Our groups’ time in Gyumri is quickly coming to an end, and before we make our way to Shushi I want to reflect on the city of Gyumri and its current condition.  Gyumri is Armenia’s second largest city and in a lot of ways it’s a microcosm of Armenia.

There exists governmental corruption, widespread poverty, and infrastructural neglect.  Sadly, remnants of the 1988 Spitak earthquake can still be seen, from the collapsed steeple of —- Sourp Amenaprgich Church, to the countless families still living without running water and electricity in domiks throughout the city.  However, the city also has incredible natural beauty, rich history, friendly people, and a bright new generation, who are proud Gyumretsis.

During our time in Gyumri I conducted an extremely informal survey amongst people in the city; kids, adults, really anyone I could have a five minute conversation with.  When I asked them about what they saw as the city’s most important needs here were the most consistent responses:

1)      Roads- the roads in Gyumri are abhorrent.  To a naïve eye, they look almost impassable.  To a local, it’s a norm that they have become accustomed to ever since the 70’s/80’s when the last repaving took place.  Potholes, boulders, and pits exist where asphalt should, especially in the residential areas, making it a journey to get anywhere.

2)      Street lights- the city has incredible architecture, and natural beauty, but walking around in the evenings is difficult because most street lights are non-functional or non-existent.  The general gloom leads the city to become a ghost town after dusk.

3)      Trash disposal- just teaching kids in our camp that it’s not okay to throw the wrappers of their sandwiches on the floor in the yard of our school was an ordeal, especially when they routinely watch trash just getting burned nearby.  The idea of an organized trash pickup that comes a certain day of the week and takes the trash to a proper disposal area, along with public trash bins, doesn’t exist and is the reason behind rampant littering.

It sounds really simple when it’s written down like this.  It would make perfect sense for the local government to invest in fixing the roads in the city, which in turn would increase accessibility and ease of transportation (car and foot).  It’s a no-brainer to put in, or repair street lights, which would increase public safety and give life to the city outside Republic Square.  And it would seem logical to set up a system of trash pick-up and disposal which would increase sanitation and beautify the city.  But sadly it’s not that simple.

New York City in the 1980’s was in the grips of one of the worst crime epidemics in its history.  This wave declined in the 1990’s and one of the theories to explain the phenomenon is called the “broken window theory”.  The crux of the theory says that simple societal problems coupled with neglect can have a far reaching impact.  For example, a broken window in a building which is left unrepaired will lead people walking by to think that no one cares, and no one is in charge.  Soon enough more windows will be broken and the sense of disorder will spread.   Things like unpaved roads, non-functional street lights, and lacking sanitation are equivalent to broken windows, and are an invitation to anarchy.

In New York, city officials began by targeting the subway system.  They began by cleaning up all the graffiti, then moved on to busting fare-beaters and drunks.  Arresting those who rode the subway without paying, and those disturbing the peace inevitably meant arresting people with outstanding warrants, and people carrying illegal weapons, and this led to an eventual drop in crime.  The result was that by 1996 New York City became the safest big city in America.

Thankfully, Gyumri does not have serious issues with violent crime, but the same changes New York saw can be replicated here.  The point is that seemingly small changes can bring about revolutionary change.  In a city like Gyumri, properly addressing the issue of roads, lights, and sanitation can lead to an increase in civic pride and a brighter future.

What is needed is the will to do so.

Vache Thomassian

By: Vaché Thomassian

As a result of the world’s inability to criminally punish the perpetrators of the Armenian Genocide, the Ninth World Congress of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation made the decision to track down and execute the most culpable Ottoman leaders in a covert undertaking called Operation Nemesis.  By the end of 1922 dozens of top Turkish leaders were extra-judicially brought to justice.

Understanding the chain of events which led to Nemesis offers important insight to the current difficulties faced by Armenians to achieve reparations and restitution for the crimes committed by Ottoman Turkey.

Post World War I

As early as May of 1915, the Allied powers formally accused the Ottoman government of crimes against humanity (a term which would be made infamous thirty years later following the Holocaust).  However, following World War I, France focused its outrage on Germany and pursued rapprochement with the Turks.  After the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, Russia lost all interest in bringing the Young Turks to justice.  And despite the well-documented and harrowing accounts of American diplomats, including Ambassador Henry Morgenthau Sr., America did not take serious steps to punish murders that killed non-Americans.  More than any other Allied Power, Britain took the massacre of Armenians seriously.

In 1918, Britain had an occupying force of over a million soldiers in the Ottoman Empire which allowed it to exert extensive pressure on the post-war government of Sultan Mehmet VI.  Furthermore, the developed British legal system wanted to hold individual members of Ottoman leadership criminally responsible for war crimes.  The Sultan, however, feared that if he took large-scale action to prosecute the Young Turks it would provoke a nationalist revolution where he would be overthrown.

Turkish Courts-Martial

In 1919 under British pressure, the Sultan ordered domestic Turkish courts-martial to try Ittihadist (Committee of Union and Progress) leaders of the Ottoman Empire.  By April, over 100 top Turkish officials were under arrest.  In custody were the grand vizier, the sheikh ul-Islam, the president of the council of state, a former director of intelligence, the commander of the garrison at Yozgat (the site of some of the most heinous Armenian massacres), several former valis (provincial governors) from Smyrna, Bogazlian, Mosul, Broussa, and Diarbekir, the ministers of justice and public instruction, along with dozens of others.  Subsequently four major trials began: for Armenian massacres and deportations in Yozgat and in Trebizond, of Ittihadist leaders, and finally for wartime Turkish cabinet members.  There were lesser trials for atrocities in Harput, Mosul, Baiburt and Erzinjan.  More trials for atrocities in Adana, Aleppo, Bitlis, Diarbekir, Erzerum, Marash, and Van were planned but never held.

The first verdicts handed down by the tribunals found Major Tevfik Bey, commander of the Yozgat police, and Yozgat lieutenant governor Kemal Bey guilty of organizing deportations, murder, pillage, robbery and crimes against humanity and civilization.  Tevfik was sentenced to fifteen years of hard labor and Kemal to death.  Kemal Bey’s funeral became a rallying point for Turkish nationalists who were still not convinced Turks had done wrong during the war and were insulted that punishments were being doled out for killing Christians.

The courts-martial continued against prominent leaders including Said Halim Pasha, as well as those who had fled to Germany, including Talaat and Enver, who were tried and sentenced to death in absentia.  The indictment of Talaat and Enver read in part:

“The disaster visiting the Armenians was not a local or isolated event.  It was the result of premeditated decision taken by a central body; and the immolations and excesses which took place were based on oral and written orders issued by the central body.”

At the same time, politics began destroying the domestic tribunals.  The British army presence shrank by over two-thirds—along with its authority.  As dozens of the accused Turks began being released, the British gave up on the Ottoman trials and decided to take custody of sixty-eight of the most prominent prisoners who were guilty of the most heinous crimes and transfer them to a British detention center in Malta.  This left the Turkish courts-martial a toothless farce.

Malta International Tribunals

After taking custody of the prisoners, the British assumed that they could implement British-style trials to attain a just conclusion.  The idea of having show trials or summarily executing the prisoners was dismissed outright.  However, an unusual problem presented itself: the Armenians were slaughtered en masse, but the massacres were carried out under Ottoman sovereignty and not under British law.  Since international law had not yet developed, a new kind of criminal law was needed: a crime against humanity (this same problem flustered the planners of Nuremberg).

Unfortunately, the British were slow to set up tribunals even after the signing of the Treaty of Sevres in August 1920, which included five articles on war crimes including language calling for Turks “guilty of criminal acts [to be] brought before the military tribunals” and even carved out a new independent Armenian state.  The British were left in a quagmire, not wanting to release the prisoners and not having the political will to prosecute.

As Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s nationalist revolt gained strength, defeating French troops in Cilicia, the British began cutting their losses.  By 1920, War Secretary Winston Churchill was clearly weary of the entire issue.  He wanted to make sure that Ataturk would not be pushed into the arms of the Soviet Union.  When pressed to choose between prosecuting war criminals and protecting British soldiers, Churchill did not hesitate to advocate choosing the latter.

The final straw came in August of 1921 when Ataturk’s nationalists took a group of 29 Britons hostage and demanded the release of all Turkish prisoners who remained in Malta jails.  All fifty-nine remaining Turks in custody were subsequently freed.  Finally, as a further insult, the Treaty of Lausanne was signed in July 1923 by Ataturk, containing no clauses on war crimes tribunals and no mention of an independent Armenia.  British Prime Minister Lloyd George referred to the treaty as an “abject, cowardly and infamous surrender.”

In Comparison with Nuremberg

The lessons learned from the failed attempts of international justice following World War I, along with the political commitment to punish wartime aggression led to the Nuremberg trials, criminally prosecuting the leadership of Nazi Germany.  Henry Morgenthau Jr. (son of Ottoman-era US Ambassador Henry Morgenthau Sr.) led calls to summarily execute all top Nazi leaders without any trials.  However, the plan set forth by War Secretary Henry Stimson to put the criminals on trial won out.

The Allied effort (led by the United States), to punish the Nazis was undertaken mostly out for retribution for the Nazi instigation of the war, rather than just punishing the perpetrators of the Holocaust.  While the intention was to punish the Nazis for starting the war, the legacy left by the trials is that it was an effort to punish crimes against humanity, namely the Holocaust.  By 1963 over 2000 Germans were sentenced, nearly 700 to death.  These trials have subsequently led to the 1948 adoption of the UN Genocide Convention as well as the later creation of the International Criminal Court.

Aftermath

Had the war crimes tribunals held in Constantinople been given the opportunity to uncover evidence and document high-level testimony, as was stipulated by the Treaty of Sevres, it would have been significantly more difficult for subsequent Turkish governments to deny, distort or minimize Turkish culpability for the Armenian Genocide.  For Britain, it was in their strategic interest to leave Constantinople.  For Ataturk, nationalist fervor led to the establishment of the Turkish Republic on the blood of murdered Armenians.  For the Armenians, abandoned by the international community, justice became an elusive concept.

Unlike Germany, whose Nazi-era leaders were held criminally responsible and punished, the Turkish Republic has never confronted the Armenian Genocide.  In the short-run, the lack of adequate criminal prosecution of Young Turk leaders following the Armenian Genocide led to vigilante justice to preserve Armenian dignity.  In the long-run it has caused decades of denial, and has given a path for the successor state to avoid reparations.  However, during the past five decades, Armenians worldwide have persevered to attain global recognition of the Armenian Genocide. While the perpetrator generation of Turks may have escaped justice, what remains is the civil and territorial compensation to the Armenian people from the benefactors of Genocide.

The Armenian Youth Federation was quick to respond to the deal by releasing a statement calling for Bryant to take a moral stand and rescind his contract. However, some community members have viewed this “hard-lined” approach as unwarranted—referring to Bryant as a businessman who is simply following the dollar signs, or pointing out that Bryant isn’t an Armenian and therefore would not be interested in the Armenian Genocide.

These perspectives raise concerns about the way we think about ourselves, leading to two important points which have to be made clear: 1) The denial of the Armenian Genocide is not an “Armenian only” issue; 2) We underestimate our true capacity to bring change.

We can look back in history to elaborate these points. From the 1940’s to the 1990’s South Africa was ruled by one political party which implemented a policy of legal racial segregation known as apartheid. The minority white population held all the political power and subjugated the black majority to dehumanizing conditions. In the 1970’s an international movement began that encouraged investors to withdraw direct investment in South African companies and pushed citizens to stop supporting US based companies which had business interests in South Africa, as an act of protest against apartheid.

The movement grew as stockholders pressed their boards of directors, and investors became weary. The movement grew as universities like Berkeley, Stanford and Columbia organized their campuses to divest billions in endowment and bond money from companies with South African ties. This movement was lead by youth and fueled in part by celebrities using their fame to raise awareness for the cause. The billions of dollars that stopped flowing-in undoubtedly got the South African government’s attention. US cities and states followed suit, passing divestment legislation, all leading up to the “Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act” in 1986 which banned new US investments and military sales to South Africa.

The divestment campaign, coupled with the internal struggle of the oppressed population, led to the dismemberment of the apartheid government in South Africa in the early 1990’s. Divestment from apartheid South Africa was lead by people like you: the consumer who asked where their products came from, the student who organized her campus, the union member who pressured her company, the religious leader who encouraged their parish, the musician who wrote a song; people who otherwise, individually, could never have made a difference.

Today we see another divestment movement which has taken shape.  The Genocide currently taking place in Darfur, Sudan has resulted in the murder of almost half a million. Celebrities, like George Clooney and Don Cheadle have given their time and support, not to make a petty profit, but to raise awareness about the desperate situation.  The Al-Bashir government (which unsurprisingly has strong ties with the government of Turkey), has ignored all international humanitarian efforts and continues its genocidal policies. The move to economically isolate the Sudan may be the last hope to stop a catastrophic situation.

The mindset that led the divestment movement is the mindset that our communities and youth should be driven by today.

Justice for the Armenian Genocide is an international human rights issue that belongs on the minds of every single investor in the Republic of Turkey, and every person—celebrity, athlete, actor, socialite—who endorses or supports the government or trade with the government. The moral difficulty of dealing with a company which does business in Turkey should be enough of a factor to dissuade any deal, for any amount of money.

Here, when I see a public figure like Kobe Bryant associate himself with a Turkish company, my reaction is not a knee-jerk hate-inspired reaction, it’s a confident reaction that says, “If he knew the facts, he would quickly change his mind.”

Turkish Airlines is not only the national airlines of Turkey; the government of Turkey owns 49.1% of the company. It’s also a prime example of the public relations work the government is doing to try to repair decades of negativity as a result of its human rights record.

Our choice is to either accept what we think is invincible, or connect our cause, organize and have our concerns heard.

It may seem trivial for an activist youth organization to become a thorn in the side of a multi-million dollar basketball icon, but the fact of the matter remains that a principled stance must be taken when it comes to supporting a genocide-denying regime like the current Turkish government. Much like the South African example demonstrated, decades of inhumanity can succumb to the power of the dollar, and to the power of organization.

Unfortunately, this article is not a call for us to divest from Turkey, because my honest opinion is that we aren’t ready for that step…yet. We have a hard enough time convincing Armenian grocery store owners and importers to stop selling Turkish tomato paste, when the Armenian alternatives are readily available. We have a hard enough time of convincing our new generation that an act of protest is not a one day a year occurrence. And we have a hard enough time convincing some people that our fight for genocide recognition has nothing to do with hating the enemy, and has everything to do with loving our own people.

This is just a first step that says our fight should be everyone’s fight and our power does not yet even know it’s potential.

_____
Vaché Thomassian is a member of the Armenian Youth Federation Central Executive and the Editor of Haytoug magazine.

Haytoug: Describe yourself in 5 words.

Antranig Kzirian: Committed. Creative. Adaptive. Persistent. Stubborn.

H: Where did you get the inspiration to pursue your field?

A.K.: The Armenian oud tradition of the Eastern United States strongly motivated me to explore and study the oud and the role Armenians played historically in mastering it.  Growing up I also incorporated various influences into my understanding of music and performing on the instrument.  I believe that traditions must be kept alive but also developed and grown so that they remain a living, breathing part of our perception of art and life.

H: Please describe your proudest achievements.

A.K.: Working with great musicians in various genres and learning as much as I can while striving to be a flexible musician.  Working with Viza, Aravod, History, Ara Dinkjian, Serj Tankian, Gor, Sonya Varoujan, and several musicians from all over.

H: Do you think identity is something that must be preserved or something that can evolve?

A.K.: Both – we must preserve but also help it evolve and survive in its surroundings.  Adding our own experiences and seasoning helps to keep identity fresh and current while still maintaining core values that we hold dear as Armenians and people of good conscience.

H: What are your thoughts about Armenian culture today in the Diaspora? In Armenia? Where is it headed? What do you see your role as?

A.K.: I see Armenian culture as dynamic – especially given the richness and complexity of the Diaspora.  I believe it’s headed in a positive direction generally, but we must work hard to make sure not to disqualify or marginalize certain components of our diverse art and music history. I see my role as trying to preserve one piece of the puzzle as best I can.

H: What does the future hold for you?

A.K.: More writing, performing, recording and collaboration. Raising awareness of the Armenian oud tradition.

Haytoug: Describe yourself in 5 words

Ara Soudjian: Mexican/Armenian filmmaker living in Los Angeles. (let’s count Los Angeles as one word.)

H: Where did you get the inspiration to pursue your field?

A.S.: My inspiration came from my Mother, who was an actress, and Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing.

H: Please describe your proudest achievements.

A.S.: First, winning two 2008 MVPA (Music Video Production Association) awards for best music video under 25k (Serj Tankian’s Money) and best Hip-Hop video (Wiz Khalifa’s Say Yeah). Second, producing content for the ANCA (Armenian National Committee of America). Third meeting my wife at an AYF Kebab night in Orange County! (Most important!)

H: Do you think identity is something that must be preserved or something that can evolve?

A.S.: The customs, language, history must be preserved but I also believe that a person’s identity can evolve over time.  We are human after all….

H: What are your thoughts about Armenian culture today in the Diaspora?

A.S.: The Armenian culture today in the Diaspora has evolved from 10 years ago. I feel that our culture is strong. I don’t think it’s as strong “culturally” as it was in the past, but I do believe we are stronger on the activism front. I believe we have assimilated, which is only natural. Some people may say that a lot of young Armenians can’t read or write the language. The white genocide is upon us, etc. Is that bad? Some would say so…but there are those who don’t speak the language but are still active in the community.

I would prefer having young “active” Armenians who care about our community and country any day over those who speak the language and do nothing positive.

H: What does the future hold for you?

A.S.: A successful filmmaking career along with a successful marriage and some future AYF-ers.

Haytoug: Describe yourself in 5 words.

Eric Nazarian: I am a human being.

H: Where did you get the inspiration to pursue your field?

E.N.: My father Haik inspired me to become a filmmaker and screenwriter.

H: Please describe your proudest achievements.

E.N.: Being awarded the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Nicholl Fellowship in Screenwriting for my screenplay “Giants” and making my first feature film, “The Blue Hour.”

H: Do you think identity is something that must be preserved or something that can evolve?

E.N.: I believe in the evolution of our identities.  Identity evolves with age and experience.  I’d like to believe that I can evolve as a human being and preserve and advance my spiritual, cultural and artistic identity.

H: What are your thoughts about Armenian culture today in the Diaspora? In Armenia? Where is it headed? What do you see your role as?

E.N.: I can only comment as an Angeleno.  In Los Angeles, Armenian culture is alive and well.  So many events, screenings, concerts, lectures, etc.  Armenians as well as non-Armenians have several cultural activities to choose from.  In Armenia, the culture and history lives and breathes in the faces and stories of the Armenian people, the ancient monuments and churches, and the cinematic heritage now slowly being resurrected.  The Golden Apricot International Film Festival in Armenia is doing a phenomenal job with their annual film festival.  They attract so many countries and filmmakers to participate.  I see my role as a bridge builder through cinema, making films that can hopefully be interesting to international audiences.

H: What does the future hold for you?

E.N.: I don’t think anybody can answer that question truthfully since we don’t know what will happen ten seconds from now. I’d like to think the future holds great movies, amazing sunsets, lots of “kef” music, phenomenal food and wonderful friends dancing “shoorjbar”.  Cheers to the future!

Commonality In Struggle

BY VACHÉ THOMASSIAN

A lot of things are taken for granted. In our daily lives we wake up, go to class, go to work, check our emails, check our Facebook, go out, live our lives, often times taking the smallest things, usually the most important things for granted. Things like our ability to freely express ourselves, the ability to have opinions, to make them, argue about them. The ability to stand up and speak. The ability to hear and be heard.

Here in the United States, the free speech movement in the 1960’s was a pivotal time in developing and shaping our country’s activist spirit. It was a time when students stood up to authority to demand their right to express themselves. This spirit was captured by the immortal words of Mario Savio on the steps of Sproul Hall in Berkeley when he said:

“There’s a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart that you can’t take part! You can’t even passively take part! And you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus — and you’ve got to make it stop! And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it — that unless you’re free the machine will be prevented from working at all!

This was the movement that secured free speech and academic freedom here in America.

In a place like Turkey where the call to speak is an invitation to prosecution, to harassment, in a place where historical truths do not exist, where contemporary human rights are trampled, minority rights are unfathomable, women’s rights unimaginable it takes courage and it takes conscience to speak. That is the common quality spotlighted by individuals like Layla Zana, Akin Birdal and Erin Keskin—the courage to see a wrong and speak out about it, ignoring the personal consequences.

There is no better example of the consequences of allowing Turkey to get away with Genocide then what is happening to the Kurds today. The news headlines about the Kurdish question hits especially close to home for Armenians: “Community leaders arrested”, “Violence in the streets”, “Demonstrators beaten or killed”, “Political parties banned”…all in the name of preserving the Turkish nation…protecting Turkishness…sounds all too familiar.

When we talk about the Armenian Cause we have to talk of it as an issue of justice for humanity and we shouldn’t limit our vision to securing the rights of just Armenians, but instead affirm the idea that Turkey as a nation must free its people, end its occupations and be saved from itself. Until those who live in exile, those that live in fear, those that live in silence, Kurds and Armenians can lose the shackles that they still wear.

Recently, Turkey has tried diplomatically strong-arming the weak and inept government of Armenia with protocols that would undermine Armenian Genocide recognition efforts. Recently also, deceitful claims by Turkey of making peace with the Kurdish Worker’s Party have again resulted in violence, arrests and killings. The “TheArmenian Issue”and “TheKurdish issue” remain top priorities among the list of taboos in Turkish society. Taboos that are punished by Article 301.

Only by confronting these taboos of their society through open, honest and meaningful dialogue, without prosecution or arrest, can there be a revolution of values in Turkey, when the historic rights of Armenians who were slaughtered in Genocide and removed through deportation are respected, where the natural rights of the world’s largest landless minority, the Kurdish people’s right to exist is respected.

Only then, not through any other hollow means can there be a shift from Turkish ultanationalist arrogance towards real peace.

In this world the ideas of power and powerlessness chase each other around in a perpetual circle of conflict. One struggles to attain and maintain its vise-grip while the other struggles to find a voice and fight for its liberty.

Those of us who have only ever lived in a democracy, however flawed, would find it hard to imagine living a state of powerlessness. The fear of reprisal for expressing your thoughts, the hesitation felt before opening your mouth. Living your life constantly looking over your shoulder.  Like Hrant Dink said in his last article before being murdered, “I am just like a pigeon, equally obsessed by what goes on my left, and right, front and back…”

But Dink wanted to turn the boiling hell that he lived in, into a heaven and he saw that the only way to do that was through democracy, through free speech and through respect for all humans.

Our job as activists is to look at the world in its proper perspective. In today’s interconnected world, we can longer isolate ourselves, separate our struggle from the struggles of groups in similar circumstances, we can’t just preach to ourselves and hope for the best. The struggles of oppressed peoples are like the fingers on your hand. Although each one is independent, each one moves fluidly in its own way they are all connected by the hand that holds them together. Their commonalities far outweigh their differences. And only when the fingers come together, only when they cooperate and work in concert, can they form a fist that can protect their rights and ensure their vitality.

Our job as activists is to open our eyes to the world, to the voiceless, to stand when they cannot stand and to speak when they are silenced.

In the memory of Hrant Dink, in solidarity with the likes of Ayse Gunaysu, Elif Shafak, Layla Zana, and individuals like Kani Xulam. In solidarity with their struggle and making that struggle our own.