The risk of forgetting
Mixing politics and history is perilous, says David Rieff, the author of “In Praise of Forgetting”.
In the book he argues that the commemoration of past wrongs can become a dangerous tool, cynically
weaponized and abused for political ends. That is certainly how Turkey’s government sees it when
foreigners refer to the deaths of over a million Armenians at the hands of Ottoman forces in 1915 as
genocide. On October 29th, US Congress voted to do just that. Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip
Erdogan, was furious. “Countries whose history is stained by genocide, slavery and exploitation have
no right to give lessons to Turkey,” he fumed.
Most countries in the world agree that the massacres and forced deportations of the
Armenians were genocide. But Americans’ voting was motivated less by a commitment to historical
truth than by the desire to reprimand Mr Erdogan. For decades American lawmakers had prevented
recognising the genocide to avoid damaging relations with Turkey, a crucial NATO ally. But recently
Turkey bought a Russian missile-defence system, which could allow Moscow to spy on American
warplanes. Its army also invaded northern Syria to attack Kurdish fighters there who have been close
American allies in the battle against Islamic State. The relations have got worse and America’s attitude
to Turkey has hardened. The genocide bill was passed by US Congress, and next it also voted for
economic sanctions against Turkey. Politics was the main reason why America did not recognize the
genocide in the past, and why it has done so today.
Turkey has always denied the genocide, insisting that the number of Armenians who lost their
lives is much lower than most records suggest, and that far more Ottoman Muslims were killed during
the war. Mr Erdogan’s government has occasionally referred to 1915 as a tragedy, but has never
pointed to its perpetrators. Turkey today is home to about 50,000 Armenians. Practically they all live
in Istanbul, which was mostly exempted from the mass deportations. These Armenians are well aware
of the basic facts of the genocide, but the majority of them just refuse to be engaged in the global
recognition campaign.
Starting in the early 2000s, a number of seminars were organised in America and Europe.
Intellectuals from many countries discussed the genocide and the present challenges facing Turkey
and its minorities. One of the Turkish Armenian participants, a journalist named Hrant Dink, argued
that genocide resolutions by third countries have done more harm than good, provoking a nationalist
backlash and hindering Turkey’s democratisation. “We must separate history from politics,” he
claimed. “Let us not try to resolve our historical disputes before resolving our political ones.”
Remembrance may be fraught with risks, but the dangers of forgetting are even higher. Taner
Akcam, a Turkish historian, once wrote that the genocide has become his country’s “collective secret”.
Schoolbooks in Turkey continue to teach that the death marches were a necessary response to attacks
on Turkish villages by Armenian rebels. Also, those Armenians who died during the war died as
a result of “transportation difficulties, adverse weather conditions and epidemic diseases”. However,
Turkey’s rejection of the genocide label is only part of the problem. What causes the greatest worry,
though, is its refusal to accept any accountability for what happened. For successive governments,
condemnation of the events of 1915, whether as genocide, a war crime or ethnic cleansing, has been
out of the question. “There have been no massacres and no slaughters in our history,” Mr Erdogan said.
The notion that the Turkish state can do nothing wrong is also visible at present. No Turkish
news stations can report on the dozens of civilians killed during the country’s latest Syrian offensive.
Turks who openly oppose the invasion risk prosecution. This is largely because Mr Erdogan stifles all
forms of opposition, but also because the legacy of 1915 has made some topics especially taboo. Many
of the liberals who spoke out about Turkish crimes against Armenians have been silenced or forced
into exile. The Turkish state can’t be guilty: suggestions to the contrary are called treason.
Exposing or dwelling on another country’s past wrongs creates tensions and might even be
perilous. But covering them up is an offence to the dead and a disservice to the living. Turkey will face
the consequence of such policy. The massacres of the Armenians will not be the only stain on its
history. So will be the century of denial that has followed.