees hated local Christians of Anatolia and tried to take a revenge for their killed relatives. 8. During the 1878' Berlin Congress Western countries agreed to use Armenians to weaken the Ottoman Empire. Western Countries and Russia started to deliver nationalistic propaganda and weapons to Armenians and prepare Armenian insurgents to fight against Ottoman Empire. They promised to announce the national Armenian republic after the failure of Ottoman Empire. 9. Decades of Armenian guerilla started after the Berlin Congress. During the WW1 Armenians switched over to the side of Entente (UK, France and Russia). It was a betrayal of Ottoman Empire and Ottoman Empire started to punish Armenians according to the medieval feudal laws. 10. Armenian nationalists started ethnic cleansing of the controlled territories to exterminate the whole Muslim population. Muslims of Eastern Anatolia were mostly Kurds and they were attacked by Armenians. Kurdish tribes were semi-independent and they were ready to switch over to the side of Entente. But Armenian attacks forced Kurds to stay loyal to Ottoman Empire. Bloody civil war between Armenians and Muslims of Eastern Anatolia started in 1915 and the Ottoman government wasn't an initiator of this war and it was not capable to stop it because the Ottoman Empire was on destruction. 11. Armenian insurgents responsible for hundreds of massacres against the Muslim population in Anatolia and Russian South Caucasus. Armenian insurgents attacked Muslims even in Baku, the largest Azerbaijani city, in 1918. But Armenia never recognized these massacres as crimes and continues to honor the murderers of civilian people as national heroes. 12. Ottoman Empire deported Armenians from Eastern Anatolia and let other Armenians leave Ottoman Empire. 350'000 Armenians migrated from Eastern Anatolia to Russia, some people moved to Persia and 250'000 Armenians were deported by Ottoman Empire to Syria. But Muslim officers and Muslim population (including Kurds and Arabs) considered Armenians as traitors and killers and hated them. When the Ottoman Empire lost the control over Syria, Armenian prisoners in Syria finally lost their chances to survive. How Europeans see it: "The noble ancient Armenian nation was intentionally exterminated by Turkey which wanted to get rid of Armenians and capture their properties". How it was actually: "Different Muslim nations of Ottoman Empire (Turks, Kurds, Azerbaijani, Circasses, Tatars) suffered ethnic cleansing and massacres and were forced to run from Balkans, Black Sea region and Caucasus to the Anatolia in the end of 19th Century. This resulted in multiple bloody clashes between Muslims and Christians in the Anatolia. When Armenians started guerilla for their independence, Muslim nations quickly understood that Muslims would suffer ethnic cleansing even in the Eastern Anatolia which was supposed as the territory of the future Armenian Republic. During the WW1 Armenian insurgents supported by Entente attacked Kurds and other Muslims, so the Ottoman Empire deported Armenians from Anatolia with huge victims from both Armenian and Muslim side". The question is, why Western people never wanted to check the details of this tragedy. The second question is, why so many Western people still have Barbaric ethics and still believe that if Muslims were killed, it's not even worth to mention it.
Third question: How come the channel owner (who talked about looking deeply into some conflicts in the context of history, politics and international law in the channel introduction) has the audacity to show two United Nations documents and shoot a video without doing enough research?
Thank you very much for commentary. I haven't heard any better. My grandmother was a genocide survivor and told disturbing stories about the events. With all that said, I do not believe that all turks are enemies. There were ones who risked their lives saving Armenians. My grandmother is an example of that. There is still hope for Armenians and Turks to become civil, but first the genocide acceptance has to be done. It seems that Turk politicians are still dreaming of Ottoman Empire return.
I agree. I really do hope that the two countries can find a way to build a better relationship. The events of 1915 were truly horrific. I can only imagine what your grandmother went through. I actually go to Armenia a couple of times a year and I am always amazed to see Ararat so near and yet so far. I think it is hard for many countries to come to terms with past who no doings. But it is also hugely important. Britain’s relationship with Ireland began to change when it accepted its part in the Famine. But Turkey finds it difficult, for all sorts of reasons I covered. On another note, I wanted to wish you a very warm welcome to the Channel. I really and truly appreciate the support. Thank you. It means a lot!
@@ayhancevik5657 No, she didn't. She has not witnessed any of that you say. I know that Russia was in war with Turkey and that there were Armenian soldiers on both sides: Russia and Turkey. Even if what you say is true (and not made up as many other "facts"), this doesn't close the question of Armenian Genocide. The partisans were fighting with Germans during the Second World War and I am sure there were atrocities too, but that didn't close the question with Jewish Genocide.
@@ashodmartirossian6487 You are a liar and your grandmother died with her secrets. In the east of Turkey, mass graves created as a result of the massacres of many Armenian gangs were found. Many cities, towns and villages were burned and destroyed by Armenian gangs. You cannot deny this. In addition, genocide is consciously gathering and killing people. The Ottomans did not take this approach in the exile incident. Of course, they made many mistakes. The deaths occurred due to these deficiencies and mistakes, but this does not mean genocide. During the exile, people whose families were massacred attacked the communities, thieves attacked. There was hunger. There were diseases. The soldiers were inadequate to prevent these, this is not genocide. Some of the Ottoman officials responsible for this were accused and hanged. In which genocide did countries try and hang their own soldiers? You are biased, do not see the facts and want to change history with revenge and lies. No, history cannot be written with your lies.
@@JamesKerLindsayIf the Turks committed genocide. Then can you provide us with evidence? objectively? Armenians were not subjected to genocide even during the most powerful times of the Ottoman Empire. Why did they suffer genocide while collapsing? Maybe the opposite is the Armenian fascist gangs there. While the Ottoman Empire was struggling to survive on the front lines in World War I, it took advantage of its weaknesses and gaps and massacred innocent people! Seeing this, the Ottoman Empire then perhaps sent these radical Armenians to another region. Have you ever looked at it from this perspective? Have you ever heard of the Dashnak and Hinchak Armenian organizations at that time? Do you know what activities they do there? Or have you heard about the Khojaly massacres in 1992? do you know about these? Just because the voice of Armenians is loud in the world does not mean that they are right. If the Turks were truly genocidal. During the time of the lawful sultan Suleiman, he would destroy everyone. because he had absolute power. I suggest you think about these a little...
Another excellent and very balanced analysis of a very sensitive & difficult subject.. you're a brave man James taking on this one..! Nothing but admiration for you doing so..! all the best.. g
Thank you so much George. It’s always nice to see the friendly faces in the comments. I suppose I should expect a degree of abuse given the topics I cover but it has gone into overdrive this past week or so. I’ll be heading over to your channel again soon for my dose of relaxation and soothing calm! ☺️
Talat Pasha gave the order for deportation of Armenians. According his indisputable figures, as recorded by Talat Pasha himself, the number Armenians subjected to deportations was 924,158 (see Murat Bardakci: Talat Paşa'nın evrakı metrukesi). Considering several hundred thousand Armenians subjected to deportations subsequently settled in Lebanon, France, South America, Armenia and the rest of the world it astounding how the figure of 1.5 million is pronounced and accepted.
Eastern Anatolia was Armenian lands since 3000 BC. Mongols, turks selcuks, tatars came with burning, killing, raping the indigenous Armenians. At the time, theres were more chrches in Van Mush Sasoon Ardahan Erzrum Trabzon than mosques in Eastern Anatolia. Armenians wanted liberation from ottomans just like any others.
There are several flaws in this kind of reasoning. First of all, those 900,000+ are only the ones that were officially deported, meaning there could be several thousand other who had been killed before the deportations already, as history shows that there were multiple events of mass killings of the Armenian citizens in the Ottoman empire. Hence it seems quite accurate, in my opinion.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. I did try to at least present the Turkish argument. Although, as you could probably tell, I have clear views on this. But it is important to understand the different positions in these important debates.
James is one of the few voices I value on international analysis. I don't always agree with his opinion pieces, but he approaches the most controversial of topics with a nuance seldom seen nowadays. Thanks for all you do, Professor Ker-Lindsay.
Thank you so much. That's incredibly kind of you to say. I really appreciate it. I would certainly hope that my videos are watched with a critical eye. And I always like to hear constructive disagreement. Hopefully, that can at least stimulate debate. :-)
@Prof James Ker-Lindsay The major flaw amongst most commentators and journalists nowadays is their inability to listen. Thank you for being someone who *does* listen.
@James Ker-Lindsay, I've been binge watching your videos and I have to say you really have a knack for falling into the really controversial topics. Most things like the Armenian Genocide or anything related to the Balkans such as your video on Kosovo or Bosnia falling apart are extremely difficult videos to do considering how emotionally charged they are. Most people avoid making these videos like the bubonic plague and for good reason. You sir took on the challenge and dove in head first. Perhaps a video on the little known ethnic cleansing campaigns by Russia in the North Caucasus would be a nice topic for you to tackle next.
Thanks so much! Haha! Yes, I really do pick them. :-) But, interestingly, I don’t always get a massive backlash. Some do provoke huge anger. My one on Bulgaria and North Macedonia unleashed all the Bulgarian nationalists. (I have my theories on this.) But very often it is nice to see that people do try to engage with the topics I cover and actually want to have a proper discussion. I had always hoped it could become a bit of a haven for informed debate on international relations and conflict.
@@JamesKerLindsay To be fair James you can't make a video on eastern European politics/ history and expect rational debate lol You're asking for a lot my man 😂😂
@@williamdavis9562 are you implying some racist essentialist generalisation about how Eastern Europeans relate to their history? Clearly orientalism in your country didn’t die with the Victorians.
Would you ever do a video on the Circassian genocide ? I think only Georgia recognises it. Also why is the Armenian genocide usually recognised more than the Assyrian genocide ? How similar were they ?
This topic is really sensitive and controversial. However, it is not clear why it attracts attention much more than similar crimes of Europeans or other nations? I am not talking about Holocaust, where Germans were forced to admit and keep apologizing for last 80 years. Ho sincere is another question, but at least they do. No, I talk about France crimes in Algeria, what happened with indigenous population in Australia and Americas just 150 years ago, Japanese war crimes which they are reluctant to apologize for? Why Turkey is being pressed that much? Because allies were unable to fully reach their goals to erase any memory of Turks in the region or turn Turks into their puppet state?
Good questions that make one to think. The fast response will be that maybe they do not deny it? But I have to do more research to confirm. The aboriginal population in Australia is still in a state of despair. Great Britain still keeps other countries as their vassal states. USA dictates the whole world how to behave... But the present topic is not about them. It is best if we stay in the frame of the topic and respect each other.
Dude ur country has a talent in manuplation.Your goverment does not tell the truth and your coubtry don’t know 20 years old massacre but you remember 100+ years events.It’s so weird…
@@DELLX_motivasyonSo Armenians Cypriots Greeks Assyrians & the entirety of the Balkans are all lying about Turkish aggression but Turkey are the good guys? 😂😂😂
The Greek national anthem is the first two stanzas of a long poem of 158 stanzas by Dionysios Solomos. See the Turkish hostility in some lines of this poem below. The sequel contains the same hostility. It tells the story of the massacre of 30 thousand Turks by the Greeks in the Corinth peninsula in 1835. Lyrics of the Greek National Anthem: Deep ocean, that's how I wish you were humming. And drown in its wave, every Turkish seed. Why did he slow down into combat for a moment? Why has the blood spilled decreased? Both helmets and swords To scattered brains, To the skulls torn apart, It's smeared with squirming internal organs the dogs were running low And they were shouting God, God! But the lips of the Christians were more true They were shouting fire! They were fighting like lions. Always fire! they were shouting. And the scumbags were dying, Shout out to God. Their dirty blood has become a river Flowing in the plain Innocent herbs instead of water drinking blood The bravest were shaken with blind steps They were expelled from Corinth. They hid and fled. Death sends its angel, Filled with famine and disease, Skeleton-like shapes They walk side by side.
Dionysios Solomos must have been a time traveler then, since he wrote the poem in 1823 and talked about events in 1835. You are probably referring to the siege of Tripolisa, which is mentioned in the anthem and also not located close to Corinth. Next time try some elementary research.
@@Mariouszful Thanks for the warning and correction. yes, tripolice massacre started in 1921. Approximately 30 thousand Turks, Muslims and Jews were killed by the Greeks. Below is a small excerpt from wikipedia about this massacre: British historian Walter Alison Phillips on the Tripolice massacre: British historian Walter Alison Phillips on the Tripolice massacre(Phillips, Alison W. The War of Greek Independence, 1821 to 1833. London, 1897, p.): « For three days the inhabitants of the city, a savage « For three days the inhabitants of the city were left to the evil and pleasure of a savage gang. No age or gender discrimination was made. Women and children were tortured before they were killed. The slaughter was so great that Kolokotronis said his horse's feet never touched the ground from the gate to the fort. After the Greek victory in the city, the roadsides were filled with corpses. Masses of Muslims, including women and children, were butchered like cattle in the nearby mountains. » William St. Clair (William St. Clair. That Greece Might Still Be Free The Philhellenes in the War of Independence. London: Oxford University Press, 1972. ISBN 0-19-215194-0, page 43) saw what foreign officers in Tripolice saw during the massacre He described it like this: « Over 10,000 Turks were killed. Prisoners who were suspected of hiding their money were tortured. Their arms and legs were cut off and slowly fried over the fire. The pregnant women had their bellies cut off, their heads cut off, and the dog's heads nestled between their legs. From Friday to Sunday, the air was filled with screams. ... A Greek boasted that he had killed 90 people. The Jewish community was systematically tortured.... Turkish children starving for weeks were thrown to the ground by the Greeks as they ran through the helpless ruins, then shot.... Water wells were filled with corpses..." On February 11, 1821, The American Mercury newspaper, published in the USA, wrote that 20,000 Turks were killed in the massacre in the city. Greek commander Teodoros Kolokotronis wrote in his memoirs that 32,000 people were killed and claimed that his horse did not step on the ground from the city walls to the palace due to the abundance of corpses. References: (Digital online copy by Elizabeth M. Edmonds, English translation, Kolokotrones, the Klepht and the Warrior, Sixty Years of Peril and Daring. An autobiography. London, 1892, pp.156-159) (Κολοκοτρωνης, Διηγησις συμβαντων, ε.α,σελ77)
In the video, you mention that the decision for an explict intention of killing order, is not necessary for being charged by such political term as genocide. On the other hand, In the hitler example or any other colonial power abusing over african or american continent, there is always a explict order for such action. But there is also documents in the archives that ottoman empire punished more than a 1000 military member to harm Ermenians on the road. There is a failure state and civil war. The emigration policy is known since Ottoman's ancient times not only minorities also against Turkish tribes. Instead of an action, genocide is a result of fascist( radical-modern) mindset and the hitler was the top of the mentality. An empire can't have any benefit to kill its components.
In fact, Belgium has openly acknowledged its wrongdoings. There is also a much more open national conversation about the wrongs of its actions in Africa. www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53232105 I still don’t see such a conversation in Turkey.
@@JamesKerLindsay Turkey is extremely annoyed by some countries using it as a blackmail against Turkey or using it as a propaganda tool against Turkey. Amd in fact Turkey wantted to discuss this issue with Armenia in international court however Armenia refused ( but accoding to the UN genocide convention one needs a declaration from the international court to legally recognize it. Othercise it stay as a claims and insult.) Later Turkey offered to form research commision but it is unanswered still. Belgium recognized but did not apologised.
@@JamesKerLindsay It even got out of control and became some nations pride and it is even used by Armenian diaspora to prevent assimilation within countries. There are so many disinformation made by them.
@@JamesKerLindsay killing 10 million people is "wrongdoings", relocating a part of your population because they joined arms with another country to attack you and your civillians is genocide. how very neutral of you.
@@JamesKerLindsay Türkiye has repeatedly stated that it is saddened by the events, but these events were not one-sided and do not meet the definition of genocide.
Similar incidents happened with Crimean Tatars and Koreans during the Soviet times. Do they qualify as genocide too? Tatars and Koreans do not have a powerful diaspora in the West. So does this mean whoever pushes harder will get what they want without adequate process?
I don't think Turkey should be blamed for genocide for Armenian, after all that was in war during the Ottoman government, this modern day Turkish Republic, all peoples in war suffer, so lets move on. Tell that too the native American, they lost all there land, and was eliminated, they don't claim Genocide. It was war, in wars bad things happens.
Well done James!! I am glad, I found your channel! A future topic could be the Lausanne Treaty, the related population exchange and what happened with the minorities in both countries! Χαιρετισμούς από Αθήνα!
Thank you so much Dimitris. I really appreciate it. Great suggestion! A few others have also asked me to look at the population exchange. I certainly hope to cover it. It is amazing to think that such a monumental decision could be made to order two entire populations to move. And very best regards from London! :-)
@@JamesKerLindsay ermenilerin doğu anadolu ve azerbaycanda ve yunanların batı anadolu da yaptığı soykırımları neden araştırmıyorsun?öeneğin fransanın cezayir, italyanın libya ve amerika kıtasındaki yerlilere yapılan soykırımları avusturalya da aborjinlere yapılan soykrımı!avrupa ve hristiyanlar soykırım yapınca neden hiç sesiniz çıkmıyor abd ırakta 2 milyon vietnamda 4 milyon sivile soykrım yaptı
What about the Hawaiian genocide? Even as a member of the Family of Nations having treaties of friendship with numerous countries, Hawaii has been ignored by the international community and the unprovoked Hawaiian genocide has yet to be recognized. It's no surprise that genocide during war is excusable when a peaceful and friendly People can face near extinction without any acknowledgement by countries that claim genocide with respect to their own Peoples.
@@axel665 Congress apologized only to aboriginal Hawaiians and their descendants but neglected to apologize to any other Hawaiian nationals, whether native or naturalized. Also the apology did not mention or acknowledge that the United States committed genocide.
"A 'Christian genocide' framing acknowledges the historic claims of Assyrian and Greek peoples, and the movements now stirring for recognition and restitution among Greek and Assyrian diasporas. It also brings to light the quite staggering cumulative death toll among the various Christian groups targeted ... of the 1.5 million Greeks of Asia minor - Ionians, Pontians, and Cappadocians - approximately 750,000 were massacred and 750,000 exiled. Pontian deaths alone totaled 353,000." Jones 2010, pp. 150-51: Jones, Adam (2006), Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction, Routledge.
You shameless liar, why don't you mention the genocide of Turks in Greece during the 1820 uprising? What about the Tripolitsa and Navarino massacres? What about exterminating hundreds of thousands of Turks living in the Pelopennese? Your national hero (!) Kolokotronis committed disgusting crimes against humanity. If had lived in modern times, he would have languished in prison after being brought to trial at the court in the Hague.
@Vangelis Skia, You really can't put the Armenian genocide on par with what happened to the Greeks. Because by the sheer numbers the Greeks actually slaughtered more Turks on the lands they conquered at the time than the Turks of Greeks. So if anything they'd both have to admit to it with Greece paying out more in reparations. The Armenian genocide sticks out because it was very one sided. It's like a 1000-1 ratio. I find it interesting when the topic of genocide comes up, people feel like it's a party they want to join. Very strange.
@@Kenan-Z "the genocide of Turks in Greece during the 1820 uprising" "exterminating hundreds of thousands of Turks living in the Pelopennese" 😂 THE ACTUAL TRUTH:😂 This is taken from the site "turkish coalition of America": "It is estimated that nearly 30 thousands Muslims lived in the Peloponnese in March 1821" tc-america/turkish-history/greek-war-of-independence-and-its-toll-on-turks But wait! Did you not write about a SUPPOSED genocide of hundreds of thousands?! 😂There is no source whatsoever that estimates the turks in Peloponnese before the Greek revolution as more than 30 thousand. Most sources speak of around 20 thousand souls. And a large percentage of those 20 thousand according to eye witness sources, sailed to Anatolia...It 's clear as crystal that you are the actual shameless liar. Better not comment about history since you don't even have the basic knowledge on the field, cause the only thing you "achieve" is to expose your cluelessness and ignorance on the subject and nothing more... And the uprising actually started in 1821 not 1820...There is probably not one sentence in your whole comment that doesn't include lies or inaccuracies which unfortunately for you and your propaganda can easily be dismantled through the actual sources....
@@Kenan-Z You are actually trying to present, a worldwide recognized genocide organized by the highest ranking turkish state officials of the time, as the same with massacres committed by a bunch of revolutionaries during the Greek war of independence?! 😂You are actually claiming that some badly organized Greek guerrillas who didn't even have a state or even a proper army, committed a genocide to the peoples of a huge empire?! Are you any serious AT ALL?! 😂
@@williamdavis9562 I simply posted a quotation by Adam Jones, a Canadian expert scholar and author of a textbook in the particular field of Genocide. Can't you see the clearly visible brackets?! Do you even know what the term "quotation" actually means?! I haven't written my own non-expert opinion nor did I provide sources by presumably biased non-reliable scholarship but by someone who is considered one of the leading experts on the field worldwide! You claim to have better knowledge on the subject than him? 😂
For a historical event to qualify as genocide, it must be legally binding. The events between the Turks and the Armenians are tragic, but as the Armenians say, the events did not happen unilaterally. These events were started by the Armenians and ended by the Turks. We are not ashamed of our ancestors, we are proud of them!
@@kevinyonan2147 'Turks mistreated the Armenians so they rebelled. ''When this happend actually?Armenians was loyal to Ottoman Empire .Thats why Ottoman Sultan gave the tittle for the Armenians ''Millet'i Sadıka'' that's mean loyal nation while other minotires rebellion against the Turks! No your people decided to take part of the Turk's land and killing Turks in their own home and they did.Half of million muslim Turks was get killed by the Armenians hands.
Please do one about the Turks and Muslims killed in surrounding ex Ottoman territories around the first world war. İn Greece, Bulgaria and Armenia. The stories of those refugees are just a valid. Death and killing committed on both sides. Denial of this prevents any reconciliation.
Who invaded who? Who's land was it first? Where are Turks originally from? If Turkey was invaded tomorrow and under oppression for 300 years you wouldn't want to kill the invaders? 😂
@noname-12184 I'm from Cyprus the Turks came at the turn of the 16th century had a 15% minority the Greeks have been there 4500 years and the Turks took half the island. That's fine what do the Kurds get from super fair Turkey? 🤣
@@emre_iris - nothing to do with the civilians? You have any idea how many christian civilians were murdered in massacres in the whole history of the Ottoman Empire and especially during it's dying years? Do you think the hatred against the turks, which led to the massacres you are talking about came from nowhere, because civilians were let to live peaceful lives with equal rights with the muslim population, protected by the law? Do you think all these people revolted in 19 century, because they lived happy and prosperous lives under the Ottoman rule? C'mon... And while there is still huge turkish community in my country, Bulgaria, the idiots from CUP litteraly tried to expulse or exterminate all christian minorities from the Ottoman territory during WWI and the years before that - it's not only the armenians, who suffered, while their case is truly mind-boggling in it's scale. And so many years after that, there is still no remorse - why? The Balkan massacres...which ones, these after the April Uprising in 1876, these during the war of 1877-1878, thеse during the summer of 1903 in Macedonia, or these during the summer of 1913 in Thrace?
i was in Armenia a while back, while visiting a cemetery with those wonderful carved stones you find there, a little girl approached us. she was playing there with some kids. we were talking to my friend (in norwegian) when we got struck at the depictions on a stone. the girl explained (in english) : this is the house; this is the bread (it was some wheat). so we asked, and who is the horseman? "oh, it was the turk that killed them". chilling.
Dear all, As a genocide survivor's grandson, I would like all not to compare the Armenian genocide to any other massacre or atrocities event, neither by size nor by impact on a nation. Nothing can compensate for a nation's pain, horror, and catastrophic results. Thank you all for understanding
I am so glad YT recently recommended one of your videos to me. I had no idea there exists a YT CH that uses logic, well rounded reasoning, &, most importantly, civility to discuss such topics. Even the comments, of those I've read so far, aren't the usual YT spite & regurgitated froth. Thank you, oh, so powerful YT algorithm. I bow to thee yet again.
This was just one of Turkey's genocides. There's the Assyrian, the Bulgarian, the Ionian Greek, the Pontic Greek, the Cypriot Greek and others. If Turkey recognizes one, it will have to recognize all the others step by step and thus recognize international law, something that it can't do.
@@williamdavis9562 The other way around? I will agree that Cyprus did try to suppress Turkish Cypriots and try to make Cyprus a part of Greece but was it was clearly not a genocide. What was clearly a war crime was the complete ethnic cleansing of Northern Cyprus from its majority Greek Cypriot populations and its further colonization by Mainland Turks to boost the Turkish population in the island and to legitimize the illegal occupation of Northern Cyprus
@@starman1144 Is that the word you use for a mass extermination effort, "Suppress" Interesting wording, I didn't realize slaughtering people based on their ethnic make up was suppressing them. I thought the was another phrase for that. Yea, it's called ethnic cleansing.
Thank you so much James. I really appreciate it. It was definitely one of those videos where I actually had to think long and hard about whether to go ahead with it. To be honest, I had to take a few minutes to consider whether to even to press the 'publish' button when it was finished!
I'm a Western person who has citizenship in Australia and The United Kingdom (plus ties to New Zelanad). I am annoyed that all 3 countries don't even recognise these events as Genocide. When you look into the Americas, who recognised the Armenian Genocide? United States of America, Canada, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile. No Carribbean nations, no Central American nations, Why? Turkey wants to pull other countries legs not to recognise the Genocide. The Armenian genocide also lack recognition in Asia and Africa. Only 3 nations in Asia (Syria, Lebanon and Armenia) and Libya in Africa recognize the Armenian Genocide. If Turkey were to cut ties with any country that recognised the Armenian, Assyrian and Greek Genocide. Those countries could loose out on big money and other things. Australia and New Zealand won't recognise the Genocide because it may cancel future Anzac Day ceremonies. The ANZACs in The Ottoman empire did witness these Genocides.
@@MartintheMetalhead Anzac didnt see anything because of constantly flying bullets above their heads. They were in Western shores of Anatolia, not East. They even couldnt reach the high grounds, they got humiliated and returned. Your claim is a joke and you are a clown
You are just a clown. Same thing goes for your English Side. What happened to Real Natives of Australia and America? What happened to africans? I hope all countries will recognize the genocides committed by English people in Australia, canada, us and africa one day
@@MartintheMetalhead yeah evidence like that make this believable story. sources: christian missionaries, American diplomats interested in war and now anzac soldier stuck btw sea and hill .
When you have time, tell about what the Russians, Armenians, French, Greeks and British did in Anatolia during the First World War and Turkey's War of Independence. I can still see the shame of being defeated by the women, children and elders who fought to the last drop of their blood for their independence. Those who accuse us of genocide should look at their own history.
Thanks. I know that there’s more than enough blame to go round with many wars. Lots of countries have done terrible things. The problem is that Turkey denies it took place. This is an ongoing political problem. Far better to accept that something truly terrible happened and move on. Just refusing to accept it will only make it more of a powerful weapon against Turkey.
@@JamesKerLindsay Armenians klled innocent Turks and other different Minorities to increase their influence in Russian occupied territories. The real problem is that Armenians are shown as innocent. If Turkey committed genocide, the same crime applies to Armenians. Just stop blaming Turkey.
@@mym2726 That's beyond idiotic.Are bosniaks commiting genocide when they retaliated against serb yugoslavian soldiers trying to purge them? What Armenians did was a political revolution and retaliation against kurd and turkish raiders during the latter days of the Ottoman Empire,and by any means are not as brutal as the repression instituted by the Pashas
@@ihavenojawandimustscream4681 It's not the same thing and you're lying. Is it a defense tactic against the enemy that Armenians kll innocent people along with the Russians?
@@ihavenojawandimustscream4681 Despite what Armenians did, they were only expelled from Anatolia and allowed to live. If I had been the Ottoman Pasha during those war years, I would have imitated what the Armenians and Russians were doing.
The idea of apologizing for the past is in itself a political issue at it’s heart, as doing so can be bad for national morale and unity. It can help a victimized group unify with the country, however it can also serve as a stamp of approval for such a group to continue to cast dissent. It it worth spurning the majority, who generally feel self-righteous about their own, their father’s, their grandfather’s, or their ancestors atrocities? After all, it is simply human nature to believe one’s family or group is in the right. Even when there is an absolute necessity for apologizing, doing so in too intense a manner or for too long after the events can still produce this negative affect, leading to intense political polarization today based on events that happened decades of centuries ago. See Germany in the last decade for an example of this, or America in the last 7-8 years. Both are now re-fighting old civil conflicts in modern politics because of this… Edit: and of course the 1915-21 events were a genocide, but I’m Christian and not I’m Turkish so therefore I have no reasons to justify it, though at the same time I’m not going to overplay it, as all countries commit atrocities and war crimes, basically all human settlement and wars involving such. The exception on calling this out, and it shouldn’t be because it’s hypocritical, but I’m guilty of doing it as well, is when the clash is ideological, such as the Soviets or Chinese calling out America’s atrocities as an example of the evils of Classical imperialism, and likewise America calling out the evils of the Soviet Union and (this is obviously the one I’m guilty of) Communist China as demonstrating the evils of political Socialism.
Thanks as ever. I can see the argument for national unity. But that also says a lot about a country as well. In this case, it is not much of an issue as the Armenian community is not that large any moire, and certainly won't be galvanised by this. More generally, I think that states must be evolve to evolve and reflect changing circumstances. This is the PR problem Turkey now faces. In a world where many countries are facing up to their past, and especially countries that Turkey regards as close allies, its own position looks increasingly bad. That's why I noted that even from a purely pragmatic point of view (leaving aside the morality of this issue for a moment, if one can or should) there is an argument to accept what happened and move on as a matter of effective foreign policy. Not only will it smooth relations with partners, it increases Turkey's moral grounds to then condemn atrocities against Muslims, thus bolstering Erdogan's position as a leader in the Islamic world. He would be so much stronger speaking out once he has addressed the genocide argument.
@@JamesKerLindsay true I meant in general, but for sure in turkey’s specifically case it has nothing really to lose by accepting responsibility in terms of bolstering Turkish Armenians, however regardless of the lack of Armenians left in Turkey it still could create a divide within the Turkish population over the issue of national pride. There is a great danger in deconstructing national myths that you could deconstruct the nation with it.
My father’s family was Levantine, Christians originally from Venetia, who had been living between the Greek island of Kos and neighbouring Turkish city of Izmir for six centuries before, as Christians, they were forced to flee and leave it all behind in the early 1920’s. They went to Lebanon which they have also had to leave fifty years later… And I myself am now European because of this.
If someone came and raided your village while you were at war with Russia, killing the child, the woman, and even the pregnant woman, and removing the baby in her womb, what would you do in such a situation? All of these events take place behind the war with Russia and the men returning to the village attack some Armenians. I draw your attention to the fact that those who carry out these attacks are not the soldiers who have been ordered by the state, they are the men living in those villages and they do not carry out an organized attack. But the Armenians, who raided and massacred those villages and cities, act in a very organized and systematic way. Even in such a situation, the state moved its Armenian citizens to another region within the country in order to prevent such incidents. The responsible soldiers who mistreated the Armenian citizens during this transport were later brought to court and punished. We feel sorry for all Ottoman citizens who lost their lives in these sad events in the region at that time. because people's right to live before their race and religion is sacred. James, I think you don't have a full grasp on this subject, and it would be better if you talk about such issues from the perspective of both communities. It hurt us Turks a lot, and if I look at it from your point of view, the massacre committed by the Greeks in the Peloponnese peninsula is exactly the same and exactly the same as the Armenian terrorists above. Read about this massacre from an English writer who was there at that time, and then let's talk to you about what genocide is. We feel sorry for the people who died in our country and in any part of the world and for any reason, and for this, the religion and race of those people do not matter. because we have a conscience. I am now asking everyone here who is not Turkish, do you feel sorry for everyone who died in these events that happened a hundred years ago, or do you only feel sorry for your own kinsmen and religious brothers? Or do you feel sorry for the Turks who died in the Turkish massacre that took place about 200 centuries ago in the Peloponnese peninsula, which is within the borders of Greece today? Or do you think that the people who died there were Turks, and are you happy inside? I ask these questions to your conscience and answer yourself, do you feel sorry for all the people who died during those events or are you just clinging to this issue because of racial hatred? And we Turks do not hate them, despite all the sad events that happened with the Armenians in the past, because we have never committed genocide in our history and therefore we have full confidence and self-confidence.
@@Lafuerza_V Yes, it's classic for you, but for us it's our stance on real events. Because your view on this issue is racial and we do not look at this issue as racially as you do. Indeed, if you, like us, look at the subject on the basis of human life, come and say that you are sorry for all the Muslims - Christians, Turks - Armenians who died there. Let's talk about why those events turned into such a great tragedy. Let's talk about why the Ottoman state officials were insufficient to prevent these events. Let's empathize to understand each other. I don't think you can do that, because you're looking at the issue on a racial basis and passing your anger on to your children from generation to generation. As long as you look at it that way, we don't care.
Honestly, I was very surprised after watching the video. It is the first time I have seen a Western perspective on the subject that is unbiased. Thank you. Let me explain the issues we Turks have regarding this matter: The claims bear no resemblance to other events they are often compared to, such as the Holocaust or Srebrenica. If the motivation were religious or racial, it would have affected Armenians in other parts of the Ottoman Empire as well. However, the events in question are only alleged for Armenians in Eastern Anatolia. There is not a single decision by the Ottoman government aimed at the massacre of Armenians, nor is there any such document. However, there are documents regarding the relocation to Syria, which we do not dispute, and it represents a serious human rights violation. The topic is approached very one-sidedly, especially by the West. During these events, there was a world war, and the Ottoman army fighting the Russian forces attacking from Eastern Anatolia faced hit-and-run tactics, village raids, and supply line disruptions by the extremely nationalist and separatist Dashnak organization and its 100,000 Armenian members (later many more joined the Russian army). The source of the tragedy here is not a state targeting a group, but an internal conflict between two different religious and ethnic subjects of an empire. There is a chain of events where Turks responded to Armenian village raids, and Armenians responded in turn, escalating the conflict. The reason for the state's decision to relocate was that ordinary Turkish civilians, who were supposed to support the army, were dying while clashing with Armenians; similarly, Armenians were causing damage right behind the front against Russia. The decision was made for very rational reasons-to stabilize the region for the war effort against Russia. Discussing these events without mentioning the 600,000 Turkish civilians who died in the region is very disturbing and even nauseating.
Thank you for your positive contributions to the actual discussion on this topic. I am admittedly ignorant of most of the facts surrounding this topic & have been curious for some time now. Your comments along with this video of course have added to my overall understanding. I didn't realize how complex this was.
@@Lyle-In-NO it really is a complex matter. But the main problem is, the west is flagging people that argues the Armenian allegations like they are denying the holocaust. Bernard Lewis and some other historians are literally cancelled in the U.S. just because they simply said it wasn’t a genocide, it was a civil war. The subject has become a political matter rather than a historic dispute. Türkiye is actually welcoming any historian who wants to study this matter in Imperial Archives, in Istanbul. Anyway, I am happy to see someone that trying to understand. Thank you for your comment.
3:20 - Don't forget about the Armenians who were loaded onto ships and "deported" into the middle of the Black Sea. (spoiler: they didn't get to stay on the ships either.) 4:07 - Also don't forget that the definition of genocide written by the UN was formulated _specifically_ to describe what was inflicted on Armenians by the Ottoman Empire. The Armenian Genocide cannot be described as anything other than a genocide because it is the _exemplar_ of the word.
The term "genocide" was coined by a Polish lawyer named Rafał Lemkin in 1944. Lemkin was motivated by the atrocities committed by the Germany and Soviet Russia during the II WW.
How many, Britain, France, US, Belgium recognised yet in their genocide yet? none,. So its clear this is only political motivated action against Turkey in this issue which is unfortunate anyone hurt in that tribble war. At least Germany did. Thanks.
Pointing a finger will not cover up the atrocity that was factually committed. The problem with you Turks is your proud. Don't forget that you are branded as the sickman of Europe and I dare say Asia too! The rotten decaying core of the Ottoman Empire. 🇹🇷👎
Ok, I see it's very hard to speak about many genocides committed by Europeans country. But at least we would like to see Tripolice katliami because Greece is not totally an European country lets say half 🙂
@@snnnndddyy898 they will never speak about that because look at what your country is doing to Armenia rn. Khojaly is 0.0001% of what azerbaidjan is doing
Thank William. I thought to also mention it, but it was a little removed from the key events being described. As ever, it’s always a balancing act. But I do plan to return to the broader subject of the population exchanges in another video and will try to bring it up then as part of the background to events.
@@Kalimdor199Menegroth yea that's why grandmother of mother always told the stories of burning villages and mosques around my hometown. When Greek army occupied my town in march 1921, Greek gangs turn on its neighbours, steel all the animals and gold after killing many of the people. People always had to run into forests and mountains to hide themselves. Thanks god Ataturk and its army saved my town after 80 days of occupation.
Thanks so much. Yes, this is a little known element of the story. Many think that this is about a wholesale denial of the facts. It isn't. It is about whether the events constitute genocide in the formal meaning of the term.
@@JamesKerLindsay Turkey does not recognise it as a genocide period. Don't sell wrong information as propoganda Turkey describe civilian killings as "mukatele" which means mutual revenge killings by irregulars. British Goverment investigated and found zero evidence regarding intend of genocide. Ottoman goverment even hanged officilas for poor supervision during the mass deportation. You have conveniently don't mention Bernard Lewis a British! historian and you are basicly doing a pro genoice propoganda. ruclips.net/video/U0SDHOiY7vQ/видео.html watch and maybe learn something. You have also don't mention how many Muslim Turk and Kurds died in the hand of Armenian Gangs.
@@metesever6546 Did you actually watch the video? I discuss the main arguments and perspectives. And I think I fairly outlined the Turkish stance, although I think its position is ultimately self-defeating.
@@JamesKerLindsay How countries deal with their past increasingly important? Are you that naive? What is AUKUS? Why is India is in it ? Who colonized India? Why Turkey is in NATO? Russia, France, US was already supporting the armenian rebellion, so if there is some self defeating it is the trying to convince the judges who calls for ur head..
@@JamesKerLindsay It's clear that you made that video with a biased perspective. You take sides. If it was different, I would definitely get surprised. Because, Turks are the "constituent Other" of the Christian Europe. Turks have been demonized and dehumanized in European religious, historical, and literary narratives throughout history. Your minds are already shaped firmly, like cast iron.
yes, it's called genocide. The Turkish state does not accept this, the lands and population lost by Turkey in the Balkans are still a nightmare for the Turks.And that fear is still very much alive. because there is the Kurdish issue. First of all, the European Union and America should be sincere. Indeed, the Turkish state gave up on the island of Cyprus in 2004. The President of Turkey went to Armenia. The two football teams played a friendly match together. They worked hard to enter the European Union. What was the result. With an arrogant and still superior mentality, the West excluded Turkey. The West supported the military coup in Turkey. and the Turkish government has moved away from democracy. I hope the coming years will be more peaceful.
Thanks for the research & presentation James. Can you pls look at the pros & cons of the British Empire. Some of the atrocities commited in India for instance or even Kenya with the Mau Mau tribe would be illuminating.
When Turk recognizes the genocide happened they will finally become happy and healthy humans. Until then, they will be a sad lot their so life. I’m from marash, I am Anatolia, my grandparents survived the Armenian genocide.
@@jackieny9914 if there was any genocide, surviving would not be an option against Turks, so you mentioning your grandparents surviving, means there was no genocide against them, there was just harsh conditions in which some of your people died, but at that time, a lot people died due to those conditions, you will not be getting anything from Turkey in the name of the genocide. Do whatever you can, still, you will always be a so-called country of poorest people on earth due to their hate towards Turks.
I feel like the wide span of what is genocide is important. When I think of it I tend to think of things like Rwanda or the Holocaust as in the systematic killing of groups. I feel like that that idea and view is so powerful that in many minds that is what is seen as genocide so when things like transferring people or groups across harsh areas or separating people or cultures happen it doesn’t pop into the mind as genocide. And I think those events are important but the specific focus on and implementing of such as genocide makes it more difficult in the public sense
Thank you so much. You are completely right. As I also explained in my video on Xinjiang, there is a widespread belief Genocide only refers to directly ordered mass killing. That is not the case. That is the most directly obvious form of genocide, but it far from the totality if the term. Genocide is about trying to deliberately eradicate a group or a part of that group,
@@JamesKerLindsay Can you please also make a video about what happened after their deportation? The revenge movement Armenians started which resulted in killings of more than 1 million Turkish and Kurdish civilians. Because if we are going to talk about this issue, we have to talk about what happened before the events and what happened after the events as well. There are many mass graves in Turkey which have Turkish and Kurdish peoples' bones. So if we were to call a deportation a genocide, then shouldn't we also talk about direct killings of Turks and Kurds and call it a genocide? And I know for a fact that Ottoman Empire commissioned many guards to protect Armenians while they were being deported, which we saw in a photograph as well that you put on your video. What pisses me of is that the Ottomans had to fight in many fronts which caused lack of supplies and lack of men as well, so understandably they couldn't provide Armenians with a lot of supplies nor men(guards). People do not hesitate to call it a genocide, but nobody talks about how Armenians directly killed my people which were unarmed, and basically got away with it. What I believe is that this matter has become more of a pressure tool rather than the recognition of the tragic events that occurred. I feel sorry for every single civilian who lost their lives whether they were Armenian, Turkish, or Kurdish; but I'm against calling these events a genocide only to humiliate us and demand lands from us.
@@bugrayuksel3502 That is mostly part of your mythology. Armenians simply put did not have the numbers or the military power, especially during the period when they were being killed and deported to conduct any form of mass killing against anyone. Localized small scale war crimes as reprisals? Yes. Killing over 1 million Turkish civilians? Probably in a fantasy book. "And I know for a fact that Ottoman Empire commissioned many guards to protect Armenians" The same guards that were escorting them to their doom? So helpful were those guards that they allowed Kurdish and Turkish irregular troops to periodically attack the Armenians being deported and massacre them. There was never any intention by the Turkish government to supply the Armenian people being deported. In fact the location chosen for the location was strategically chosen to liquidate those deported. The parts of Syria where the surviving Armenians were sent was a dessert, with little fertile land to grow crops, livestock, little water to fish. The intention was clear to send them to an inhospitable place and they will die by themselves due to starvation, dehydration or by prey to Kurdish nomadic raids. Trying to invent some fantastical mass-murders that reportedly Armenians perpetrated is something that has been already debunked by Turkish professors such as Taner Akcam. You can be against calling it a genocide. Same Nazis are against calling the Holocaust a genocide. But we have a moral duty to recognize it as such. While our governments may not, we, the average folk should an will.
I am a Turk living in Anatolia. I am not a Muslim. The Ottomans mean nothing to me. But even I do not accept the Armenian Genocide at all. The general view of the Turks is the same as me.
Good video. What happened to the Christians of Anatolia during the late days of the Ottoman Empire, was ethnic cleansing. It was a state policy to get rid of them especially after the balkan wars.
Thank you. I agree. It would certainly amount to ethnic cleansing. But I think it is the way that this ethnic cleansing was conducted that creates the argument for genocide. Had the deportations been carried out in a way that tried to preserve human life it would have been appalling, but it wouldn’t have been genocide. It was forcing people to walk into the desert without adequate food, water or medical attention that has led most observers to argue that it constitutes genocide. (Edited for spelling.)
@@JamesKerLindsay If it were ethnic cleansing none of them would left alive. The response was not national. Many Christian families living in the West were protected. Those families are still alive and keeping their names in Turkey today. There are still Armenian schools in Turkey that preserve the language since half a Millenium. I really don't understand how warped the Western perception on this issue is.. There was not a unified, omnipotent response, or a decree, by the state, to exterminate the Armenians. The response to their alliance with the invading forces(Russian, British) were local, and the people that responded the most were the ones that suffered the most from their newly formed alliances. The populous had been driven, killed by Armenian, British and Russian forces. We have to be grateful for the Russians though, it was them during their revolution that unravelled the sykes picot hotline, all the messages, and the real thoughts and perceptions about the minorities that are used as pawns by the powers that be. But alas, good attempt to revisionise. Looks professional enough=).
@@JamesKerLindsay I think, the main reason behind the so-called denial is hypocrisy, which can easily be seen here! Two events are mentioned above. In the former one, 1,5 million muslims were deported to Anatolia and around half of them died because of the committed atrocities, diseaaes, hunger and cold. This is called 1st Balkan War. In the later, 1,5 million Armenians were deported and a (million?) disputed amount of which died because of the same kind of atrocities, diseases and hunger. This is called "genocide or ethnic cleansing of the christian community in Anatolia". Dear Prof Ker-Lindsay, why don't you prepare a video about ethnic cleansing of the muslim population in the 1st Balkan War and if this may also be an act of genocide?
@@JamesKerLindsay Bernard Lewis denied the Armenian genocide. He argued that the deaths of the mass killings resulted from a struggle between two nationalistic movements, claiming that there is no proof of intent by the Ottoman government to exterminate the Armenian nation
@@JamesKerLindsay It preserved human lifes. We dont know how many died. 600.000 is a very exaggerated number let alone 1.5 million. Where do you think the diaspora come from ?
Our comment on this issue is wrong. Why are you telling us what the Armenian gangs have done to the Kurds and Turks in the east since 1894? Thousands of innocent people were murdered in mosques by Dashnak gangs.
Hmmm. I see your point but I still believe that it is a little bit one-sided. What do you think of the Armenian attacks to Turkish civilians in the late 1800s? Why did you not mention the Russian-backed Armenian forces attacking Turkish citizens before, and as soon as the WW1 was announced making use of the opportunity? Why did you not come to a conclusion on the Turkish muslim civilians that were mass murdered by the Armenians, namely in the Turkish city Van? Is that not a genocide? I repeat, is that not a genocide? Was this so-called genocide in fact targeted without a reason after living in peace for several hundreds of years? Or was it caused by the independence movement starting in the Balkans, and the Armenians wanted to get a taste of it, backed by their older brother Russia? I wish you touched upon these points as well. The Jewish people in Germany took no arms, the Uyghur Turks in China took no arms, the African people enslaved by European nations took no arms. Their only fault was simply to exist. Can you put this occasion in the same basket as the other examples? Don't you think that it would not be an insult to those people who suffered during those incidents? I think they would. In Turkish history, this issue is not very significant. We have had our people killed only because of their ethnicity in the past as well. You dont believe me? Look at what the Uygur Turks are going through right now. Turks ruled the world many times in the past during the times of the Ottomans, Seljuks, Golden Horde, Gokturks etc. We have a huge, very rich history. This issue is Armenia's only source of identity and only way that they can keep their people together. That is why they hold onto it like they have nothing else. Because they have nothing else. Turkish resources estimate that we also lost over 500,000 people resulting because of Armenian attacks. WW1 was an all-out war meaning that civilians in most cases were involved in battles. Weaponized civilians by Russian forces are not civilians anymore, especially if they are capable of mass murdering others and attacking remote villages to gain land. Turkey should put more emphasis on this issue, because it is ridiculous how many publications that the Armenians do every day, and Turkey lets this issue arise even to this day.
"People were mean to us in the past so we can do and say what we want" God, you sound like such a baby. Also you clearly didn't actually watch the video.
The city of Van is Armenian. So are Sasoun, Mush, Ardahan, Erzrum, Trabzon...turkish history is 600 years old unlike Armenian which is 7000...so now you tell me who occupied who? EVERYTHING and ANYTHING turkish is stolen from indigenous nations. Starting from lands, language, alphabet, mosque (Haga Sophia church), food, music... that's the absolute truth...
@@noway6379 @Oh no, 600 years? You are a small country and your culture is very small. Everything you learned is a big lie. I won't bother myself by answering you
A little unrelated, but I am surprised that you used the term Arabian Gulf instead of Persian Gulf, similar to how Arabian governments would refer to it. Is that how it is usually called in Britain?
Another fascinating topic. It is amazing that the issue still provokes such emotions from the successor state to the ottoman empire so many years later. Surely it would have been easy enough to place the blame on the Young Turk/Ottoman government and distance the Republic of Turkey from culpability? Do you think a Turkish/Armenian rapprochement is possible or will it always be prevented by the nagorno-karabakh/artsakh conflict and the issue of the 1915 genocide?
Thanks. I agree fully. Turkey would have been better to put this down to the Ottoman Empire, recognised it and moved on. As I say, with every passing year it makes it more difficult to back down and, in prevailing circumstances where countries now recognise atrocities, is doing more and more harm to its reputation. As for rapprochement, that would probably be difficult to see at the moment given Nagorno-Karabakh.
@@JamesKerLindsay It's a real pity for Armenia that they remain stuck in a situation where they have such poor relations with neighbours and a dependency on Moscow alone.
Thanks. I am thinking about it. The thing is that I have actually recently prepared a script on Namibia for my origins of countries series. (Not many people realise it, but its path to independence is actually one of the most important in the modern era!) I do mention it in that. But I don’t necessarily want to focus too much on historical cases. As you saw, even in this video the focus was firmly on the international relations aspects of the issue, rather than a detailed account of 1915. I would really want to have a very contemporary hook to the video. Finally, as you might imagine, I don’t really like doing these type of videos as they attract the very worst types of trolls - genocide deniers! My topics are grim enough without having to get into that territory too often. I’m sure you understand.
Great video as always! Next year I am writing my bachelor thesis about recognition of armenian genocide. Is there any chance you could recommned any sources you used besides those in description? Love your videos and greetings from Slovakia.
Hi Alex, there are a lot of books out there. Look for ones published by reputable publishers, such as major university presses (Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.) or well by well established academic presses (Routledge, Palgrave). IB Taurus and Hurst might also have some books. A well-respected Turkish scholar who has written on this is Taner Akcam.
it's never been approved by any court rather thn politic games and gains for some powers so how could you call it a genocide??? Genocide claims based on what!
All recognitions are done by political bodies and political reasons. Term genocide was use so loosely, when it comes to Armenian issue, then all the countries committed genocide in every war they were in.
Dear Prof. have you made a video about the difficult relation between South Korea and Japan (including issues such as the "comfort women" and the Yakusuni Shrine)? Two countries that I would expect to be closed allies. I worked for both Mitsubishi Motors and Hyundai and executives from both companies couldn't be in the same room!!!
Thanks so much Jorge. Great suggestion. I’ve wanted to look at Korea for a while. But this is a really interesting angle to explore. I’ve marked it down.
A good attempt at tackling this issue but you fail to mention historians are divided on the matter. Historians such as Stone & McCarthy have concluded there is no evidence that falls under the definition of genocide. Rather what we have are stories of atrocities handed down generation by generation. The British trials did not find any evidence when everything was fresh and the British had a motivation to do so. Forced relocation in times of war (bearing in mind Christian countries had on mass invaded Turkey on all fronts to dismember the ottoman lands) does not amount to genocide (Stone). Did terrible things happen? Did the Turks take advantage and take revenge on the Armenias that sided with the Russians and killed innocent Muslims village by village? No doubt they did but does it account to genocide? It is interesting that many of the countries that are in the genocide camp have large Armenian diaspora, the other countries are historic Turcophobes and the rest mostly Christian countries. What does this tell you? It is also somewhat odd that these same countries refuse to own up to their own genocidal behavior (US, native Indians. France, Algeria, Republic of Cyprus.Turkis Cypriots. Russia, there are loads and these are just to name a few) again mainly Christian countries. In summary, until a commission of historians is established to ultimately conclude this matter the question of was it genocide or not will remain in doubt and until that time genocide should not be concluded. Would should definitely not happen is for politicians to make decisions for political expediency. The saying politicians do not make good history applies here. This is not only wrong but devoid of any conclusive evidence lessons the weight of their argument.
Thanks. I was a little more cautious on this point in an earlier draft of the script. However, I think that the overwhelming majority of scholars do accept the view that the events in 1915 do constitute genocide under the terms of the Genocide Convention. Also, even the British Government concedes that the Malta tribunals were affected by serious questions about jurisdiction. I think the view now is that the trials themselves can't be used either way. As for the question of the deportations, I agree that forced relocations cannot be considered to be genocide in themselves; although they could be considered ethnic cleansing. The problem is this case was the way in which the deportations were conducted. Expelling a people who had been identified as enemies of the state into the desert with no obvious regard for their basic human needs would, by any reasonable view, effectively amount to a policy of extermination. This is the fundamental argument.
@@JamesKerLindsay I take your point however I do not understand why the Armenians do not invite these scholars to review the evidence and accept the conclusions either way? If genocide is concluded an apology and consideration of reperations should be discussed. If the Armenian position is strong why do they avoid going down this route?
Thank you James for this historical video about Armenian Genocide in 1915 by Ottoman empire who massacred 1.5 Million Armenian also Assyrian and Greeks. But people should know that that country is not belong to Turks, used to be Armenian land and Greeks,Assyrian's which Turks about 850 years ago concurred by Seljuks and turks and distroyed millions of life.
Well, things happened before 200 years are history, where human rights didn't existed or globalism, you can't blame those people for conquering Anatolia or Balkans, Timur had killed 50.000 Armenian war prisoners by building a platform and throwing a feast on top of it.
Thank you James.. I think most democratic nations will eventually accept the term genocide and it is a matter of time. Most non-Turkish historians that study the subject agree that the Ottoman government from 1915 carried out the systematic mass murder and expulsion of around 1.5 million ethnic Armenians, which meets the definition of a genocide.
No. The Armenian Genocide is the source of the word Genocide. Raphael Lemkin based the word Genocide on the Armenian Genocide. Its like saying the Moon meets the definition of a moon.
Thanks for the video, very interesting as always. It was interesting to note that the issue is not over reparations in case Turkey acknowledges the genocide. In that case, I am curious as to why the modern Turkish Republic is reluctant considering the atrocity was committed by the Empire that the modern state fought against during the Turkish War of Independence.
The simple fact is there is no evidence. You cannot force the acquisition of genocide down someone's throats devoid of evidence. Turkey has agreed to establish an international commission of historians to look into the matter. Why does Armenia if they are so confident of their claim refuse the commission?
@@thetraveller1612 Check out this then. www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/en/document/extermination-ottoman-armenians-young-turk-regime-1915-1916.html The timeline has sources linked to it for you to research. Many of these authors are historians. Where is the evidence of your claim? and does it come from a non-Turkish source? The Turkish government has a high control over the media so I don’t believe a Turkish source would be unbiased.
@@connor4955 yes evidence from non Turkish sources. If there is evidence either way then let international historians assess and conclude once and for all. This is the only way forward on the matter.
It does become a problem when you want to reinstitute a neo ottoman empire. Not to mention it's not the only genocide Turks have carried out AND they are still actively persecuting ethnic and religious groups in their country to this day.
The question of how countries respond to historic atrocities has become increasingly significant. Yes i see, but i dont know where that path leads anymore
Isn't it crazy how in Germany you can go to jail for denying to Holocaust but in Turkey the same can happen to you for not denying the Armenian genocide.
The thing that no country mention including ours is that same years, in Balkans, Turks forced to exile and died on the road because of the hunger and violence that nobody mentions. In Cyprus, 1974, Turks living in the land killed by the Greeks to unite with Greece and today no country recognizes Turkish Republic of Cyprus. Bulgarian genocide, and at the same time Arzerbaijan genocide happened in 1994 still doesn’t recognized nor talked in the Europe even thought Armenian attack the civilians with an argument of Karabakh is theirs even it is given by Russia to Azerbaijan. Many died and suffered but their stories untold and continue. I haven’t seen the Armenian genocide so did my mom, grandma and maybe her mother even didn’t see it. The stories haven’t told by our parents but we know that this is not one way down. There were many occasions happened before Armenian exile in world war 1 that could said to be Turkish genocide but unsurprisingly it is not noticed. I am not here to blame but why united nations are so persistent about Armenian genocide but not about the ones done by Armenian in near future? Why there is some sort of bias? I think that needs to be questioned and that is what we are standing in. Many mistakes had been done in the past and many stories changed over time so I think it would be more right to let it go since no countries really try to notice the truth but just power against the other. I am not writing to say you are not right vice versa. This video is really the most objective video I have ever seen so thanks for that but still there are stories that forgotten and circumstances the Europe forgets to mention.
James, you are really an amazing expert in this things. The knowledge you have on international affairs and countries foreign relation is on a different level. Historically , Turkey has always had issues with many neighbouring countries, Greece, Russia, Armenia, Cypress and others but the Armenian genocide has always been obvious, with so many evidences that these genocides and atrocities had been committed against the poor Armenian by Turkish forces. As a country Turkey need to come out and apologise to the atrocities and genocide they committed against the Armenians. Turkey is also a country with a tendency to invade any country that dare attempts to cross their imaginary or geographical borders. For example the recent confrontations with Greece, Syria and the the war of words with Israel etc... They consider themselves as the regional power which is wrong and far from the truth.
Who would apologize for the hundreds of thousands of Turks (more than 500 thousand to be exact) killed by Armenians during those events, for hundreds of thousands massacred by the Greeks in Tripolitsa and Navarino massacres of 1821 and in various other massacres in Crete and the Pelopennese? Why are these victims not given the same sympathy? The answer is: because they are not Christians and the whole global media is controlled by their erstwhile enemies.
Name some of those "So many Evidences" then ? Turkey calls Armenia to international court they refuse. Turkey calls for internaional historians and researches do investigate matter they refuse. Turkey open Ottoman and Turkish Archives for investigation again Armenia refuses infact Turkey offered 4 millin+20 million USD in humnetarian aid had armenia open their archives they refuse. Turkey calls for any form of solid evidence, Armenia can't produce any. This is bullshit and injustice towards Turks and you know it. Hell There is no international court ruling, political consensus or academic agreement that defines the events of 1915 as genocide Also it's simple biology and math lol What's today armenian population 3 million in Armenia and total 11 million all over the world. What was their fertility rate during last 100 years 1.2 to 2.1 What's their claim on death tall on events of 1915 ? 1.5 to 2 millon So unless each and EVERY armenian family produced 36 child UNRECORDED a century straight such claims are mathematicly hell even biologically impossible. And so there's no genocide it's nothing but a political lie in order to pressure Turkey simple as that.. So.. Quit being stupid pls.
It can't be callled a genocide. Ottomans were attacked from all fronts and they lost majority of their people and land. WW1 was still going on and in such situation, Armenian rebels were attacking the Ottomans. Ottomans reacted to this and killed the rebels and deported them. Yes they went too far but it was about saving their land and not killing Armenians. Also what choice did they had. The rebels would never stop. It was an act of self defence.
@@JamesKerLindsay Slavery was abolished as late as 1908 in The Ottoman Empire.Much later then in Europe.In Croatia women had to tattoo their bodies in crosses and all kinds of symbols to protect themselfs from abductions,rape and murder.The Ottomans saw tattoos as something dirty... Now women in Croatia tattoo those symbols as a matter of pride and tradition.It has had a real revival in the last 2 decades
@@mariocroatia9321 if you are still speaking your own language and still same religion that clearly shows how good Ottoman Empire was so stop fooling yourself with that crap.. Here in Ireland we speak English and many more, some countries speaks German, some countries speaks French and I wonder why...! Ottoman Empire was probably far more better thn those murderers...
You claimed that Turkey is an imperial state. Is there anyone who speaks Turkish in the Ottoman-dominated areas? No. Let's give another example. Did the Ottomans act as missionaries to people in the Balkans? No, most of them are still Christians today. But England, Spain, France are imperial states. These countries both forcibly taught their own language and changed the religion of the people by doing missionary work. Go learn history.
As always thank you so much for the video James its really is an interesting topic and been developing a lot this last year. An odd fact the mention is every US state government has recognized it 49 except for Mississippi. I haven’t found a reason why they haven’t though.
Thank you so much Nicholas. I had in fact considered mentioning the large number of recognitions in US state assemblies and in other assemblies around the world. It is indeed an absolutely fascinating aspect of international relations. (I actually wrote about this in one of my books.) Unfortunately, I had to cut it out. But you make a great point. And I have no idea why Mississippi is the lone hold out. Hopefully, the power of RUclips will bring this to the attention of someone who might be able to answer it!
Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians, cypresses, Kurds and now Syrians. I don’t understand why many counties are quiet on this subject because of their own interest and close eyes on such incidents. Thx United States to recognize the genocide. You can’t let a murderer walk away.That’s why there is prison and punishment for that.
'Should'? There is no place to accept this accusation because some of the parliaments decided to recognize 'historical event' results and reasons. History is not a subjective topic, this reminds us of when Galileo was accused as a criminal because of denial of the 'flat earth' theory that is Pope/Church ruled world obligation. But the reality, the earth is a sphere, and Galileo was right. Turkey never accepts declarations from any parlements, the country is not responsible for any abroad governing tools, local populist movements. Governments and representatives can select for one time and are changeable. So even Armenians can never trust for next parliaments won't decelerate the event is not genocide. Also, Turkey is open to any debate with counterparts about this issue. Always has been offering 'let's open historical archives and create a working group with the help of 3rd party countries' but always refused by Armenia. Because it is a useful tool for annoying Turkey. The honest way is creating a commission with historians, legit bureaucrats, and working together on this issue with the under international law and justice community. Until that time come, all political declaration, any other government's views, accusations, videos, and talks are not significant. P.S. The citizen of Turkey always sad about what happened around Balkan Wars - WW1, and sharing all pain. Both sides of people died for nothing. And only all of us gained hatred, untrust, and fear.
Additionally, the Biden administration just released a guy who killed an innocent Turkish diplomat in the USA, sent him to Armenia like a hero. This kind of clarification of guilt is making our world more untrusty and less civil. The guy is a perpetrator of a certain crime and the killer.
Last statement, counterproductive. Counterproductive to what? To the current vision of the imperialists that want to enforce their version of history onto countries. Your talk was good, however, I believe the intend was not there by the Ottoman Empire to commit this terrible act. Another issue you did not fully go into was, the faultless imperialists (yeah right - UK, France etc.) that pressured the Ottomans into WW1, and with this war on one side, the Russians along with the Armenians on the eastern borders, the a Ottomans were overwhelmed. What to do? Since there was a large population of Armenians, they (meaning the Ottomans along with their German superior officers) made the decision to remove Armenians outside and/or away from the battle that was happening. The fighting that was taking place between the Ottomans and the Armenians with their Russian cousins killed over 1 million Ottomans and Armenians. We cannot say and fault one side (Ottomans), while the other side, who were just as guilty (Armenians), and more, since they sided with the enemy and upraised against a government that was theirs for over 400 years. We donot say their was a genocide. No. As an Ottoman grandchild, I am terribly upset at the deaths from these years. My condolences go out to our Armenians friends. But it was not an intend to commit this act. I could go on, but will leave it at that.
Thank you for the comment. I think the problem is that we are conditioned to understand Genocide in very narrow terms. But it is more complex and wide ranging than people realise. In this case, the intent wasn’t a direct order to kill, as with the Holocaust. It was different. It was indirect. But ones has to ask what did Talat Pasha and others think would happen if you marched hundreds of thousands of people into the desert without adequate food, water, shelter, medical assistance or protection? The end goal was obvious. It would have amounted to a death sentence for a large proportion of them. And the fact that they were being deported as enemies of the state meant that that wilful disregard fir their lives would have been intimately tied up with their identity as a group. This is why the large majority of observers now regard it as genocide. Again, it is important to take a step back and consider whether the behaviour of the administration, applied in other circumstances, would be considered genocide. I absolutely guarantee that had the victims been Turkish and the government in question Greek or Armenians, Turks would be arguing that there was a malign intent and that it was genocide. I have been following this issue for almost thirty years as part of my work on the Eastern Mediterranean. I have seen the issue develop. I just find it disappointing that Turkey had made this about its National honour. It isn’t. And it should never have been framed as such. And I found it so interesting the way that President Erdogan brought up the Native Americans. This says so much. Not because he brought it up, but because it highlights the way that the vast majority of Americans would readily acknowledge the terrible crimes committed and would not have viewed this as a slur on the nation. So, as someone who certainly doesn’t have an axe to grind with Turkey - quite the opposite, it is a country I love and know very well - I feel that it has dug itself into a whole that sadly does not reflect well on it. I understand you may see things differently, but that’s just an outside view from a long standing observer.
As for the element about the local fighting between Armenians and Turks and Kurds, and how this relates to the genocide argument, I’ve addressed this in several other comments.
@@JamesKerLindsay you make references, but it is not very simple in this age old country that was a melting pot to many nationalists, plus, everyone had their eye on the lands of the empire. How do we break apart the empire more, and grab lands? This Was the question on many nationalists minds. Now you mention Talat Pasa. It is not that simple to put the blame on this Ottoman pasa. Why? Let us just examine this. Talat pasa was a member of the Young Turks movement, in Ottoman, Ittihat Ve Terraki. Now, we can write a book about this party, but will not. I will ask you, who were the creators of this party? Yes, they were Ottomans, but were 90% of all members were of the Zionist mindset. The goal of this party was to go against the sultan, and undermine and make the empire weaker. Please do some research on this. Now you are probably saying, what has this have any barring on the Armenian fighting. Plenty. If an Ottoman pasa, meaning Talat pasa takes orders from a group that are not Muslim, and their ultimate goal is to grab lands for themselves, why does not the western community, like you, not look at this further. Why are you and the western community finding blame on the Ottoman Empire, when the last 10 to 15 years of the great empires years, she was assaulted, ruled, manipulated, and totally butt-fucked by the Zionists, Germans, French, Russians, UK, and Armenians. Do you want me to keep going here???? That is the issue here. The empire gave the order to March the Armenians to southern Syria. So the empire is to blame. It is not that simple. The empire was trying to stay on her two feet while the imperialists were abusing my forefathers. Don’t you think the imperialists have the blame here as well. It’s like saying, “10 children are fighting, but just blame the black kid as he looks to be the blame, since it was his house.” It is wrong. Every nation that was involved in war against my beloved Ottoman Empire, during WW1 needs to share the blame of the killings, both Turkish and Armenians were slaughtered. I don’t buy it, the genocide argument. Again my condolences to my Armenian friends, plus Muslim/Turkish families that suffered. Your looking at one, my ancestors came out of Siirt, eastern Turkey, immigrated to Istanbul. I could go on here again, but will conclude. Osmanli torunu. Period.
Thank you for remembering the Armenians 🇦🇲, Professor James Ker-Lindsay, and for your diligent study of complex international relations, and compassionate and accurate reporting on the history. Exceptional work.
Maybe you should mention why Armenians joined the Russians . Please review and share the information about the massacres carried out by sultan Hameed Over 300 thousand were butchered because they asked for equality under fair justice system. Also please mention the Armenians living as Dimmi and had to pay head tax in order to retain their faith, culture and language….
Thank you for this video. I would like to comment on this from the perspective of a Turkish person. I think international relations professors should closely examine theology professors who work on interfaith dialogue. Their studies will reveal that no matter how much and issue is studied by IR professors, there will be inherent viewpoints that will only be available to Armenians and Turks. Therefore, conflict resolution will have to happen between these two groups. Turkey is a developing country that has been battling financial issues throughout its existance. Therefore, the elected politicians are elected with internal issues in mind where they might lack proper international relations education. This may prevent governments from making fruitful statements. However the Armenian government using other countries to force a resolution instead of making proactive attempts to dialogue with Turkey is equally unfruitful and counter-productive. There is a thin line between using a third country to force the resolution and using said country to bring two groups together to the discussion table. While the video presented arguments for both sides, the tone of the video simply accuses Turkey of preventing this conflict's resolution by not admitting the genocide, however, because of the argument I made above this is undeniably not the case and both countries are equally responsible for the failure of this conflict's resolution and simply pointing the finger to Turkey is counter productive and simply poor academic practice. Moreover, the video bases the case for genocide on UN's definition. I would argue that the UN's definition for genocide can be applied to all wars in the history of mankind, as all wars have an intent to hurt the other party, both physically and emotionally. The reason why Turkey denies genocide while admitting to the massacre, is undeniably a proof that the term genocide is an overloaded word after the events of WW2 that has torture application connotations. The United Nations definition is simply too vague, insufficient and outdated. This was further proved in the Palestinian Israeli conflict. Lastly, context matters in law. In litigation, context is the deciding factor between murder degrees, why don't we apply the same criteria for genocide definition? In World War I, the Ottoman Empire has deployed all of its manpower to the Gallipoli front. This fight was seen as an existential fight. Kids as young as 14 years of age were deployed to the front. Even then, the ottoman empire couldn't provide soldiers with medication or hot food, and a loaf of bread was all soldiers could get if anything. Therefore, how feasible was it for the Ottoman Empire to have provided the optimal conditions while forcing the relocation? Didn't the Ottoman Empire have the right to defend itself against a group who have taken arm against their state, and who have murdered their citizens. With what manpower did the ottoman empire organise this genocide, an act that undeniably requires an abundance of resources. As can be seen, this conflict/issue is far more complex than what was made out to be in this video. The real productive thing here to do is for academics and other countries to find ways to bring both nations to the discussion table while studying the matter without bias. It isn't right to juxtapose this issue with imperialism and slavery, as it isn't as white and black as those issues are.
Yet ANOTHER great video James! Keep up the good work! I LOVED that you stayed neutral. I got my friend to say hi btw. I looked at a map about the recognition of the event and Turkey AND Azerbaijan deny that the event happened. Why does Azerbaijan deny the event happened? Is it because both are sort of allies? Anyway keep up the good work. I had another idea for one of your independence videos. You should talk about how Mongolia gained independence. And how Taiwan (ROC) still kind of does not recognize it's independence! It's a very interesting story actually.
Azerbaijan also refuses as even Armenian capital Yerevan had 40% Azerbaijani population who got ''peacefully'' disappeared while Armenians were genocided!! Turkey doesn't say there weren't atrocities rather Turkey says Armenians revolted against the empire and started to target not only Ottoman forces also Muslim civilians so Ottoman acted to end their rebellion so it wasn't planned nor deliberate act of genocide. For example here are some very known atrocities and genocides for comparison: German civilians who were killed during Holocaust? Zero. Russian civilians who were killed during Circassian or Crimean genocides? Zero. Japanese civilians who were killed during ''war crimes'' in China? Zero. Belgian civilians who were killed during Congolese genocide? Zero. Spanish civilians who were killed during Aztec genoice? Zero. British civilians who were killed during 1857 rebellion of India? Few hundred. American civilians who were killed during Native American genocide? Few thousand. Turkish civilians who were killed during ''Armenian genocide''?? HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS... This alone shows how insanely the subject is politicized, in fact often Turkish casualties are completely ignored or worse even called ''Armenian resistance'' like it was women and children were targeting them so they got killed!!! Then how Russian empire invaded entire eastern Turkey in 1914 and encouraged Armenians to revolt is often ignored so they could claim Ottoman targeted ''peaceful'' and ''harmless'' people while in reality they revolted a year before their deportation. ''Armenian genocide'' is only an example of wicked politics, nothing else and Turkey will not recognize anything until Turkish/Muslim casualties are recognized from Balkans to Anatolia from Crimea to Caucasus but im pretty sure Crimean genocide will remain as ''Crimean deportation'' even if it was much worse than so called Armenian genocide...
Thanks as ever, LE. Azerbaijan's position his shaped by its extremely close relationship with Turkey, as seen last year by Turkey's direct assistance in its military campaign to retake Nagorno-Karabakh. I must indeed take a look at Mongolia. It is fascinating case. And I hope I replied to your friend. It is getting increasingly difficult to respond to every comment, although I try my best with as many as I can. If not, do pass on my apologies.
@@JamesKerLindsay I wonder since when selling weapons or sharing intelligence is ''direct assistance'' due in that case US and Russia had ''direct assistance'' in every single war on Earth in last 75 years!! Instead of such false claims from media nonsense you should have used ''Turkey supported Azerbaijan'' which is completely true, Azerbaijanis aren't only Turkic people rather they are also descendance of Oghuz Turks same as Anatolian Turks which is why Turkish and Azerbaijani are very close languages and easily understandable by both nations. (Imagine it like Australian and British English) And Turkey didn't start supporting Azerbaijanis today rather even Ottoman always tried to support them and keep them away from Russian occupation. For example even if everybody knew WW1 was lost Ottoman still sent an army into Azerbaijan in 1918 and cleared entente forces from Caucaus which is why all Caucasus countries could declare their independence from Russian empire in 1918!! Russian forces returned to Caucasus in 1920 but back then the civil war was still ongoing and they couldn't risk another war against Turkey so they recognized the independence of all Caucasus countries, then signed treaty of Kars with them in 1921 which ceded both Nagorno-karabakh and Nakhchivan to Azerbaijan not in Stalin era like some ''journalists'' are claiming!! So in short being neutral while completely ignoring other side of the coin isn't something possible and even a child can read from guardian, bbc etc rather than searching and reaching some true information...
@@ggoddkkiller1342 I’m really not sure what your point is!? I was asked a question. I answered. It seems that the word ‘direct’ seems to have triggered something. Care to talk about it calmly? (And I understand these issues very well. I’ve actually been working on Turkey for 30 years!)
@@JamesKerLindsay Even if you are a native speaker of English you don't know ''direct assistance'' would imply Turkish involvement to the war while in reality it isn't proven at all?? Perhaps you've been working on Turkey for 30 years while working for guardian or bbc due you have a very similar language even using a lot of open-ended statements like them which could imply anything while also refusable in case of proven false!! Such as one of your statements was same in the video that ''Even if Ottoman didn't order it's soldiers to kill civilians they knew people would die under these conditions so it was a genocide'' which looks a reasonable statement but again very open-ended. For example British empire kept importing/collecting food out of both Ireland and Bengal while millions of people were dying because of the famines. And without any question they knew if they still collected food more people would die so according to your own logic British empire committed genocides in both Ireland and Bengal??? Ofc not, you are talking military actions not collecting food while there were famines and people were dying because of ''natural causes''!! If you seriously think you are even slightly neutral rather im aggressive perhaps you are too BBCed to see straight due i couldn't care less what the heck you are saying in your videos nor thinking about Turkey rather im only trying to make you see the wicked hypocrisy that you are also a part of...
Cause There was no genocide . Armenians killed many ottomans as well Also Greeks killed over half a million ottoman Turks which was genocide but Turks never made a big deal of it
Nice video as usual, it is a pity I have seen this one three years later. As an ex-Turkish diplomat and an academic now, I see some failues on the Turkish side to explain its standing. And Regardless of whether a genocide happened or not, as you also mention, recognition is a political issue. Those countries with sizeable Armenian diasporas recognize it, those without do not, the only exception being Germany, who kind of wants to wash its hands clean by recognizing any genocide claim (am not sure about Hodjali though). Well the political nature of genocide recognitions can be clearly seen in the case of Hodjali, the same countries that recognized the Armenian genocide turn a blind eye probably for fear of the elections and losing votes. But at the essence of the issue lies the Turkish what-aboutism and mismanagement of the foreign affairs rather than the humanitairian emotions of the states that recognize the genocide. In the past as a commentator wrote below, there was the fear of a conspiracy to take the Eastern Half of Turkey. But I don't really think that is the issue anymore. But certainly the rather light treatment or even outright support for ASALA in the past fed Turkish suspicions. Coupled with an ideologically anti-western government in power and new diplomats selected by such a government, the issue becomes more serious and the feeling is that Turkey is being pushed around by the west for racist/islamophobic/turcophobic reasons.
Thanks. It is such an interesting issue on all sorts of levels. I do think Turkey has handled it badly, and fed a lot of the anti-Turkish views that you mention. Sometimes, just admitting that something terrible happened takes a lot of the sting out of the issue. I know that it is a pride issue for many countries. It is not easy to admit that one’s ancestors did something wrong. But sometimes it is the easiest way to mange the problem and move beyond it. Most (if not all) major empires committed atrocities. Britain has its fair share, including the Irish Famine, which Britain apologised for. Every time an Armenian says that the Turks committed genocide, the best response would be to say that, ‘sadly, the Ottomans did indeed. And we are Turks are deep sorry about that.’ An argument becomes very difficult to sustain under those circumstances.
Thank you. Great suggestion. A few others have mentioned this. I actually have. script on Namibia, but on its broader history. It is a fascinating country, with a far more interesting history than many people realise.
The independence of Norway in 1905 and the Norwegian referendum of independence could be interesting with the threat of war after the independence and how the rest of the world reacted.
We are waiting for USA 🇺🇸 to recognise British auchastrated genocide against Biafra where more than six million civilians are slaughtered & half of this number are children who sterved to death because of air and sea blockade
The British didn't just commit genocide where you said it.. There is no continent left in the world where they did not commit genocide and they perpetrated their genocides with racist motives.. They also have a great history of slavery.. but they have a sense of superiority stemming from that racist thought.. That's why barbarian Turks are genocidal but they are not genociders.. So ataturk gave the biggest answer to these b***ches in the lands they came to occupy.. There is no need to give another answer that b***tces.... 😀😀😀😀
The fact that the history keeps repeating itself is sad in this regard 😢. Why are humans are so evel. I mean you exterminate thousands of people for the sake of your empire yet empires still collapse. So clearly its not the solution, and most importantly inhumane. Why? We will never know.
Both of my parents lost their families in 1915 because of the genocide. Fortunately for me , I was born in America because my parents were able to come here to live.
@@Deniz-l5d What happened to them has absolutely nothing to do with my parents or me, we didn’t harm anyone. Ask the Europeans from northwestern Europe, they’re the ones to blame for the treatment of the native Americans. My people never hurt anyone, we were the ones that were hurt.
@@JamesKerLindsay well, I saw this through the prism of mass media, either European ones (like Euronews) , the Israeli ones (though Israel does not recognize the Armenian genocide for political reasons, I think, the majority of Israelis do), or even Russian ones (I am fluent in Russian, but usually skeptical regarding their news). From all that, I took the Armenian genocide as an undebatale fact. Now, I have my doubts.
I do not know if this is a topic for this channel. But one thing i find interesting is the idea of scandinanism, in scandinavia during the 1800's. It is for example the reason why we in sweden do not mention our country in our national anthem, because the song was about the idea of an united north.
Thank you so much. I really feel that it is important to try to discuss these topics responsibly, especially in this day and age. I have my opinions, and strong ones, but there has to be a space for informed debate. Not always easy, but one has to try. In any case, thank you so much for your support!
Neutral he said. Wheres armenian atrocities against Turks here. Theres no neutrality here. Everytime same story small channel wants to grow brings this topic.
Your account of the so-called genocide claims is extremely biassed, as a matter of fact you have referred to the affair as the "Armenian Genocide" from start to finish. Shame on you Mr Ker-Lindsay for intentionally distorting historic events. If you take eugenics out of the definition of a genocide then practically every war in history ends up being a case of genocide, including Armenia's invasion of Karabakh, but also the two world wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the colonial wars, the Hundred Years War and the US Civil War to name just a few.
@@noway6379 if any Turk said (...) race belong (...) that would seen as racism (fair) but those guys somehow normalized racism against Turks now no one does not oppose it
Hello sir,I wanted to know a topic,Bangladesh government claim that in 1971 Pakistani millitery killed 3 million Bangladeshi people.Is it true or just a conspiracy? Is there any valid evidence /prove or any documents where we can find the correct numbers?I hope you will make a vedio on this topic because the numbers are still mistirious for both Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Your PM imran Khan himself had said before becoming the Prime Minister that Pakistan army had massacred 3 million Bangladeshis. That claim BTW is not just by Bangladeshis, but India, Russia and most of the world do as well. Your Pakistani army called them " ye kaale Bangali", your AAK Niazi and yahaya Khan had claimed that " Hum in Bangaliyon kin nasal badal denge". Further more your army raped 400,000 Bangladeshi women, they are today referred to as " Bairongonas". You can google this, you can see all media archives of 1971 BBC, CNN and other news. www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DScMollcmAe4&ved=2ahUKEwi7t8SjoLr0AhUeslYBHYhkAZ8Qxa8BegQIBhAF&usg=AOvVaw3_YX3sHBzXxSl_y2Y4bV3a
Great video and interesting as always, somehow you always manage to make pieces that seem to keep everyone at bay when others cant. 1:31 Johnny was always a small man wanting a smaller world
Why not? All countries should talk about it. And the U.K. has been ready to acknowledge its appalling conduct in Ireland. Turkey really needs to have an open conversation about all this.
@@JamesKerLindsay I met someone who came to Istanbul for a trip to Hagia Sophia and I asked him if he was British. He said he was Scottish and hated England. He gave yes in the independence referendum. Why do you think the Scots hate you so much? is there any historical enmity between you? Some English people insulted the Scots by calling them sheep herders.
This is obviously an extremely controversial topic. Even more than usual, I would ask that people watch the entire video before jumping in to the discussion - one way or another. But it does raise important questions about whether - and how - countries are coming to terms with past atrocities. I would be really interested to hear from viewers about debates in their own countries about the past.
Good day, I'm Turkish and if you want to know the facts about the so-called armenian genocide, I recommend this video.
ruclips.net/video/QQg9OQ5TLdM/видео.html
It is slow and bringing it up is stokes up emotions - especially amongst those who identify themselves as 'nationalists'. I identify myself with two states with which I am having close connection (one having had an empire and another being under an empire in the past) and in either, the levels of acknowledgement of past atrocities is a touchy subject at both social and political levels.
@@anirudhparthasarathy3387 What countries are those?
A video on the Circassian genocide would be interesting.
German civilians who were killed during Holocaust? Zero.
Russian civilians who were killed during Circassian or Crimean genocides? Zero.
Japanese civilians who were killed during ''war crimes'' in China? Zero.
Belgian civilians who were killed during Congolese genocide? Zero.
Spanish civilians who were killed during Aztec genoice? Zero.
British civilians who were killed during 1857 rebellion of India? Few hundred.
American civilians who were killed during Native American genocide? Few thousand.
Turkish civilians who were killed during ''Armenian genocide''?? HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS...
This alone shows how insanely the subject is politicized, in fact often Turkish casualties are completely ignored or worse even called ''Armenian resistance'' like it was women and children were targeting them so they got killed!!! Then how Russian empire invaded entire eastern Turkey in 1914 and encouraged Armenians to revolt is often ignored so they could claim Ottoman targeted ''peaceful'' and ''harmless'' people while in reality they revolted a year before their deportation.
''Armenian genocide'' is only an example of wicked politics, nothing else and Turkey will not recognize anything until Turkish/Muslim casualties are recognized from Balkans to Anatolia from Crimea to Caucasus but im pretty sure Crimean genocide will remain as ''Crimean deportation'' even if it wasn't any different than so called Armenian genocide...
I'm sorry, but it's naive to treat the issue as if it's really only about the Armenian Genocide and has no wider implications. Turks have developed and carefully cultivated a national psychosis around the idea that They are trying to break up their country - "They" being a roster of villains that always includes the Armenians (both the diaspora and the government of Armenia) and often also includes the United States. The idea being that recognition of the Armenian Genocide would be only a first step towards forcing Turkey to cede eastern Anatolia to Armenia. This is both completely reasonable and utterly bonkers.
Completely reasonable in that plenty of Armenians and non-Armenians really do think like that: probably most of the politically-engaged members of the Armenian diaspora; plenty of Armenians in Armenia itself and Artsakh, presumably alongside their elected representatives; and the sort of people who generally don't care for the Turks to begin with, from Breivik types and Greek ultra-nationalists on the right to Che wannabes and PKK supporters on the left.
Utterly bonkers in that there is no grandiose anti-Turkish conspiracy to achieve this. Most of the people pursuing this objective are very open about it; if anything, you can't get them to shut up about it. And they're not in positions of power from which to make any of it happen. But then, as one of the many secret, well-placed members of that conspiracy, of course I'd say that, wouldn't I?
Anyway, a cold, calculated analysis of the current situation would reveal that Turkey's policy on this is counterproductive. The sort of people who believe Turkey should pay reparations in the form of territory aren't waiting for a Turkish recognition, as they already believe the Genocide happened. The sort of people who believe Turkey's denial do so because they are predisposed to take its side on this, not because they find its arguments compelling, so a reversal would mean little to them. Where the denial makes a difference is with people who both believe that the Armenian Genocide happened and have no quarrel with the Republic of Turkey. With them, continued denial does nothing but harm Turkish reputation and credibility.
Thank you so much. An incredible well-reasoned comment. I completely agree.
Why Western Anatolia and not Eastern Anatolia?
@@aurelianxcbd I actually meant eastern Anatolia. That error has now been corrected.
They are right. They are the ones being targeted for terrorism and terrorism is an act of genocide.
@@eflvin You have to invoke karma because you've nothing else. The pursuit of territorial expansion while awaiting divine intervention has already proven catastrophic. Your solution seems to be waiting for an even bigger divine intervention.
Hello everyone. What if Turkey stopped denying the Armenian genocide officially?
Than their would be roads to true peace.
@@Solus94 Recognition of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish authorities could be a powerful step towards normalizing relations between Turkey and Armenia, as well as normalizing relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan
@@AlexCaspian yep. Too good to be true right? Unfortunately not even close to happening in this reality.
Its not that unrealistic
Why "Armenian Genocide" cannot be recognized. "Armenian Genocide" is a subject of history, it should not be a subject of politics. Western nations try to use this subject to exert pressure on Turkey. European nations should recognize their own responsibility for millions of deaths during the destruction of the Ottoman Empire by Western empires and during the colonization of the former Ottoman provinces by Western empires.
1. Ottoman Empire doesn't exist anymore. Turkey is a different country. Ottoman Empire was belonged to the Ottoman dynasty, not the Turkish nation. Ottoman Empire suppressed the Turkish nation in favor of the ideology of Islamic Caliphate. So the Ottoman Empire was finally recognized as a suppressor of Turkish nation. All members of Ottoman dynasty were deported from Turkey and never allowed to go back.
2. Blaming Turkey for "Armenian Genocide" is the same thing as blaming France for St. Bartholomew's Day massacre.
3. There wasn't a legal concept of genocide and there weren't any laws against genocide in 1915. Genocide wasn't considered as a crime according to international laws of that period. Nobody can be accused of violating non-existent laws or principles.
4. "600'000 or 1.5 million Armenian victims" is a pure nonsense. The whole Armenian population of Anatolia was 1.0-1.2 million. 350'000 Armenians migrated to Russia, 150'000 to France, 100'000 to the North America etc. Approx. 950'000 Armenians migrated from Anatolia during the WW1.
5. The only "evidence" that the Ottoman government intended to exterminate Armenian nation is the "telegrams of Talaat Pasha" written by Armenian journalist by his own hand. He said that Ottoman postal officer showed him the original telegrams but he couldn't prove it. That Armenian journalist was deported from Istanbul during "the day of Armenian genocide" (April 24th, 1915), went back to Istanbul, was captured and deported again. He had contacts with Ottoman officials and spied against the Ottoman Empire but nobody tried to kill him.
6. 950'000 Armenians left Ottoman Empire during the WW1. They wouldn't be able to cross the borders if the government actually issued an order to "kill all Armenians".
7. There was a lot of violence between Muslim and Christian population of Ottoman Empire when Muslim population was forced to leave the Balkans and the northern Black Sea region and move to Anatolia after the 1877-78 war. A lot of Muslim civilians were killed. Muslim refugees hated local Christians of Anatolia and tried to take a revenge for their killed relatives.
8. During the 1878' Berlin Congress Western countries agreed to use Armenians to weaken the Ottoman Empire. Western Countries and Russia started to deliver nationalistic propaganda and weapons to Armenians and prepare Armenian insurgents to fight against Ottoman Empire. They promised to announce the national Armenian republic after the failure of Ottoman Empire.
9. Decades of Armenian guerilla started after the Berlin Congress. During the WW1 Armenians switched over to the side of Entente (UK, France and Russia). It was a betrayal of Ottoman Empire and Ottoman Empire started to punish Armenians according to the medieval feudal laws.
10. Armenian nationalists started ethnic cleansing of the controlled territories to exterminate the whole Muslim population. Muslims of Eastern Anatolia were mostly Kurds and they were attacked by Armenians. Kurdish tribes were semi-independent and they were ready to switch over to the side of Entente. But Armenian attacks forced Kurds to stay loyal to Ottoman Empire. Bloody civil war between Armenians and Muslims of Eastern Anatolia started in 1915 and the Ottoman government wasn't an initiator of this war and it was not capable to stop it because the Ottoman Empire was on destruction.
11. Armenian insurgents responsible for hundreds of massacres against the Muslim population in Anatolia and Russian South Caucasus. Armenian insurgents attacked Muslims even in Baku, the largest Azerbaijani city, in 1918. But Armenia never recognized these massacres as crimes and continues to honor the murderers of civilian people as national heroes.
12. Ottoman Empire deported Armenians from Eastern Anatolia and let other Armenians leave Ottoman Empire. 350'000 Armenians migrated from Eastern Anatolia to Russia, some people moved to Persia and 250'000 Armenians were deported by Ottoman Empire to Syria. But Muslim officers and Muslim population (including Kurds and Arabs) considered Armenians as traitors and killers and hated them. When the Ottoman Empire lost the control over Syria, Armenian prisoners in Syria finally lost their chances to survive.
How Europeans see it: "The noble ancient Armenian nation was intentionally exterminated by Turkey which wanted to get rid of Armenians and capture their properties".
How it was actually: "Different Muslim nations of Ottoman Empire (Turks, Kurds, Azerbaijani, Circasses, Tatars) suffered ethnic cleansing and massacres and were forced to run from Balkans, Black Sea region and Caucasus to the Anatolia in the end of 19th Century. This resulted in multiple bloody clashes between Muslims and Christians in the Anatolia. When Armenians started guerilla for their independence, Muslim nations quickly understood that Muslims would suffer ethnic cleansing even in the Eastern Anatolia which was supposed as the territory of the future Armenian Republic. During the WW1 Armenian insurgents supported by Entente attacked Kurds and other Muslims, so the Ottoman Empire deported Armenians from Anatolia with huge victims from both Armenian and Muslim side".
The question is, why Western people never wanted to check the details of this tragedy.
The second question is, why so many Western people still have Barbaric ethics and still believe that if Muslims were killed, it's not even worth to mention it.
when I'm in a whataboutism competition and my opponent is a teenage turk:
nice Berlin flat there
Third question: How come the channel owner (who talked about looking deeply into some conflicts in the context of history, politics and international law in the channel introduction) has the audacity to show two United Nations documents and shoot a video without doing enough research?
Thank you very much for commentary. I haven't heard any better. My grandmother was a genocide survivor and told disturbing stories about the events. With all that said, I do not believe that all turks are enemies. There were ones who risked their lives saving Armenians. My grandmother is an example of that. There is still hope for Armenians and Turks to become civil, but first the genocide acceptance has to be done. It seems that Turk politicians are still dreaming of Ottoman Empire return.
I agree. I really do hope that the two countries can find a way to build a better relationship. The events of 1915 were truly horrific. I can only imagine what your grandmother went through. I actually go to Armenia a couple of times a year and I am always amazed to see Ararat so near and yet so far. I think it is hard for many countries to come to terms with past who no doings. But it is also hugely important. Britain’s relationship with Ireland began to change when it accepted its part in the Famine. But Turkey finds it difficult, for all sorts of reasons I covered.
On another note, I wanted to wish you a very warm welcome to the Channel. I really and truly appreciate the support. Thank you. It means a lot!
Did your grandmother ever talk about the massacres and mass graves committed by Armenian gangs with the instigation and arms support of the Russians?
@@ayhancevik5657 No, she didn't. She has not witnessed any of that you say. I know that Russia was in war with Turkey and that there were Armenian soldiers on both sides: Russia and Turkey. Even if what you say is true (and not made up as many other "facts"), this doesn't close the question of Armenian Genocide.
The partisans were fighting with Germans during the Second World War and I am sure there were atrocities too, but that didn't close the question with Jewish Genocide.
@@ashodmartirossian6487 You are a liar and your grandmother died with her secrets. In the east of Turkey, mass graves created as a result of the massacres of many Armenian gangs were found. Many cities, towns and villages were burned and destroyed by Armenian gangs. You cannot deny this. In addition, genocide is consciously gathering and killing people. The Ottomans did not take this approach in the exile incident. Of course, they made many mistakes. The deaths occurred due to these deficiencies and mistakes, but this does not mean genocide. During the exile, people whose families were massacred attacked the communities, thieves attacked. There was hunger. There were diseases. The soldiers were inadequate to prevent these, this is not genocide. Some of the Ottoman officials responsible for this were accused and hanged. In which genocide did countries try and hang their own soldiers? You are biased, do not see the facts and want to change history with revenge and lies. No, history cannot be written with your lies.
@@JamesKerLindsayIf the Turks committed genocide. Then can you provide us with evidence? objectively? Armenians were not subjected to genocide even during the most powerful times of the Ottoman Empire. Why did they suffer genocide while collapsing? Maybe the opposite is the Armenian fascist gangs there. While the Ottoman Empire was struggling to survive on the front lines in World War I, it took advantage of its weaknesses and gaps and massacred innocent people! Seeing this, the Ottoman Empire then perhaps sent these radical Armenians to another region. Have you ever looked at it from this perspective? Have you ever heard of the Dashnak and Hinchak Armenian organizations at that time? Do you know what activities they do there? Or have you heard about the Khojaly massacres in 1992? do you know about these? Just because the voice of Armenians is loud in the world does not mean that they are right. If the Turks were truly genocidal. During the time of the lawful sultan Suleiman, he would destroy everyone. because he had absolute power. I suggest you think about these a little...
Thank you for spreading the word
Zionism is root cause of cancer of earth 🌎
Another excellent and very balanced analysis of a very sensitive & difficult subject.. you're a brave man James taking on this one..! Nothing but admiration for you doing so..! all the best.. g
Thank you so much George. It’s always nice to see the friendly faces in the comments. I suppose I should expect a degree of abuse given the topics I cover but it has gone into overdrive this past week or so. I’ll be heading over to your channel again soon for my dose of relaxation and soothing calm! ☺️
@@JamesKerLindsay ..😊👍
Brave, agreed. But you gotta be kidding me he said 600k-1.5m to make Turks feel better about it that is biased if you ask me…
avrupa devletlerinin yaptığı soykırımları neden araştırmıyor yada ermenilerin yaptığı soykrımları
Talat Pasha gave the order for deportation of Armenians. According his indisputable figures, as recorded by Talat Pasha himself, the number Armenians subjected to deportations was 924,158 (see Murat Bardakci: Talat Paşa'nın evrakı metrukesi). Considering several hundred thousand Armenians subjected to deportations subsequently settled in Lebanon, France, South America, Armenia and the rest of the world it astounding how the figure of 1.5 million is pronounced and accepted.
Eastern Anatolia was Armenian lands since 3000 BC. Mongols, turks selcuks, tatars came with burning, killing, raping the indigenous Armenians. At the time, theres were more chrches in Van Mush Sasoon Ardahan Erzrum Trabzon than mosques in Eastern Anatolia. Armenians wanted liberation from ottomans just like any others.
Its amazing that you still cant figure out that the turks have killed 1.5 million armenians with such a bloody history that turkey has
They are trying to Put us into shame. They hate turkiye
@@celikciogluemrecan378 People can like Turkiye, but not like some of the things it has done.
There are several flaws in this kind of reasoning. First of all, those 900,000+ are only the ones that were officially deported, meaning there could be several thousand other who had been killed before the deportations already, as history shows that there were multiple events of mass killings of the Armenian citizens in the Ottoman empire. Hence it seems quite accurate, in my opinion.
This was probably the most unbiased video on this topic
Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. I did try to at least present the Turkish argument. Although, as you could probably tell, I have clear views on this. But it is important to understand the different positions in these important debates.
Armenia should recognise all the Muslims they killed
@@zccau2316 if Armenians killed, only to defend themselves against barbarian turks
@@noway6379 they killed civilians. İncluding members of my grandfather's family. Armenian dashnak militia.
@@ozbagat8355 yes, both sides committed atrocities
James is one of the few voices I value on international analysis. I don't always agree with his opinion pieces, but he approaches the most controversial of topics with a nuance seldom seen nowadays.
Thanks for all you do, Professor Ker-Lindsay.
Thank you so much. That's incredibly kind of you to say. I really appreciate it. I would certainly hope that my videos are watched with a critical eye. And I always like to hear constructive disagreement. Hopefully, that can at least stimulate debate. :-)
@Prof James Ker-Lindsay The major flaw amongst most commentators and journalists nowadays is their inability to listen.
Thank you for being someone who *does* listen.
avrupa=katliam,soygun,sömürge,soykrım
4:13 -Wonder why United nation definition of ethnic cleansing doesn't apply on Israel 🤔!
@James Ker-Lindsay, I've been binge watching your videos and I have to say you really have a knack for falling into the really controversial topics. Most things like the Armenian Genocide or anything related to the Balkans such as your video on Kosovo or Bosnia falling apart are extremely difficult videos to do considering how emotionally charged they are. Most people avoid making these videos like the bubonic plague and for good reason. You sir took on the challenge and dove in head first.
Perhaps a video on the little known ethnic cleansing campaigns by Russia in the North Caucasus would be a nice topic for you to tackle next.
Thanks so much! Haha! Yes, I really do pick them. :-) But, interestingly, I don’t always get a massive backlash. Some do provoke huge anger. My one on Bulgaria and North Macedonia unleashed all the Bulgarian nationalists. (I have my theories on this.) But very often it is nice to see that people do try to engage with the topics I cover and actually want to have a proper discussion. I had always hoped it could become a bit of a haven for informed debate on international relations and conflict.
And great suggestion on the North Caucasus! Thank you. Let me look into it.
@@JamesKerLindsay
To be fair James you can't make a video on eastern European politics/ history and expect rational debate lol
You're asking for a lot my man 😂😂
@@JamesKerLindsay You should do a video on the Circassian Genocide by the Russian Empire.
@@williamdavis9562 are you implying some racist essentialist generalisation about how Eastern Europeans relate to their history? Clearly orientalism in your country didn’t die with the Victorians.
Would you ever do a video on the Circassian genocide ? I think only Georgia recognises it.
Also why is the Armenian genocide usually recognised more than the Assyrian genocide ? How similar were they ?
Because armenian genocide took more lives than greek or assyrian genocide. Those two should be recognized as well
@@UnlockOTPR there is no such thing like greek genocide!
Russians also committed Tatar, ukrainian, kazakh genocides
@@enjoymfs9715 yes there is. And yes they did. And i dont know why bring russia to it, im not even russian
@@UnlockOTPR i am just here to enlighten about other genocides. People do not talk about them .
This topic is really sensitive and controversial. However, it is not clear why it attracts attention much more than similar crimes of Europeans or other nations? I am not talking about Holocaust, where Germans were forced to admit and keep apologizing for last 80 years. Ho sincere is another question, but at least they do. No, I talk about France crimes in Algeria, what happened with indigenous population in Australia and Americas just 150 years ago, Japanese war crimes which they are reluctant to apologize for? Why Turkey is being pressed that much? Because allies were unable to fully reach their goals to erase any memory of Turks in the region or turn Turks into their puppet state?
Can it be because turkey refuses to recognize it and then turns around and threatens Armenians with another genocide?
Good questions that make one to think. The fast response will be that maybe they do not deny it? But I have to do more research to confirm. The aboriginal population in Australia is still in a state of despair. Great Britain still keeps other countries as their vassal states. USA dictates the whole world how to behave... But the present topic is not about them. It is best if we stay in the frame of the topic and respect each other.
As an Aramean whose grand grand father was killed in the genocide, I am really happy that the US has finally recognized this brutal massacre
I am glad for your grandfather, I am a Turk from Kars. Who knows, maybe my grandfather killed your dishonest grandfather.
Dude ur country has a talent in manuplation.Your goverment does not tell the truth and your coubtry don’t know 20 years old massacre but you remember 100+ years events.It’s so weird…
@@DELLX_motivasyonSo Armenians Cypriots Greeks Assyrians & the entirety of the Balkans are all lying about Turkish aggression but Turkey are the good guys? 😂😂😂
The Greek national anthem is the first two stanzas of a long poem of 158 stanzas by Dionysios Solomos. See the Turkish hostility in some lines of this poem below. The sequel contains the same hostility. It tells the story of the massacre of 30 thousand Turks by the Greeks in the Corinth peninsula in 1835.
Lyrics of the Greek National Anthem: Deep ocean, that's how I wish you were humming. And drown in its wave, every Turkish seed. Why did he slow down into combat for a moment? Why has the blood spilled decreased? Both helmets and swords To scattered brains, To the skulls torn apart, It's smeared with squirming internal organs the dogs were running low And they were shouting God, God! But the lips of the Christians were more true They were shouting fire! They were fighting like lions. Always fire! they were shouting. And the scumbags were dying, Shout out to God. Their dirty blood has become a river Flowing in the plain Innocent herbs instead of water drinking blood The bravest were shaken with blind steps They were expelled from Corinth. They hid and fled. Death sends its angel, Filled with famine and disease, Skeleton-like shapes They walk side by side.
Dionysios Solomos must have been a time traveler then, since he wrote the poem in 1823 and talked about events in 1835. You are probably referring to the siege of Tripolisa, which is mentioned in the anthem and also not located close to Corinth. Next time try some elementary research.
@@Mariouszful Thanks for the warning and correction. yes, tripolice massacre started in 1921. Approximately 30 thousand Turks, Muslims and Jews were killed by the Greeks. Below is a small excerpt from wikipedia about this massacre: British historian Walter Alison Phillips on the Tripolice massacre: British historian Walter Alison Phillips on the Tripolice massacre(Phillips, Alison W. The War of Greek Independence, 1821 to 1833. London, 1897, p.): « For three days the inhabitants of the city, a savage « For three days the inhabitants of the city were left to the evil and pleasure of a savage gang. No age or gender discrimination was made. Women and children were tortured before they were killed. The slaughter was so great that Kolokotronis said his horse's feet never touched the ground from the gate to the fort. After the Greek victory in the city, the roadsides were filled with corpses. Masses of Muslims, including women and children, were butchered like cattle in the nearby mountains. »
William St. Clair (William St. Clair. That Greece Might Still Be Free The Philhellenes in the War of Independence. London: Oxford University Press, 1972. ISBN 0-19-215194-0, page 43) saw what foreign officers in Tripolice saw during the massacre He described it like this: « Over 10,000 Turks were killed. Prisoners who were suspected of hiding their money were tortured. Their arms and legs were cut off and slowly fried over the fire. The pregnant women had their bellies cut off, their heads cut off, and the dog's heads nestled between their legs. From Friday to Sunday, the air was filled with screams. ... A Greek boasted that he had killed 90 people. The Jewish community was systematically tortured.... Turkish children starving for weeks were thrown to the ground by the Greeks as they ran through the helpless ruins, then shot.... Water wells were filled with corpses..."
On February 11, 1821, The American Mercury newspaper, published in the USA, wrote that 20,000 Turks were killed in the massacre in the city.
Greek commander Teodoros Kolokotronis wrote in his memoirs that 32,000 people were killed and claimed that his horse did not step on the ground from the city walls to the palace due to the abundance of corpses.
References:
(Digital online copy by Elizabeth M. Edmonds, English translation, Kolokotrones, the Klepht and the Warrior, Sixty Years of Peril and Daring. An autobiography. London, 1892, pp.156-159)
(Κολοκοτρωνης, Διηγησις συμβαντων, ε.α,σελ77)
In the video, you mention that the decision for an explict intention of killing order, is not necessary for being charged by such political term as genocide. On the other hand, In the hitler example or any other colonial power abusing over african or american continent, there is always a explict order for such action. But there is also documents in the archives that ottoman empire punished more than a 1000 military member to harm Ermenians on the road. There is a failure state and civil war. The emigration policy is known since Ottoman's ancient times not only minorities also against Turkish tribes. Instead of an action, genocide is a result of fascist( radical-modern) mindset and the hitler was the top of the mentality. An empire can't have any benefit to kill its components.
such an unbiased comment. Spreading truths of this so-called genocide. ty my friend
I don't care the historical documents and the other facts. Just accept my story!!
Armenia
Well Belgium killed 10 million people but did not said any offical apology ...
In fact, Belgium has openly acknowledged its wrongdoings. There is also a much more open national conversation about the wrongs of its actions in Africa. www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53232105 I still don’t see such a conversation in Turkey.
@@JamesKerLindsay Turkey is extremely annoyed by some countries using it as a blackmail against Turkey or using it as a propaganda tool against Turkey. Amd in fact Turkey wantted to discuss this issue with Armenia in international court however Armenia refused ( but accoding to the UN genocide convention one needs a declaration from the international court to legally recognize it. Othercise it stay as a claims and insult.) Later Turkey offered to form research commision but it is unanswered still. Belgium recognized but did not apologised.
@@JamesKerLindsay It even got out of control and became some nations pride and it is even used by Armenian diaspora to prevent assimilation within countries. There are so many disinformation made by them.
@@JamesKerLindsay killing 10 million people is "wrongdoings", relocating a part of your population because they joined arms with another country to attack you and your civillians is genocide. how very neutral of you.
@@JamesKerLindsay Türkiye has repeatedly stated that it is saddened by the events, but these events were not one-sided and do not meet the definition of genocide.
Similar incidents happened with Crimean Tatars and Koreans during the Soviet times. Do they qualify as genocide too?
Tatars and Koreans do not have a powerful diaspora in the West. So does this mean whoever pushes harder will get what they want without adequate process?
irrelevant. Same thing happened for Greeks and Assyrians tho
I don't think Turkey should be blamed for genocide for Armenian, after all that was in war during the Ottoman government, this modern day Turkish Republic, all peoples in war suffer, so lets move on. Tell that too the native American, they lost all there land, and was eliminated, they don't claim Genocide. It was war, in wars bad things happens.
Well done James!! I am glad, I found your channel! A future topic could be the Lausanne Treaty, the related population exchange and what happened with the minorities in both countries!
Χαιρετισμούς από Αθήνα!
Thank you so much Dimitris. I really appreciate it. Great suggestion! A few others have also asked me to look at the population exchange. I certainly hope to cover it. It is amazing to think that such a monumental decision could be made to order two entire populations to move.
And very best regards from London! :-)
Geia sou kai kali nychta Afstralia! :-)
@@JamesKerLindsay ermenilerin doğu anadolu ve azerbaycanda ve yunanların batı anadolu da yaptığı soykırımları neden araştırmıyorsun?öeneğin fransanın cezayir, italyanın libya ve amerika kıtasındaki yerlilere yapılan soykırımları avusturalya da aborjinlere yapılan soykrımı!avrupa ve hristiyanlar soykırım yapınca neden hiç sesiniz çıkmıyor abd ırakta 2 milyon vietnamda 4 milyon sivile soykrım yaptı
What about the Hawaiian genocide? Even as a member of the Family of Nations having treaties of friendship with numerous countries, Hawaii has been ignored by the international community and the unprovoked Hawaiian genocide has yet to be recognized. It's no surprise that genocide during war is excusable when a peaceful and friendly People can face near extinction without any acknowledgement by countries that claim genocide with respect to their own Peoples.
I mean didn't president Bill Clinton apologize to what us did to Hawaii in 1990 or something
@@axel665 Congress apologized only to aboriginal Hawaiians and their descendants but neglected to apologize to any other Hawaiian nationals, whether native or naturalized. Also the apology did not mention or acknowledge that the United States committed genocide.
@@soundmind9772 Hawaian genocide, rarely known topic. Thx for info! Hi from Serbia!
@@hopeindarktimes9535 Mahalo and aloha to Serbia from Hawaii!
@@hopeindarktimes9535 fyi, the Hawaiian Kingdom has a treaty with 'Servia' concluded in Lisbon, the 21st of March, 1885 (universal postal union)
"A 'Christian genocide' framing acknowledges the historic claims of Assyrian and Greek peoples, and the movements now stirring for recognition and restitution among Greek and Assyrian diasporas. It also brings to light the quite staggering cumulative death toll among the various Christian groups targeted ... of the 1.5 million Greeks of Asia minor - Ionians, Pontians, and Cappadocians - approximately 750,000 were massacred and 750,000 exiled. Pontian deaths alone totaled 353,000."
Jones 2010, pp. 150-51: Jones, Adam (2006), Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction, Routledge.
You shameless liar, why don't you mention the genocide of Turks in Greece during the 1820 uprising? What about the Tripolitsa and Navarino massacres? What about exterminating hundreds of thousands of Turks living in the Pelopennese? Your national hero (!) Kolokotronis committed disgusting crimes against humanity. If had lived in modern times, he would have languished in prison after being brought to trial at the court in the Hague.
@Vangelis Skia, You really can't put the Armenian genocide on par with what happened to the Greeks. Because by the sheer numbers the Greeks actually slaughtered more Turks on the lands they conquered at the time than the Turks of Greeks. So if anything they'd both have to admit to it with Greece paying out more in reparations.
The Armenian genocide sticks out because it was very one sided. It's like a 1000-1 ratio.
I find it interesting when the topic of genocide comes up, people feel like it's a party they want to join. Very strange.
@@Kenan-Z "the genocide of Turks in Greece during the 1820 uprising"
"exterminating hundreds of thousands of Turks living in the Pelopennese" 😂
THE ACTUAL TRUTH:😂
This is taken from the site "turkish coalition of America":
"It is estimated that nearly 30 thousands Muslims lived in the Peloponnese in March 1821"
tc-america/turkish-history/greek-war-of-independence-and-its-toll-on-turks
But wait! Did you not write about a SUPPOSED genocide of hundreds of thousands?! 😂There is no source whatsoever that estimates the turks in Peloponnese before the Greek revolution as more than 30 thousand. Most sources speak of around 20 thousand souls. And a large percentage of those 20 thousand according to eye witness sources, sailed to Anatolia...It 's clear as crystal that you are the actual shameless liar. Better not comment about history since you don't even have the basic knowledge on the field, cause the only thing you "achieve" is to expose your cluelessness and ignorance on the subject and nothing more... And the uprising actually started in 1821 not 1820...There is probably not one sentence in your whole comment that doesn't include lies or inaccuracies which unfortunately for you and your propaganda can easily be dismantled through the actual sources....
@@Kenan-Z You are actually trying to present, a worldwide recognized genocide organized by the highest ranking turkish state officials of the time, as the same with massacres committed by a bunch of revolutionaries during the Greek war of independence?! 😂You are actually claiming that some badly organized Greek guerrillas who didn't even have a state or even a proper army, committed a genocide to the peoples of a huge empire?! Are you any serious AT ALL?! 😂
@@williamdavis9562 I simply posted a quotation by Adam Jones, a Canadian expert scholar and author of a textbook in the particular field of Genocide. Can't you see the clearly visible brackets?! Do you even know what the term "quotation" actually means?! I haven't written my own non-expert opinion nor did I provide sources by presumably biased non-reliable scholarship but by someone who is considered one of the leading experts on the field worldwide! You claim to have better knowledge on the subject than him? 😂
For a historical event to qualify as genocide, it must be legally binding.
The events between the Turks and the Armenians are tragic, but as the Armenians say, the events did not happen unilaterally.
These events were started by the Armenians and ended by the Turks.
We are not ashamed of our ancestors, we are proud of them!
proud of something you had no part in? typical pride of stupid people.
no, it was started by Turks. Turks mistreated the Armenians so they rebelled. Why should Armenians take abuses from Turks?
@@kevinyonan2147 'Turks mistreated the Armenians so they rebelled. ''When this happend actually?Armenians was loyal to Ottoman Empire .Thats why Ottoman Sultan gave the tittle for the Armenians ''Millet'i Sadıka'' that's mean loyal nation while other minotires rebellion against the Turks!
No your people decided to take part of the Turk's land and killing Turks in their own home and they did.Half of million muslim Turks was get killed by the Armenians hands.
@@kevinyonan2147 yo öyle bir şey olmadı kudur 😂
@@mehmetakifkyak2746 Peki Ermeniler bu barbar davranışı "hak edecek" ne yaptılar?
Please do one about the Turks and Muslims killed in surrounding ex Ottoman territories around the first world war. İn Greece, Bulgaria and Armenia. The stories of those refugees are just a valid. Death and killing committed on both sides. Denial of this prevents any reconciliation.
Who invaded who? Who's land was it first? Where are Turks originally from? If Turkey was invaded tomorrow and under oppression for 300 years you wouldn't want to kill the invaders? 😂
@noname-12184 I'm from Cyprus the Turks came at the turn of the 16th century had a 15% minority the Greeks have been there 4500 years and the Turks took half the island. That's fine what do the Kurds get from super fair Turkey? 🤣
@@emre_iris - nothing to do with the civilians? You have any idea how many christian civilians were murdered in massacres in the whole history of the Ottoman Empire and especially during it's dying years? Do you think the hatred against the turks, which led to the massacres you are talking about came from nowhere, because civilians were let to live peaceful lives with equal rights with the muslim population, protected by the law? Do you think all these people revolted in 19 century, because they lived happy and prosperous lives under the Ottoman rule? C'mon... And while there is still huge turkish community in my country, Bulgaria, the idiots from CUP litteraly tried to expulse or exterminate all christian minorities from the Ottoman territory during WWI and the years before that - it's not only the armenians, who suffered, while their case is truly mind-boggling in it's scale. And so many years after that, there is still no remorse - why? The Balkan massacres...which ones, these after the April Uprising in 1876, these during the war of 1877-1878, thеse during the summer of 1903 in Macedonia, or these during the summer of 1913 in Thrace?
06.02.2023
@@plamenkaraivanov3807 don't bother, he's turkish, they don't teach history there
i was in Armenia a while back, while visiting a cemetery with those wonderful carved stones you find there, a little girl approached us. she was playing there with some kids. we were talking to my friend (in norwegian) when we got struck at the depictions on a stone. the girl explained (in english) : this is the house; this is the bread (it was some wheat). so we asked, and who is the horseman? "oh, it was the turk that killed them". chilling.
Dear all, As a genocide survivor's grandson, I would like all not to compare the Armenian genocide to any other massacre or atrocities event, neither by size nor by impact on a nation. Nothing can compensate for a nation's pain, horror, and catastrophic results. Thank you all for understanding
You did not mention in any of your words the massacres of Armenian gangs in the villages before the Armenian deportation incident.
@@ayhancevik5657that's whataboutism
@@Caleb-hl9qo What do you call what you do? Looking at events from a biased, one-sided perspective?
I am so glad YT recently recommended one of your videos to me. I had no idea there exists a YT CH that uses logic, well rounded reasoning, &, most importantly, civility to discuss such topics. Even the comments, of those I've read so far, aren't the usual YT spite & regurgitated froth. Thank you, oh, so powerful YT algorithm. I bow to thee yet again.
This was just one of Turkey's genocides. There's the Assyrian, the Bulgarian, the Ionian Greek, the Pontic Greek, the Cypriot Greek and others. If Turkey recognizes one, it will have to recognize all the others step by step and thus recognize international law, something that it can't do.
Dont forget genocides on Serbs in 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th century.
The Assyrian, Bulgarian and Pontic Greek I understand and agree with you. But the Cypriot Greek one the genocide was actually the other way around.
@@williamdavis9562 The other way around? I will agree that Cyprus did try to suppress Turkish Cypriots and try to make Cyprus a part of Greece but was it was clearly not a genocide. What was clearly a war crime was the complete ethnic cleansing of Northern Cyprus from its majority Greek Cypriot populations and its further colonization by Mainland Turks to boost the Turkish population in the island and to legitimize the illegal occupation of Northern Cyprus
@@starman1144 Is that the word you use for a mass extermination effort, "Suppress"
Interesting wording, I didn't realize slaughtering people based on their ethnic make up was suppressing them. I thought the was another phrase for that. Yea, it's called ethnic cleansing.
@@starman1144 Supress? They were killing them brutally and would have wiped off if not Turkey’s operation
Long-time subscriber here. I like the way you've handled this topic. Well done.
Thank you so much James. I really appreciate it. It was definitely one of those videos where I actually had to think long and hard about whether to go ahead with it. To be honest, I had to take a few minutes to consider whether to even to press the 'publish' button when it was finished!
Handled it? What is everyone worried about?
I'm a Western person who has citizenship in Australia and The United Kingdom (plus ties to New Zelanad). I am annoyed that all 3 countries don't even recognise these events as Genocide.
When you look into the Americas, who recognised the Armenian Genocide? United States of America, Canada, Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile.
No Carribbean nations, no Central American nations, Why? Turkey wants to pull other countries legs not to recognise the Genocide.
The Armenian genocide also lack recognition in Asia and Africa. Only 3 nations in Asia (Syria, Lebanon and Armenia) and Libya in Africa recognize the Armenian Genocide.
If Turkey were to cut ties with any country that recognised the Armenian, Assyrian and Greek Genocide. Those countries could loose out on big money and other things.
Australia and New Zealand won't recognise the Genocide because it may cancel future Anzac Day ceremonies. The ANZACs in The Ottoman empire did witness these Genocides.
The Anzacs did make notice of the genocide
@@MartintheMetalhead Anzac didnt see anything because of constantly flying bullets above their heads. They were in Western shores of Anatolia, not East. They even couldnt reach the high grounds, they got humiliated and returned. Your claim is a joke and you are a clown
@Arzu Okut Ne dediğine değil niye dediğine bakacaksın.
You are just a clown. Same thing goes for your English Side. What happened to Real Natives of Australia and America? What happened to africans? I hope all countries will recognize the genocides committed by English people in Australia, canada, us and africa one day
@@MartintheMetalhead yeah evidence like that make this believable story. sources: christian missionaries, American diplomats interested in war and now anzac soldier stuck btw sea and hill .
When you have time, tell about what the Russians, Armenians, French, Greeks and British did in Anatolia during the First World War and Turkey's War of Independence. I can still see the shame of being defeated by the women, children and elders who fought to the last drop of their blood for their independence. Those who accuse us of genocide should look at their own history.
Thanks. I know that there’s more than enough blame to go round with many wars. Lots of countries have done terrible things. The problem is that Turkey denies it took place. This is an ongoing political problem. Far better to accept that something truly terrible happened and move on. Just refusing to accept it will only make it more of a powerful weapon against Turkey.
@@JamesKerLindsay Armenians klled innocent Turks and other different Minorities to increase their influence in Russian occupied territories. The real problem is that Armenians are shown as innocent. If Turkey committed genocide, the same crime applies to Armenians. Just stop blaming Turkey.
@@mym2726 That's beyond idiotic.Are bosniaks commiting genocide when they retaliated against serb yugoslavian soldiers trying to purge them? What Armenians did was a political revolution and retaliation against kurd and turkish raiders during the latter days of the Ottoman Empire,and by any means are not as brutal as the repression instituted by the Pashas
@@ihavenojawandimustscream4681 It's not the same thing and you're lying. Is it a defense tactic against the enemy that Armenians kll innocent people along with the Russians?
@@ihavenojawandimustscream4681 Despite what Armenians did, they were only expelled from Anatolia and allowed to live. If I had been the Ottoman Pasha during those war years, I would have imitated what the Armenians and Russians were doing.
The idea of apologizing for the past is in itself a political issue at it’s heart, as doing so can be bad for national morale and unity. It can help a victimized group unify with the country, however it can also serve as a stamp of approval for such a group to continue to cast dissent. It it worth spurning the majority, who generally feel self-righteous about their own, their father’s, their grandfather’s, or their ancestors atrocities? After all, it is simply human nature to believe one’s family or group is in the right. Even when there is an absolute necessity for apologizing, doing so in too intense a manner or for too long after the events can still produce this negative affect, leading to intense political polarization today based on events that happened decades of centuries ago. See Germany in the last decade for an example of this, or America in the last 7-8 years. Both are now re-fighting old civil conflicts in modern politics because of this…
Edit: and of course the 1915-21 events were a genocide, but I’m Christian and not I’m Turkish so therefore I have no reasons to justify it, though at the same time I’m not going to overplay it, as all countries commit atrocities and war crimes, basically all human settlement and wars involving such.
The exception on calling this out, and it shouldn’t be because it’s hypocritical, but I’m guilty of doing it as well, is when the clash is ideological, such as the Soviets or Chinese calling out America’s atrocities as an example of the evils of Classical imperialism, and likewise America calling out the evils of the Soviet Union and (this is obviously the one I’m guilty of) Communist China as demonstrating the evils of political Socialism.
Thanks as ever. I can see the argument for national unity. But that also says a lot about a country as well. In this case, it is not much of an issue as the Armenian community is not that large any moire, and certainly won't be galvanised by this. More generally, I think that states must be evolve to evolve and reflect changing circumstances. This is the PR problem Turkey now faces. In a world where many countries are facing up to their past, and especially countries that Turkey regards as close allies, its own position looks increasingly bad. That's why I noted that even from a purely pragmatic point of view (leaving aside the morality of this issue for a moment, if one can or should) there is an argument to accept what happened and move on as a matter of effective foreign policy. Not only will it smooth relations with partners, it increases Turkey's moral grounds to then condemn atrocities against Muslims, thus bolstering Erdogan's position as a leader in the Islamic world. He would be so much stronger speaking out once he has addressed the genocide argument.
@@JamesKerLindsay true I meant in general, but for sure in turkey’s specifically case it has nothing really to lose by accepting responsibility in terms of bolstering Turkish Armenians, however regardless of the lack of Armenians left in Turkey it still could create a divide within the Turkish population over the issue of national pride. There is a great danger in deconstructing national myths that you could deconstruct the nation with it.
My father’s family was Levantine, Christians originally from Venetia, who had been living between the Greek island of Kos and neighbouring Turkish city of Izmir for six centuries before, as Christians, they were forced to flee and leave it all behind in the early 1920’s.
They went to Lebanon which they have also had to leave fifty years later…
And I myself am now European because of this.
Greek PM venizelos requested Turkey for population exchange
Excellent video Prof!! An important human rights issue, no doubt.
Thank you. It is indeed. And a valuable example of how countries don’t come to terms with their past.
Turkey Did Commited Genocide Against Armenians.
My Motto is Artsakh for Armenia and Palestine for Palestinians.
If someone came and raided your village while you were at war with Russia, killing the child, the woman, and even the pregnant woman, and removing the baby in her womb, what would you do in such a situation? All of these events take place behind the war with Russia and the men returning to the village attack some Armenians. I draw your attention to the fact that those who carry out these attacks are not the soldiers who have been ordered by the state, they are the men living in those villages and they do not carry out an organized attack. But the Armenians, who raided and massacred those villages and cities, act in a very organized and systematic way. Even in such a situation, the state moved its Armenian citizens to another region within the country in order to prevent such incidents. The responsible soldiers who mistreated the Armenian citizens during this transport were later brought to court and punished. We feel sorry for all Ottoman citizens who lost their lives in these sad events in the region at that time. because people's right to live before their race and religion is sacred. James, I think you don't have a full grasp on this subject, and it would be better if you talk about such issues from the perspective of both communities. It hurt us Turks a lot, and if I look at it from your point of view, the massacre committed by the Greeks in the Peloponnese peninsula is exactly the same and exactly the same as the Armenian terrorists above. Read about this massacre from an English writer who was there at that time, and then let's talk to you about what genocide is. We feel sorry for the people who died in our country and in any part of the world and for any reason, and for this, the religion and race of those people do not matter. because we have a conscience. I am now asking everyone here who is not Turkish, do you feel sorry for everyone who died in these events that happened a hundred years ago, or do you only feel sorry for your own kinsmen and religious brothers? Or do you feel sorry for the Turks who died in the Turkish massacre that took place about 200 centuries ago in the Peloponnese peninsula, which is within the borders of Greece today? Or do you think that the people who died there were Turks, and are you happy inside? I ask these questions to your conscience and answer yourself, do you feel sorry for all the people who died during those events or are you just clinging to this issue because of racial hatred? And we Turks do not hate them, despite all the sad events that happened with the Armenians in the past, because we have never committed genocide in our history and therefore we have full confidence and self-confidence.
Classic Turk response
@@Lafuerza_V Yes, it's classic for you, but for us it's our stance on real events. Because your view on this issue is racial and we do not look at this issue as racially as you do. Indeed, if you, like us, look at the subject on the basis of human life, come and say that you are sorry for all the Muslims - Christians, Turks - Armenians who died there. Let's talk about why those events turned into such a great tragedy. Let's talk about why the Ottoman state officials were insufficient to prevent these events. Let's empathize to understand each other. I don't think you can do that, because you're looking at the issue on a racial basis and passing your anger on to your children from generation to generation. As long as you look at it that way, we don't care.
Filth
@@Lafuerza_V cus its real lol
@ No one believes your fake history
Watching in 2024. Considering the Armenian Genocide, Let's look at how Turkey treats the Kurds currently. It's what Turkey does.
Kurds should rise up! There are millions of Kurds living in the region.
@@IsabellaCastile-y8y🤣🤣🤣
I assume you are an American, so am I. That said, relatively speaking, I'd much rather be a Kurdish-Turk than an African-American.
We have a kurd president in past, this is how we treat kurds. Dont talk even without know anything about Turkey socialpolitics.
Kurds live really equal in Turkey do you know anything about us?
Honestly, I was very surprised after watching the video. It is the first time I have seen a Western perspective on the subject that is unbiased. Thank you. Let me explain the issues we Turks have regarding this matter:
The claims bear no resemblance to other events they are often compared to, such as the Holocaust or Srebrenica. If the motivation were religious or racial, it would have affected Armenians in other parts of the Ottoman Empire as well. However, the events in question are only alleged for Armenians in Eastern Anatolia.
There is not a single decision by the Ottoman government aimed at the massacre of Armenians, nor is there any such document. However, there are documents regarding the relocation to Syria, which we do not dispute, and it represents a serious human rights violation.
The topic is approached very one-sidedly, especially by the West. During these events, there was a world war, and the Ottoman army fighting the Russian forces attacking from Eastern Anatolia faced hit-and-run tactics, village raids, and supply line disruptions by the extremely nationalist and separatist Dashnak organization and its 100,000 Armenian members (later many more joined the Russian army). The source of the tragedy here is not a state targeting a group, but an internal conflict between two different religious and ethnic subjects of an empire. There is a chain of events where Turks responded to Armenian village raids, and Armenians responded in turn, escalating the conflict. The reason for the state's decision to relocate was that ordinary Turkish civilians, who were supposed to support the army, were dying while clashing with Armenians; similarly, Armenians were causing damage right behind the front against Russia. The decision was made for very rational reasons-to stabilize the region for the war effort against Russia. Discussing these events without mentioning the 600,000 Turkish civilians who died in the region is very disturbing and even nauseating.
Thank you for your positive contributions to the actual discussion on this topic. I am admittedly ignorant of most of the facts surrounding this topic & have been curious for some time now. Your comments along with this video of course have added to my overall understanding. I didn't realize how complex this was.
@@Lyle-In-NO it really is a complex matter. But the main problem is, the west is flagging people that argues the Armenian allegations like they are denying the holocaust. Bernard Lewis and some other historians are literally cancelled in the U.S. just because they simply said it wasn’t a genocide, it was a civil war.
The subject has become a political matter rather than a historic dispute. Türkiye is actually welcoming any historian who wants to study this matter in Imperial Archives, in Istanbul.
Anyway, I am happy to see someone that trying to understand. Thank you for your comment.
@artinvartanian4631 classic dashnak mentality, lies lies lies
ruclips.net/video/1nij_I3RS6Y/видео.htmlsi=vZNrTMU4rXVG95sg
3:20 - Don't forget about the Armenians who were loaded onto ships and "deported" into the middle of the Black Sea. (spoiler: they didn't get to stay on the ships either.)
4:07 - Also don't forget that the definition of genocide written by the UN was formulated _specifically_ to describe what was inflicted on Armenians by the Ottoman Empire. The Armenian Genocide cannot be described as anything other than a genocide because it is the _exemplar_ of the word.
Both of your informations are untrue, lol.
The term "genocide" was coined by a Polish lawyer named Rafał Lemkin in 1944. Lemkin was motivated by the atrocities committed by the Germany and Soviet Russia during the II WW.
now these lies are really immoral
Thanks another Interesting topic and you make so easy to understand, you stayed neutral aswell. 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
How many, Britain, France, US, Belgium recognised yet in their genocide yet? none,. So its clear this is only political motivated action against Turkey in this issue which is unfortunate anyone hurt in that tribble war. At least Germany did. Thanks.
Pointing a finger will not cover up the atrocity that was factually committed. The problem with you Turks is your proud. Don't forget that you are branded as the sickman of Europe and I dare say Asia too! The rotten decaying core of the Ottoman Empire. 🇹🇷👎
@@papapeethehunks when people will talk about genocides committed by europeans? I think that day will not come until europeans see a Real genocide
Ok, I see it's very hard to speak about many genocides committed by Europeans country. But at least we would like to see Tripolice katliami because Greece is not totally an European country lets say half 🙂
When Armenia will apologize for mass killing of Muslims in Azerbaijan 1918 or for Khojali ? sounds like it meets your genocide definition
@Steven Taylor nothing it doesn't exist and neither its people
I agree with you. They will never speak about that.
Summgayte Pogrom Bakou 🇦🇿👹
@@snnnndddyy898 they will never speak about that because look at what your country is doing to Armenia rn. Khojaly is 0.0001% of what azerbaidjan is doing
@@aa6dcc from the lies of this crusader gang
A nice analysis. Given that you mentioned the Syriacs, however, I think that the Pontic Greeks should also have been mentioned. A grim story.
Thank William. I thought to also mention it, but it was a little removed from the key events being described. As ever, it’s always a balancing act. But I do plan to return to the broader subject of the population exchanges in another video and will try to bring it up then as part of the background to events.
@@JamesKerLindsay I hope so.
It is sad that the genocide against the Turks by the Greeks and Armenians aren't mentioned though.
@@sleros8646 Because there was none.
@@Kalimdor199Menegroth yea that's why grandmother of mother always told the stories of burning villages and mosques around my hometown. When Greek army occupied my town in march 1921, Greek gangs turn on its neighbours, steel all the animals and gold after killing many of the people. People always had to run into forests and mountains to hide themselves. Thanks god Ataturk and its army saved my town after 80 days of occupation.
Brilliant as always! Didn't know Turkey 'recognised' the genocide at any level.
Thanks so much. Yes, this is a little known element of the story. Many think that this is about a wholesale denial of the facts. It isn't. It is about whether the events constitute genocide in the formal meaning of the term.
@@JamesKerLindsay Turkey does not recognise it as a genocide period. Don't sell wrong information as propoganda Turkey describe civilian killings as "mukatele" which means mutual revenge killings by irregulars. British Goverment investigated and found zero evidence regarding intend of genocide. Ottoman goverment even hanged officilas for poor supervision during the mass deportation. You have conveniently don't mention Bernard Lewis a British! historian and you are basicly doing a pro genoice propoganda. ruclips.net/video/U0SDHOiY7vQ/видео.html watch and maybe learn something. You have also don't mention how many Muslim Turk and Kurds died in the hand of Armenian Gangs.
@@metesever6546 Did you actually watch the video? I discuss the main arguments and perspectives. And I think I fairly outlined the Turkish stance, although I think its position is ultimately self-defeating.
@@JamesKerLindsay How countries deal with their past increasingly important? Are you that naive? What is AUKUS? Why is India is in it ? Who colonized India? Why Turkey is in NATO? Russia, France, US was already supporting the armenian rebellion, so if there is some self defeating it is the trying to convince the judges who calls for ur head..
@@JamesKerLindsay It's clear that you made that video with a biased perspective. You take sides. If it was different, I would definitely get surprised. Because, Turks are the "constituent Other" of the Christian Europe. Turks have been demonized and dehumanized in European religious, historical, and literary narratives throughout history. Your minds are already shaped firmly, like cast iron.
yes, it's called genocide. The Turkish state does not accept this, the lands and population lost by Turkey in the Balkans are still a nightmare for the Turks.And that fear is still very much alive. because there is the Kurdish issue. First of all, the European Union and America should be sincere. Indeed, the Turkish state gave up on the island of Cyprus in 2004. The President of Turkey went to Armenia. The two football teams played a friendly match together. They worked hard to enter the European Union. What was the result. With an arrogant and still superior mentality, the West excluded Turkey. The West supported the military coup in Turkey. and the Turkish government has moved away from democracy. I hope the coming years will be more peaceful.
Thanks for the research & presentation James. Can you pls look at the pros & cons of the British Empire. Some of the atrocities commited in India for instance or even Kenya with the Mau Mau tribe would be illuminating.
Thank you so much. Yes, I really should look into Kenya and the Mau Mau. This has been a major issue here in the UK over the years.
When Turk recognizes the genocide happened they will finally become happy and healthy humans. Until then, they will be a sad lot their so life. I’m from marash, I am Anatolia, my grandparents survived the Armenian genocide.
Did your grandfather tell you how Armenian gangs massacred civilians, including children, babies and the elderly?
@@jackieny9914 if there was any genocide, surviving would not be an option against Turks, so you mentioning your grandparents surviving, means there was no genocide against them, there was just harsh conditions in which some of your people died, but at that time, a lot people died due to those conditions, you will not be getting anything from Turkey in the name of the genocide. Do whatever you can, still, you will always be a so-called country of poorest people on earth due to their hate towards Turks.
I feel like the wide span of what is genocide is important. When I think of it I tend to think of things like Rwanda or the Holocaust as in the systematic killing of groups. I feel like that that idea and view is so powerful that in many minds that is what is seen as genocide so when things like transferring people or groups across harsh areas or separating people or cultures happen it doesn’t pop into the mind as genocide. And I think those events are important but the specific focus on and implementing of such as genocide makes it more difficult in the public sense
Thank you so much. You are completely right. As I also explained in my video on Xinjiang, there is a widespread belief Genocide only refers to directly ordered mass killing. That is not the case. That is the most directly obvious form of genocide, but it far from the totality if the term. Genocide is about trying to deliberately eradicate a group or a part of that group,
@@JamesKerLindsay Can you please also make a video about what happened after their deportation? The revenge movement Armenians started which resulted in killings of more than 1 million Turkish and Kurdish civilians. Because if we are going to talk about this issue, we have to talk about what happened before the events and what happened after the events as well. There are many mass graves in Turkey which have Turkish and Kurdish peoples' bones. So if we were to call a deportation a genocide, then shouldn't we also talk about direct killings of Turks and Kurds and call it a genocide? And I know for a fact that Ottoman Empire commissioned many guards to protect Armenians while they were being deported, which we saw in a photograph as well that you put on your video. What pisses me of is that the Ottomans had to fight in many fronts which caused lack of supplies and lack of men as well, so understandably they couldn't provide Armenians with a lot of supplies nor men(guards). People do not hesitate to call it a genocide, but nobody talks about how Armenians directly killed my people which were unarmed, and basically got away with it. What I believe is that this matter has become more of a pressure tool rather than the recognition of the tragic events that occurred. I feel sorry for every single civilian who lost their lives whether they were Armenian, Turkish, or Kurdish; but I'm against calling these events a genocide only to humiliate us and demand lands from us.
@@bugrayuksel3502 That is mostly part of your mythology. Armenians simply put did not have the numbers or the military power, especially during the period when they were being killed and deported to conduct any form of mass killing against anyone. Localized small scale war crimes as reprisals? Yes. Killing over 1 million Turkish civilians? Probably in a fantasy book.
"And I know for a fact that Ottoman Empire commissioned many guards to protect Armenians"
The same guards that were escorting them to their doom? So helpful were those guards that they allowed Kurdish and Turkish irregular troops to periodically attack the Armenians being deported and massacre them.
There was never any intention by the Turkish government to supply the Armenian people being deported. In fact the location chosen for the location was strategically chosen to liquidate those deported. The parts of Syria where the surviving Armenians were sent was a dessert, with little fertile land to grow crops, livestock, little water to fish. The intention was clear to send them to an inhospitable place and they will die by themselves due to starvation, dehydration or by prey to Kurdish nomadic raids.
Trying to invent some fantastical mass-murders that reportedly Armenians perpetrated is something that has been already debunked by Turkish professors such as Taner Akcam. You can be against calling it a genocide. Same Nazis are against calling the Holocaust a genocide. But we have a moral duty to recognize it as such. While our governments may not, we, the average folk should an will.
I am a Turk living in Anatolia. I am not a Muslim. The Ottomans mean nothing to me. But even I do not accept the Armenian Genocide at all. The general view of the Turks is the same as me.
Good video. What happened to the Christians of Anatolia during the late days of the Ottoman Empire, was ethnic cleansing. It was a state policy to get rid of them especially after the balkan wars.
Thank you. I agree. It would certainly amount to ethnic cleansing. But I think it is the way that this ethnic cleansing was conducted that creates the argument for genocide. Had the deportations been carried out in a way that tried to preserve human life it would have been appalling, but it wouldn’t have been genocide. It was forcing people to walk into the desert without adequate food, water or medical attention that has led most observers to argue that it constitutes genocide. (Edited for spelling.)
@@JamesKerLindsay If it were ethnic cleansing none of them would left alive. The response was not national. Many Christian families living in the West were protected. Those families are still alive and keeping their names in Turkey today. There are still Armenian schools in Turkey that preserve the language since half a Millenium. I really don't understand how warped the Western perception on this issue is..
There was not a unified, omnipotent response, or a decree, by the state, to exterminate the Armenians. The response to their alliance with the invading forces(Russian, British) were local, and the people that responded the most were the ones that suffered the most from their newly formed alliances. The populous had been driven, killed by Armenian, British and Russian forces.
We have to be grateful for the Russians though, it was them during their revolution that unravelled the sykes picot hotline, all the messages, and the real thoughts and perceptions about the minorities that are used as pawns by the powers that be.
But alas, good attempt to revisionise. Looks professional enough=).
@@JamesKerLindsay
I think, the main reason behind the so-called denial is hypocrisy, which can easily be seen here!
Two events are mentioned above. In the former one, 1,5 million muslims were deported to Anatolia and around half of them died because of the committed atrocities, diseaaes, hunger and cold. This is called 1st Balkan War. In the later, 1,5 million Armenians were deported and a (million?) disputed amount of which died because of the same kind of atrocities, diseases and hunger. This is called "genocide or ethnic cleansing of the christian community in Anatolia".
Dear Prof Ker-Lindsay, why don't you prepare a video about ethnic cleansing of the muslim population in the 1st Balkan War and if this may also be an act of genocide?
@@JamesKerLindsay Bernard Lewis denied the Armenian genocide. He argued that the deaths of the mass killings resulted from a struggle between two nationalistic movements, claiming that there is no proof of intent by the Ottoman government to exterminate the Armenian nation
@@JamesKerLindsay
It preserved human lifes. We dont know how many died. 600.000 is a very exaggerated number let alone 1.5 million. Where do you think the diaspora come from ?
Our comment on this issue is wrong. Why are you telling us what the Armenian gangs have done to the Kurds and Turks in the east since 1894? Thousands of innocent people were murdered in mosques by Dashnak gangs.
Hmmm. I see your point but I still believe that it is a little bit one-sided. What do you think of the Armenian attacks to Turkish civilians in the late 1800s? Why did you not mention the Russian-backed Armenian forces attacking Turkish citizens before, and as soon as the WW1 was announced making use of the opportunity? Why did you not come to a conclusion on the Turkish muslim civilians that were mass murdered by the Armenians, namely in the Turkish city Van? Is that not a genocide? I repeat, is that not a genocide?
Was this so-called genocide in fact targeted without a reason after living in peace for several hundreds of years? Or was it caused by the independence movement starting in the Balkans, and the Armenians wanted to get a taste of it, backed by their older brother Russia? I wish you touched upon these points as well.
The Jewish people in Germany took no arms, the Uyghur Turks in China took no arms, the African people enslaved by European nations took no arms. Their only fault was simply to exist. Can you put this occasion in the same basket as the other examples? Don't you think that it would not be an insult to those people who suffered during those incidents? I think they would.
In Turkish history, this issue is not very significant. We have had our people killed only because of their ethnicity in the past as well. You dont believe me? Look at what the Uygur Turks are going through right now. Turks ruled the world many times in the past during the times of the Ottomans, Seljuks, Golden Horde, Gokturks etc. We have a huge, very rich history. This issue is Armenia's only source of identity and only way that they can keep their people together. That is why they hold onto it like they have nothing else. Because they have nothing else. Turkish resources estimate that we also lost over 500,000 people resulting because of Armenian attacks. WW1 was an all-out war meaning that civilians in most cases were involved in battles. Weaponized civilians by Russian forces are not civilians anymore, especially if they are capable of mass murdering others and attacking remote villages to gain land. Turkey should put more emphasis on this issue, because it is ridiculous how many publications that the Armenians do every day, and Turkey lets this issue arise even to this day.
"People were mean to us in the past so we can do and say what we want" God, you sound like such a baby. Also you clearly didn't actually watch the video.
true
The city of Van is Armenian. So are Sasoun, Mush, Ardahan, Erzrum, Trabzon...turkish history is 600 years old unlike Armenian which is 7000...so now you tell me who occupied who? EVERYTHING and ANYTHING turkish is stolen from indigenous nations. Starting from lands, language, alphabet, mosque (Haga Sophia church), food, music... that's the absolute truth...
@Oh no, 600 years? You are a small country and your culture is very small. Everything you learned is a big lie. I won't bother myself by answering you
@@noway6379 @Oh no, 600 years? You are a small country and your culture is very small. Everything you learned is a big lie. I won't bother myself by answering you
A little unrelated, but I am surprised that you used the term Arabian Gulf instead of Persian Gulf, similar to how Arabian governments would refer to it. Is that how it is usually called in Britain?
Thanks. Both terms can be used. But in this case, it was actually accidental. I meant to say Arabian Peninsula. 🤭
@@JamesKerLindsay Ahh I see, thanks as I was curious!
Another fascinating topic. It is amazing that the issue still provokes such emotions from the successor state to the ottoman empire so many years later. Surely it would have been easy enough to place the blame on the Young Turk/Ottoman government and distance the Republic of Turkey from culpability? Do you think a Turkish/Armenian rapprochement is possible or will it always be prevented by the nagorno-karabakh/artsakh conflict and the issue of the 1915 genocide?
Thanks. I agree fully. Turkey would have been better to put this down to the Ottoman Empire, recognised it and moved on. As I say, with every passing year it makes it more difficult to back down and, in prevailing circumstances where countries now recognise atrocities, is doing more and more harm to its reputation. As for rapprochement, that would probably be difficult to see at the moment given Nagorno-Karabakh.
@@JamesKerLindsay It's a real pity for Armenia that they remain stuck in a situation where they have such poor relations with neighbours and a dependency on Moscow alone.
🇦🇲🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🌎✊️✊️✊️
James why don't you make a video about the recognition of the Genocide that Germany commited in Namibia? (by the German Government)
Thanks. I am thinking about it. The thing is that I have actually recently prepared a script on Namibia for my origins of countries series. (Not many people realise it, but its path to independence is actually one of the most important in the modern era!) I do mention it in that. But I don’t necessarily want to focus too much on historical cases. As you saw, even in this video the focus was firmly on the international relations aspects of the issue, rather than a detailed account of 1915. I would really want to have a very contemporary hook to the video. Finally, as you might imagine, I don’t really like doing these type of videos as they attract the very worst types of trolls - genocide deniers! My topics are grim enough without having to get into that territory too often. I’m sure you understand.
Why dont you read a book written by the first president of armenia telling they were hyped up by russians😂
Great video as always! Next year I am writing my bachelor thesis about recognition of armenian genocide. Is there any chance you could recommned any sources you used besides those in description? Love your videos and greetings from Slovakia.
Hi Alex, there are a lot of books out there. Look for ones published by reputable publishers, such as major university presses (Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.) or well by well established academic presses (Routledge, Palgrave). IB Taurus and Hurst might also have some books. A well-respected Turkish scholar who has written on this is Taner Akcam.
it's never been approved by any court rather thn politic games and gains for some powers so how could you call it a genocide??? Genocide claims based on what!
Read English American Historian Bernard Lewis’s book “The Emergence of Modern Turkey (Studies in Middle Eastern History)”
All recognitions are done by political bodies and political reasons. Term genocide was use so loosely, when it comes to Armenian issue, then all the countries committed genocide in every war they were in.
1992 de hocalıda ermenilerin soykrımı tanıyormusunuz???yadan yunanların batı anadoluda yaptığı soykrımı
Dear Prof. have you made a video about the difficult relation between South Korea and Japan (including issues such as the "comfort women" and the Yakusuni Shrine)? Two countries that I would expect to be closed allies. I worked for both Mitsubishi Motors and Hyundai and executives from both companies couldn't be in the same room!!!
Thanks so much Jorge. Great suggestion. I’ve wanted to look at Korea for a while. But this is a really interesting angle to explore. I’ve marked it down.
A good attempt at tackling this issue but you fail to mention historians are divided on the matter. Historians such as Stone & McCarthy have concluded there is no evidence that falls under the definition of genocide. Rather what we have are stories of atrocities handed down generation by generation. The British trials did not find any evidence when everything was fresh and the British had a motivation to do so.
Forced relocation in times of war (bearing in mind Christian countries had on mass invaded Turkey on all fronts to dismember the ottoman lands) does not amount to genocide (Stone). Did terrible things happen? Did the Turks take advantage and take revenge on the Armenias that sided with the Russians and killed innocent Muslims village by village? No doubt they did but does it account to genocide?
It is interesting that many of the countries that are in the genocide camp have large Armenian diaspora, the other countries are historic Turcophobes and the rest mostly Christian countries. What does this tell you? It is also somewhat odd that these same countries refuse to own up to their own genocidal behavior (US, native Indians. France, Algeria, Republic of Cyprus.Turkis Cypriots. Russia, there are loads and these are just to name a few) again mainly Christian countries.
In summary, until a commission of historians is established to ultimately conclude this matter the question of was it genocide or not will remain in doubt and until that time genocide should not be concluded.
Would should definitely not happen is for politicians to make decisions for political expediency. The saying politicians do not make good history applies here. This is not only wrong but devoid of any conclusive evidence lessons the weight of their argument.
Thanks. I was a little more cautious on this point in an earlier draft of the script. However, I think that the overwhelming majority of scholars do accept the view that the events in 1915 do constitute genocide under the terms of the Genocide Convention. Also, even the British Government concedes that the Malta tribunals were affected by serious questions about jurisdiction. I think the view now is that the trials themselves can't be used either way.
As for the question of the deportations, I agree that forced relocations cannot be considered to be genocide in themselves; although they could be considered ethnic cleansing. The problem is this case was the way in which the deportations were conducted. Expelling a people who had been identified as enemies of the state into the desert with no obvious regard for their basic human needs would, by any reasonable view, effectively amount to a policy of extermination. This is the fundamental argument.
@@JamesKerLindsay I take your point however I do not understand why the Armenians do not invite these scholars to review the evidence and accept the conclusions either way? If genocide is concluded an apology and consideration of reperations should be discussed. If the Armenian position is strong why do they avoid going down this route?
@@JamesKerLindsay
It wasnt a ''desert''. There are still Armenian communities in Syria and Lebanon.
Good video James!
Thank you very much!
@@JamesKerLindsay can you do a video on the recent Slovenia PM Balkan redrawing map? What are your thoughts etc
I might do something on it. In the meantime, here are some of my thoughts that I gave to the BBC on the issue www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57251677
Thank you James for this historical video about Armenian Genocide in 1915 by Ottoman empire who massacred 1.5 Million Armenian also Assyrian and Greeks. But people should know that that country is not belong to Turks, used to be Armenian land and Greeks,Assyrian's which Turks about 850 years ago concurred by Seljuks and turks and distroyed millions of life.
Well, things happened before 200 years are history, where human rights didn't existed or globalism, you can't blame those people for conquering Anatolia or Balkans, Timur had killed 50.000 Armenian war prisoners by building a platform and throwing a feast on top of it.
Neither the USA belongs to Europeans
It's also Stolen
Thank you James.. I think most democratic nations will eventually accept the term genocide and it is a matter of time. Most non-Turkish historians that study the subject agree that the Ottoman government from 1915 carried out the systematic mass murder and expulsion of around 1.5 million ethnic Armenians, which meets the definition of a genocide.
source ?
No.
The Armenian Genocide is the source of the word Genocide. Raphael Lemkin based the word Genocide on the Armenian Genocide. Its like saying the Moon meets the definition of a moon.
Thanks for the video, very interesting as always. It was interesting to note that the issue is not over reparations in case Turkey acknowledges the genocide. In that case, I am curious as to why the modern Turkish Republic is reluctant considering the atrocity was committed by the Empire that the modern state fought against during the Turkish War of Independence.
The simple fact is there is no evidence. You cannot force the acquisition of genocide down someone's throats devoid of evidence. Turkey has agreed to establish an international commission of historians to look into the matter. Why does Armenia if they are so confident of their claim refuse the commission?
@@thetraveller1612 Check out this then.
www.sciencespo.fr/mass-violence-war-massacre-resistance/en/document/extermination-ottoman-armenians-young-turk-regime-1915-1916.html
The timeline has sources linked to it for you to research. Many of these authors are historians. Where is the evidence of your claim? and does it come from a non-Turkish source? The Turkish government has a high control over the media so I don’t believe a Turkish source would be unbiased.
@@connor4955 yes evidence from non Turkish sources. If there is evidence either way then let international historians assess and conclude once and for all. This is the only way forward on the matter.
Tribalism they just hate Armenia because of tradition.
It does become a problem when you want to reinstitute a neo ottoman empire. Not to mention it's not the only genocide Turks have carried out AND they are still actively persecuting ethnic and religious groups in their country to this day.
The question of how countries respond to historic atrocities has become increasingly significant.
Yes i see, but i dont know where that path leads anymore
Isn't it crazy how in Germany you can go to jail for denying to Holocaust but in Turkey the same can happen to you for not denying the Armenian genocide.
Thank you so much for this revelation. Am Always hungry for your lectures.
Thank you so much. Always lovely to hear from you. I hope all is well with you and yours.
💯🇦🇲🙏🏻🇦🇲✝️🕊💕👏🏻
Source "Trust me bro"
Armenians.
The thing that no country mention including ours is that same years, in Balkans, Turks forced to exile and died on the road because of the hunger and violence that nobody mentions. In Cyprus, 1974, Turks living in the land killed by the Greeks to unite with Greece and today no country recognizes Turkish Republic of Cyprus. Bulgarian genocide, and at the same time Arzerbaijan genocide happened in 1994 still doesn’t recognized nor talked in the Europe even thought Armenian attack the civilians with an argument of Karabakh is theirs even it is given by Russia to Azerbaijan. Many died and suffered but their stories untold and continue. I haven’t seen the Armenian genocide so did my mom, grandma and maybe her mother even didn’t see it. The stories haven’t told by our parents but we know that this is not one way down. There were many occasions happened before Armenian exile in world war 1 that could said to be Turkish genocide but unsurprisingly it is not noticed. I am not here to blame but why united nations are so persistent about Armenian genocide but not about the ones done by Armenian in near future? Why there is some sort of bias? I think that needs to be questioned and that is what we are standing in. Many mistakes had been done in the past and many stories changed over time so I think it would be more right to let it go since no countries really try to notice the truth but just power against the other. I am not writing to say you are not right vice versa. This video is really the most objective video I have ever seen so thanks for that but still there are stories that forgotten and circumstances the Europe forgets to mention.
James, you are really an amazing expert in this things. The knowledge you have on international affairs and countries foreign relation is on a different level.
Historically , Turkey has always had issues with many neighbouring countries, Greece, Russia, Armenia, Cypress and others but the Armenian genocide has always been obvious, with so many evidences that these genocides and atrocities had been committed against the poor Armenian by Turkish forces. As a country Turkey need to come out and apologise to the atrocities and genocide they committed against the Armenians. Turkey is also a country with a tendency to invade any country that dare attempts to cross their imaginary or geographical borders. For example the recent confrontations with Greece, Syria and the the war of words with Israel etc... They consider themselves as the regional power which is wrong and far from the truth.
Who would apologize for the hundreds of thousands of Turks (more than 500 thousand to be exact) killed by Armenians during those events, for hundreds of thousands massacred by the Greeks in Tripolitsa and Navarino massacres of 1821 and in various other massacres in Crete and the Pelopennese? Why are these victims not given the same sympathy? The answer is: because they are not Christians and the whole global media is controlled by their erstwhile enemies.
Name some of those "So many Evidences" then ?
Turkey calls Armenia to international court they refuse.
Turkey calls for internaional historians and researches do investigate matter they refuse.
Turkey open Ottoman and Turkish Archives for investigation again Armenia refuses infact Turkey offered 4 millin+20 million USD in humnetarian aid had armenia open their archives they refuse.
Turkey calls for any form of solid evidence, Armenia can't produce any.
This is bullshit and injustice towards Turks and you know it.
Hell There is no international court ruling, political consensus or academic agreement that defines the events of 1915 as genocide
Also it's simple biology and math lol
What's today armenian population 3 million in Armenia and total 11 million all over the world.
What was their fertility rate during last 100 years 1.2 to 2.1
What's their claim on death tall on events of 1915 ? 1.5 to 2 millon
So unless each and EVERY armenian family produced 36 child UNRECORDED a century straight such claims are mathematicly hell even biologically impossible.
And so there's no genocide it's nothing but a political lie in order to pressure Turkey simple as that..
So.. Quit being stupid pls.
It can't be callled a genocide. Ottomans were attacked from all fronts and they lost majority of their people and land. WW1 was still going on and in such situation, Armenian rebels were attacking the Ottomans. Ottomans reacted to this and killed the rebels and deported them. Yes they went too far but it was about saving their land and not killing Armenians. Also what choice did they had. The rebels would never stop. It was an act of self defence.
Turkey was a colonial empire just like UK,The Netherlands or Spain.... Turkey is just denying it
Thanks. Very good point. I should do something in this. And do keep an eye out for tonight’s video. I’m looking at France and Algeria.
@@JamesKerLindsay Slavery was abolished as late as 1908 in The Ottoman Empire.Much later then in Europe.In Croatia women had to tattoo their bodies in crosses and all kinds of symbols to protect themselfs from abductions,rape and murder.The Ottomans saw tattoos as something dirty... Now women in Croatia tattoo those symbols as a matter of pride and tradition.It has had a real revival in the last 2 decades
@@mariocroatia9321 if you are still speaking your own language and still same religion that clearly shows how good Ottoman Empire was so stop fooling yourself with that crap.. Here in Ireland we speak English and many more, some countries speaks German, some countries speaks French and I wonder why...! Ottoman Empire was probably far more better thn those murderers...
You claimed that Turkey is an imperial state. Is there anyone who speaks Turkish in the Ottoman-dominated areas? No. Let's give another example. Did the Ottomans act as missionaries to people in the Balkans? No, most of them are still Christians today. But England, Spain, France are imperial states. These countries both forcibly taught their own language and changed the religion of the people by doing missionary work. Go learn history.
colonial, how? did ottoman colonize america or africa? where?
As always thank you so much for the video James its really is an interesting topic and been developing a lot this last year. An odd fact the mention is every US state government has recognized it 49 except for Mississippi. I haven’t found a reason why they haven’t though.
Thank you so much Nicholas. I had in fact considered mentioning the large number of recognitions in US state assemblies and in other assemblies around the world. It is indeed an absolutely fascinating aspect of international relations. (I actually wrote about this in one of my books.) Unfortunately, I had to cut it out. But you make a great point. And I have no idea why Mississippi is the lone hold out. Hopefully, the power of RUclips will bring this to the attention of someone who might be able to answer it!
I found. İt's lie
@@umitsanl3409 Kendini o kadar iyi açıkladın ki okuyan herkesin düşüncesini değiştirdin. Bravo
hocalı soykrımınıda tansın abd ve vietnam ve ırakta kendi yaptığı soykırmlarıda
Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians, cypresses, Kurds and now Syrians. I don’t understand why many counties are quiet on this subject because of their own interest and close eyes on such incidents. Thx United States to recognize the genocide. You can’t let a murderer walk away.That’s why there is prison and punishment for that.
'Should'? There is no place to accept this accusation because some of the parliaments decided to recognize 'historical event' results and reasons.
History is not a subjective topic, this reminds us of when Galileo was accused as a criminal because of denial of the 'flat earth' theory that is Pope/Church ruled world obligation. But the reality, the earth is a sphere, and Galileo was right.
Turkey never accepts declarations from any parlements, the country is not responsible for any abroad governing tools, local populist movements. Governments and representatives can select for one time and are changeable. So even Armenians can never trust for next parliaments won't decelerate the event is not genocide.
Also, Turkey is open to any debate with counterparts about this issue. Always has been offering 'let's open historical archives and create a working group with the help of 3rd party countries' but always refused by Armenia. Because it is a useful tool for annoying Turkey.
The honest way is creating a commission with historians, legit bureaucrats, and working together on this issue with the under international law and justice community.
Until that time come, all political declaration, any other government's views, accusations, videos, and talks are not significant.
P.S. The citizen of Turkey always sad about what happened around Balkan Wars - WW1, and sharing all pain. Both sides of people died for nothing. And only all of us gained hatred, untrust, and fear.
Additionally, the Biden administration just released a guy who killed an innocent Turkish diplomat in the USA, sent him to Armenia like a hero. This kind of clarification of guilt is making our world more untrusty and less civil. The guy is a perpetrator of a certain crime and the killer.
Last statement, counterproductive.
Counterproductive to what? To the current vision of the imperialists that want to enforce their version of history onto countries.
Your talk was good, however, I believe the intend was not there by the Ottoman Empire to commit this terrible act.
Another issue you did not fully go into was, the faultless imperialists (yeah right - UK, France etc.) that pressured the Ottomans into WW1, and with this war on one side, the Russians along with the Armenians on the eastern borders, the a Ottomans were overwhelmed.
What to do? Since there was a large population of Armenians, they (meaning the Ottomans along with their German superior officers) made the decision to remove Armenians outside and/or away from the battle that was happening.
The fighting that was taking place between the Ottomans and the Armenians with their Russian cousins killed over 1 million Ottomans and Armenians.
We cannot say and fault one side (Ottomans), while the other side, who were just as guilty (Armenians), and more, since they sided with the enemy and upraised against a government that was theirs for over 400 years.
We donot say their was a genocide. No.
As an Ottoman grandchild, I am terribly upset at the deaths from these years. My condolences go out to our Armenians friends. But it was not an intend to commit this act.
I could go on, but will leave it at that.
Thank you for the comment. I think the problem is that we are conditioned to understand Genocide in very narrow terms. But it is more complex and wide ranging than people realise. In this case, the intent wasn’t a direct order to kill, as with the Holocaust. It was different. It was indirect. But ones has to ask what did Talat Pasha and others think would happen if you marched hundreds of thousands of people into the desert without adequate food, water, shelter, medical assistance or protection? The end goal was obvious. It would have amounted to a death sentence for a large proportion of them. And the fact that they were being deported as enemies of the state meant that that wilful disregard fir their lives would have been intimately tied up with their identity as a group. This is why the large majority of observers now regard it as genocide. Again, it is important to take a step back and consider whether the behaviour of the administration, applied in other circumstances, would be considered genocide. I absolutely guarantee that had the victims been Turkish and the government in question Greek or Armenians, Turks would be arguing that there was a malign intent and that it was genocide.
I have been following this issue for almost thirty years as part of my work on the Eastern Mediterranean. I have seen the issue develop. I just find it disappointing that Turkey had made this about its National honour. It isn’t. And it should never have been framed as such. And I found it so interesting the way that President Erdogan brought up the Native Americans. This says so much. Not because he brought it up, but because it highlights the way that the vast majority of Americans would readily acknowledge the terrible crimes committed and would not have viewed this as a slur on the nation. So, as someone who certainly doesn’t have an axe to grind with Turkey - quite the opposite, it is a country I love and know very well - I feel that it has dug itself into a whole that sadly does not reflect well on it. I understand you may see things differently, but that’s just an outside view from a long standing observer.
As for the element about the local fighting between Armenians and Turks and Kurds, and how this relates to the genocide argument, I’ve addressed this in several other comments.
@@JamesKerLindsay you make references, but it is not very simple in this age old country that was a melting pot to many nationalists, plus, everyone had their eye on the lands of the empire. How do we break apart the empire more, and grab lands? This Was the question on many nationalists minds.
Now you mention Talat Pasa. It is not that simple to put the blame on this Ottoman pasa. Why?
Let us just examine this. Talat pasa was a member of the Young Turks movement, in Ottoman, Ittihat Ve Terraki. Now, we can write a book about this party, but will not. I will ask you, who were the creators of this party? Yes, they were Ottomans, but were 90% of all members were of the Zionist mindset.
The goal of this party was to go against the sultan, and undermine and make the empire weaker. Please do some research on this. Now you are probably saying, what has this have any barring on the Armenian fighting. Plenty.
If an Ottoman pasa, meaning Talat pasa takes orders from a group that are not Muslim, and their ultimate goal is to grab lands for themselves, why does not the western community, like you, not look at this further.
Why are you and the western community finding blame on the Ottoman Empire, when the last 10 to 15 years of the great empires years, she was assaulted, ruled, manipulated, and totally butt-fucked by the Zionists, Germans, French, Russians, UK, and Armenians. Do you want me to keep going here????
That is the issue here. The empire gave the order to March the Armenians to southern Syria. So the empire is to blame. It is not that simple.
The empire was trying to stay on her two feet while the imperialists were abusing my forefathers. Don’t you think the imperialists have the blame here as well. It’s like saying, “10 children are fighting, but just blame the black kid as he looks to be the blame, since it was his house.” It is wrong.
Every nation that was involved in war against my beloved Ottoman Empire, during WW1 needs to share the blame of the killings, both Turkish and Armenians were slaughtered.
I don’t buy it, the genocide argument.
Again my condolences to my Armenian friends, plus Muslim/Turkish families that suffered.
Your looking at one, my ancestors came out of Siirt, eastern Turkey, immigrated to Istanbul. I could go on here again, but will conclude.
Osmanli torunu. Period.
@@benoaktv On point indeed. Accept responsibility AND demand the same of others. Forgive ourselves rather than excuse ourselves.
Thank you for remembering the Armenians 🇦🇲, Professor James Ker-Lindsay, and for your diligent study of complex international relations, and compassionate and accurate reporting on the history. Exceptional work.
Maybe you should mention why Armenians joined the Russians . Please review and share the information about the massacres carried out by sultan Hameed Over 300 thousand were butchered because they asked for equality under fair justice system. Also please mention the Armenians living as Dimmi and had to pay head tax in order to retain their faith, culture and language….
4:53 speaking or genocide how come you do not call genocide in Gaza Palestine against Palestinians from Israel
Thank you for this video. I would like to comment on this from the perspective of a Turkish person. I think international relations professors should closely examine theology professors who work on interfaith dialogue. Their studies will reveal that no matter how much and issue is studied by IR professors, there will be inherent viewpoints that will only be available to Armenians and Turks. Therefore, conflict resolution will have to happen between these two groups.
Turkey is a developing country that has been battling financial issues throughout its existance. Therefore, the elected politicians are elected with internal issues in mind where they might lack proper international relations education. This may prevent governments from making fruitful statements. However the Armenian government using other countries to force a resolution instead of making proactive attempts to dialogue with Turkey is equally unfruitful and counter-productive. There is a thin line between using a third country to force the resolution and using said country to bring two groups together to the discussion table.
While the video presented arguments for both sides, the tone of the video simply accuses Turkey of preventing this conflict's resolution by not admitting the genocide, however, because of the argument I made above this is undeniably not the case and both countries are equally responsible for the failure of this conflict's resolution and simply pointing the finger to Turkey is counter productive and simply poor academic practice.
Moreover, the video bases the case for genocide on UN's definition. I would argue that the UN's definition for genocide can be applied to all wars in the history of mankind, as all wars have an intent to hurt the other party, both physically and emotionally. The reason why Turkey denies genocide while admitting to the massacre, is undeniably a proof that the term genocide is an overloaded word after the events of WW2 that has torture application connotations. The United Nations definition is simply too vague, insufficient and outdated. This was further proved in the Palestinian Israeli conflict.
Lastly, context matters in law. In litigation, context is the deciding factor between murder degrees, why don't we apply the same criteria for genocide definition? In World War I, the Ottoman Empire has deployed all of its manpower to the Gallipoli front. This fight was seen as an existential fight. Kids as young as 14 years of age were deployed to the front. Even then, the ottoman empire couldn't provide soldiers with medication or hot food, and a loaf of bread was all soldiers could get if anything. Therefore, how feasible was it for the Ottoman Empire to have provided the optimal conditions while forcing the relocation? Didn't the Ottoman Empire have the right to defend itself against a group who have taken arm against their state, and who have murdered their citizens. With what manpower did the ottoman empire organise this genocide, an act that undeniably requires an abundance of resources.
As can be seen, this conflict/issue is far more complex than what was made out to be in this video. The real productive thing here to do is for academics and other countries to find ways to bring both nations to the discussion table while studying the matter without bias. It isn't right to juxtapose this issue with imperialism and slavery, as it isn't as white and black as those issues are.
Yet ANOTHER great video James! Keep up the good work! I LOVED that you stayed neutral. I got my friend to say hi btw. I looked at a map about the recognition of the event and Turkey AND Azerbaijan deny that the event happened. Why does Azerbaijan deny the event happened? Is it because both are sort of allies? Anyway keep up the good work. I had another idea for one of your independence videos. You should talk about how Mongolia gained independence. And how Taiwan (ROC) still kind of does not recognize it's independence! It's a very interesting story actually.
Azerbaijan also refuses as even Armenian capital Yerevan had 40% Azerbaijani population who got ''peacefully'' disappeared while Armenians were genocided!! Turkey doesn't say there weren't atrocities rather Turkey says Armenians revolted against the empire and started to target not only Ottoman forces also Muslim civilians so Ottoman acted to end their rebellion so it wasn't planned nor deliberate act of genocide. For example here are some very known atrocities and genocides for comparison:
German civilians who were killed during Holocaust? Zero.
Russian civilians who were killed during Circassian or Crimean genocides? Zero.
Japanese civilians who were killed during ''war crimes'' in China? Zero.
Belgian civilians who were killed during Congolese genocide? Zero.
Spanish civilians who were killed during Aztec genoice? Zero.
British civilians who were killed during 1857 rebellion of India? Few hundred.
American civilians who were killed during Native American genocide? Few thousand.
Turkish civilians who were killed during ''Armenian genocide''?? HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS...
This alone shows how insanely the subject is politicized, in fact often Turkish casualties are completely ignored or worse even called ''Armenian resistance'' like it was women and children were targeting them so they got killed!!! Then how Russian empire invaded entire eastern Turkey in 1914 and encouraged Armenians to revolt is often ignored so they could claim Ottoman targeted ''peaceful'' and ''harmless'' people while in reality they revolted a year before their deportation.
''Armenian genocide'' is only an example of wicked politics, nothing else and Turkey will not recognize anything until Turkish/Muslim casualties are recognized from Balkans to Anatolia from Crimea to Caucasus but im pretty sure Crimean genocide will remain as ''Crimean deportation'' even if it was much worse than so called Armenian genocide...
Thanks as ever, LE. Azerbaijan's position his shaped by its extremely close relationship with Turkey, as seen last year by Turkey's direct assistance in its military campaign to retake Nagorno-Karabakh.
I must indeed take a look at Mongolia. It is fascinating case.
And I hope I replied to your friend. It is getting increasingly difficult to respond to every comment, although I try my best with as many as I can. If not, do pass on my apologies.
@@JamesKerLindsay I wonder since when selling weapons or sharing intelligence is ''direct assistance'' due in that case US and Russia had ''direct assistance'' in every single war on Earth in last 75 years!! Instead of such false claims from media nonsense you should have used ''Turkey supported Azerbaijan'' which is completely true, Azerbaijanis aren't only Turkic people rather they are also descendance of Oghuz Turks same as Anatolian Turks which is why Turkish and Azerbaijani are very close languages and easily understandable by both nations. (Imagine it like Australian and British English) And Turkey didn't start supporting Azerbaijanis today rather even Ottoman always tried to support them and keep them away from Russian occupation. For example even if everybody knew WW1 was lost Ottoman still sent an army into Azerbaijan in 1918 and cleared entente forces from Caucaus which is why all Caucasus countries could declare their independence from Russian empire in 1918!! Russian forces returned to Caucasus in 1920 but back then the civil war was still ongoing and they couldn't risk another war against Turkey so they recognized the independence of all Caucasus countries, then signed treaty of Kars with them in 1921 which ceded both Nagorno-karabakh and Nakhchivan to Azerbaijan not in Stalin era like some ''journalists'' are claiming!! So in short being neutral while completely ignoring other side of the coin isn't something possible and even a child can read from guardian, bbc etc rather than searching and reaching some true information...
@@ggoddkkiller1342 I’m really not sure what your point is!? I was asked a question. I answered. It seems that the word ‘direct’ seems to have triggered something. Care to talk about it calmly? (And I understand these issues very well. I’ve actually been working on Turkey for 30 years!)
@@JamesKerLindsay Even if you are a native speaker of English you don't know ''direct assistance'' would imply Turkish involvement to the war while in reality it isn't proven at all?? Perhaps you've been working on Turkey for 30 years while working for guardian or bbc due you have a very similar language even using a lot of open-ended statements like them which could imply anything while also refusable in case of proven false!! Such as one of your statements was same in the video that ''Even if Ottoman didn't order it's soldiers to kill civilians they knew people would die under these conditions so it was a genocide'' which looks a reasonable statement but again very open-ended. For example British empire kept importing/collecting food out of both Ireland and Bengal while millions of people were dying because of the famines. And without any question they knew if they still collected food more people would die so according to your own logic British empire committed genocides in both Ireland and Bengal??? Ofc not, you are talking military actions not collecting food while there were famines and people were dying because of ''natural causes''!! If you seriously think you are even slightly neutral rather im aggressive perhaps you are too BBCed to see straight due i couldn't care less what the heck you are saying in your videos nor thinking about Turkey rather im only trying to make you see the wicked hypocrisy that you are also a part of...
Cause There was no genocide . Armenians killed many ottomans as well
Also Greeks killed over half a million ottoman Turks which was genocide but Turks never made a big deal of it
Nice video as usual, it is a pity I have seen this one three years later. As an ex-Turkish diplomat and an academic now, I see some failues on the Turkish side to explain its standing. And Regardless of whether a genocide happened or not, as you also mention, recognition is a political issue. Those countries with sizeable Armenian diasporas recognize it, those without do not, the only exception being Germany, who kind of wants to wash its hands clean by recognizing any genocide claim (am not sure about Hodjali though). Well the political nature of genocide recognitions can be clearly seen in the case of Hodjali, the same countries that recognized the Armenian genocide turn a blind eye probably for fear of the elections and losing votes. But at the essence of the issue lies the Turkish what-aboutism and mismanagement of the foreign affairs rather than the humanitairian emotions of the states that recognize the genocide.
In the past as a commentator wrote below, there was the fear of a conspiracy to take the Eastern Half of Turkey. But I don't really think that is the issue anymore. But certainly the rather light treatment or even outright support for ASALA in the past fed Turkish suspicions. Coupled with an ideologically anti-western government in power and new diplomats selected by such a government, the issue becomes more serious and the feeling is that Turkey is being pushed around by the west for racist/islamophobic/turcophobic reasons.
Thanks. It is such an interesting issue on all sorts of levels. I do think Turkey has handled it badly, and fed a lot of the anti-Turkish views that you mention. Sometimes, just admitting that something terrible happened takes a lot of the sting out of the issue. I know that it is a pride issue for many countries. It is not easy to admit that one’s ancestors did something wrong. But sometimes it is the easiest way to mange the problem and move beyond it. Most (if not all) major empires committed atrocities. Britain has its fair share, including the Irish Famine, which Britain apologised for. Every time an Armenian says that the Turks committed genocide, the best response would be to say that, ‘sadly, the Ottomans did indeed. And we are Turks are deep sorry about that.’ An argument becomes very difficult to sustain under those circumstances.
Thanks for the video. I liked it.
Thanks so much!
A video on Namibia genocide will be good too
Thank you. Great suggestion. A few others have mentioned this. I actually have. script on Namibia, but on its broader history. It is a fascinating country, with a far more interesting history than many people realise.
@@JamesKerLindsay welcome
The independence of Norway in 1905 and the Norwegian referendum of independence could be interesting with the threat of war after the independence and how the rest of the world reacted.
Another truly excellent suggestion! Thank you.
Let's not forget Ottoman Empire starve Syrian nation and massacred Arabs in Arabian peninsula
We are waiting for USA 🇺🇸 to recognise British auchastrated genocide against Biafra where more than six million civilians are slaughtered & half of this number are children who sterved to death because of air and sea blockade
The British didn't just commit genocide where you said it.. There is no continent left in the world where they did not commit genocide and they perpetrated their genocides with racist motives.. They also have a great history of slavery.. but they have a sense of superiority stemming from that racist thought.. That's why barbarian Turks are genocidal but they are not genociders.. So ataturk gave the biggest answer to these b***ches in the lands they came to occupy.. There is no need to give another answer that b***tces.... 😀😀😀😀
The fact that the history keeps repeating itself is sad in this regard 😢. Why are humans are so evel. I mean you exterminate thousands of people for the sake of your empire yet empires still collapse. So clearly its not the solution, and most importantly inhumane. Why? We will never know.
🇪🇭🇦🇲❤️❤️❤️❤️
Both of my parents lost their families in 1915 because of the genocide. Fortunately for me , I was born in America because my parents were able to come here to live.
Fortunately for you yes but what about native Americans?
@@Deniz-l5d What about them,? I’m not sure that I understand your comment. The native Americans have been here for thousands of years. Explain please.
@@chuckc7375 yes but what happened to them
@@Deniz-l5d What happened to them has absolutely nothing to do with my parents or me, we didn’t harm anyone. Ask the Europeans from northwestern Europe, they’re the ones to blame for the treatment of the native Americans. My people never hurt anyone, we were the ones that were hurt.
@@chuckc7375 true
Amazing video, really eyes opening. I think I am changing my point my point of view on the matter now.
Thank you. It would be interesting to hear how it changed your views.
@@JamesKerLindsay well, I saw this through the prism of mass media, either European ones (like Euronews) , the Israeli ones (though Israel does not recognize the Armenian genocide for political reasons, I think, the majority of Israelis do), or even Russian ones (I am fluent in Russian, but usually skeptical regarding their news). From all that, I took the Armenian genocide as an undebatale fact. Now, I have my doubts.
I do not know if this is a topic for this channel. But one thing i find interesting is the idea of scandinanism, in scandinavia during the 1800's. It is for example the reason why we in sweden do not mention our country in our national anthem, because the song was about the idea of an united north.
Zengazur corridor will be created and the road connecting Türkiye and Turkish States will be opened.
Pantukizm 👹🇹🇷👹
Wow, a surprise video. No announcement whatsoever.
Sorry. I usually do put up an announcement. However, I was caught up trying to finish it amongst a whole range of other things.
@@JamesKerLindsay That's fine. Perhaps a surprise video or two are okay.
İt's hard to b a turk because you fight with the word it's harder to be not a turk because you fight with a turk
Its hard to be a turk because you cant speak proper english
It is really to be appreciated how neutral you stay!
Thank you so much. I really feel that it is important to try to discuss these topics responsibly, especially in this day and age. I have my opinions, and strong ones, but there has to be a space for informed debate. Not always easy, but one has to try. In any case, thank you so much for your support!
Neutral he said. Wheres armenian atrocities against Turks here. Theres no neutrality here. Everytime same story small channel wants to grow brings this topic.
Your account of the so-called genocide claims is extremely biassed, as a matter of fact you have referred to the affair as the "Armenian Genocide" from start to finish. Shame on you Mr Ker-Lindsay for intentionally distorting historic events. If you take eugenics out of the definition of a genocide then practically every war in history ends up being a case of genocide, including Armenia's invasion of Karabakh, but also the two world wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the colonial wars, the Hundred Years War and the US Civil War to name just a few.
Karabagh was and is Armenian before turks killed Armenians and occupied their lands. Turks belong to Mongolia ;)
@@noway6379 disingenuous
@@noway6379 if any Turk said (...) race belong (...) that would seen as racism (fair) but those guys somehow normalized racism against Turks now no one does not oppose it
@@ccem. Ask bozkurd about racism amk
Hello sir,I wanted to know a topic,Bangladesh government claim that in 1971 Pakistani millitery killed 3 million Bangladeshi people.Is it true or just a conspiracy? Is there any valid evidence /prove or any documents where we can find the correct numbers?I hope you will make a vedio on this topic because the numbers are still mistirious for both Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Your PM imran Khan himself had said before becoming the Prime Minister that Pakistan army had massacred 3 million Bangladeshis. That claim BTW is not just by Bangladeshis, but India, Russia and most of the world do as well. Your Pakistani army called them " ye kaale Bangali", your AAK Niazi and yahaya Khan had claimed that " Hum in Bangaliyon kin nasal badal denge". Further more your army raped 400,000 Bangladeshi women, they are today referred to as " Bairongonas". You can google this, you can see all media archives of 1971 BBC, CNN and other news.
www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DScMollcmAe4&ved=2ahUKEwi7t8SjoLr0AhUeslYBHYhkAZ8Qxa8BegQIBhAF&usg=AOvVaw3_YX3sHBzXxSl_y2Y4bV3a
Great video and interesting as always, somehow you always manage to make pieces that seem to keep everyone at bay when others cant. 1:31 Johnny was always a small man wanting a smaller world
ı think uk and usa should not talk about genocide :)
Why not? All countries should talk about it. And the U.K. has been ready to acknowledge its appalling conduct in Ireland. Turkey really needs to have an open conversation about all this.
@@JamesKerLindsay
I met someone who came to Istanbul for a trip to Hagia Sophia and I asked him if he was British. He said he was Scottish and hated England. He gave yes in the independence referendum.
Why do you think the Scots hate you so much? is there any historical enmity between you?
Some English people insulted the Scots by calling them sheep herders.