Through the Wall of Fire E-Book

Muriel Mirak-Weißbach

• Herausgeber: Ithaca Press
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012

Beschreibung

Can peoples and nations who have been pitted against each other in geopolitically manipulated conflict overcome the adversary relationship and achieve reconciliation? Through the Wall of Fire attempts to answer this question, examining the Armenian genocide of 1915, the two Iraq wars and embargo regime, as well as the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians beginning in 1948. Muriel Mirak-Weissbach portrays these seminal moments of the twentieth century through the eyes of those who were children at the time. Their first-hand accounts of the dramatic events are corroborated by documented historical research, in the effort to identify which political forces were ultimately responsible and why. An episode from Dante's Divine Comedy, the pilgrim's passage through a wall of fire, serves as a metaphor for the challenge facing political leaders and their citizens who seek reconciliation; like the pilgrim-poet, they must undergo a profound internal, emotional transformation, overcoming the hatred, bitterness and desire for revenge that the traumatic past has left behind. In contemporary politics, traversing the 'wall of fire' requires abandoning the prejudices and ignorance bred by conflict. It means facing the truth about the past, acknowledging the historical record in all its brutality and identifying those responsible. Only then is it possible to 'forgive and forget', to define a new relationship based on the commitment to enhance the progress of the Other.

Leseprobe

Through the Wall of Fire

Armenia–Iraq–Palestine From Wrath to Reconciliation

Muriel Mirak-Weissbach

Through the Wall of Fire

Armenia–Iraq–Palestine: From Wrath to Reconciliation

Ithaca Press

8 Southern Court, South Street

Reading, RG1 4QS, UK

www.ithacapress.co.uk

www.twitter.com/Garnetpub

www.facebook.com/Garnetpub

blog.ithacapress.co.uk

Ithaca Press is an imprint of Garnet Publishing Ltd.

Copyright © Muriel Mirak-Weissbach, 2013

All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review.

First Edition

ISBN: 9780863724428

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Typeset bySamantha Barden

Jacket design by Garnet Publishing

Cover image © Muriel Mirak-Weissbach

Printed by TJ International, Padstow, Cornwall

Contents

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Part One: Armenia

Chapter 1 The Loss

Chapter 2 If Not the Turks, Then Who?

Chapter 3 The Challenge of Reconciliation

Part Two: Iraq

Chapter 4 Born in Mesopotamia

Chapter 5 Homecoming Iraqi-Style

Chapter 6 Innocents and Patriots

Chapter 7 Fly Iraqi Airways!

Chapter 8 Genocide?

Part Three: Palestine

Chapter 9 Oslo Betrayed

Chapter 10 The Battle for Gaza

Chapter 11 Palestine Lost

Chapter 12 The Geopolitical Mind

Chapter 13 Composing the Peace

Epilogue

Photo Credits

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Dr. Vahakn N. Dadrian of the Zoryan Institute for helping me to identify many important sources, and the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute in Yerevan for its generous permission to use documentary material, including photographs. Ara Ghazarians, of the Armenian Cultural Foundation in Arlington, Massachusetts, provided me with textual corrections of transliterations and invaluable suggestions regarding content. I am also grateful to A. Altay Unaltay of Istanbul, who helped to translate a number of expressions from Turkish. My brother Bob, who published a book on Armenians in America many years ago, read my manuscript several times with most welcome ruthless criticism and productive proposals. Whatever I have done with the material and suggestions offered by all of them is solely my responsibility. Finally, I thank my husband Michael for his infinite patience and support, as well as many friends who encouraged me to proceed with this project.

This book is dedicated to the memory of my parents and all those of their generation, in the Ottoman Empire or Europe, who were victimized by the geopolitical machinations of the Great Powers. May their will to survive and capacity for forgiveness shape the approach of today’s political leaders in the search for justice.

Introduction

I am the daughter of two orphans, both victims of the 1915 Armenian genocide. Although I did not realize its implications until entering adulthood, this fact was to shape my outlook and work. The following pages are a reflection of some of that work and the process that led to it.

This is not intended to be yet another book which recounts the horrors, and seeks self-righteously to consign the perpetrators to an appropriate circle in Dante’s Inferno. I have no doubt that those involved in such crimes have already met, or will eventually meet, their just reward or punishment in a realm in the afterworld over which I certainly have no immediate influence.

My intention is another: it is to recount the experience of ethnic cleansing, genocide and war from the viewpoint of those who were children at the time, to communicate the nature of the trauma they suffered. It is only by grasping the deep psychological impact on the children that others may understand how prejudices, hatred and the thirst for revenge can be passed on from generation to generation, until it may appear that no solution is in sight.

I am convinced that solutions do exist, but that they can be sought only if there is adequate psychological insight into this subjective character of the problem. To presume, for example, that there could be a quick Palestinian–Israeli peace based on some internationally imposed formal treaty arrangements, especially in the wake of the infernal Gaza war, is at best naive. A fundamental revolution in thinking, a far-reaching shift in moral outlook, is required to pave the way to a possible peace, and cultural means, including great music and poetry, may have a role to play in this.

Here I have turned to my favourite poet Dante Alighieri for guidance. In his monumental Divine Comedy, Dante provided precious insight into the process through which such an emotional, moral shift may occur. At the end of Purgatory, the second canticle of his epic, the poet-pilgrim comes up against a Wall of Fire, which, he is told by his trusted guide Virgil and an attendant angel, he must pass through if he wants to enter Paradise. He is hopelessly gripped by fear, utterly immovable. The incandescent flames remind him only too graphically of the wretched souls he had encountered in Hell, who had been condemned to eternal torture by fire:

Over my clasped hands I stared aghast

Into the fire, picturing vividly

Human bodies I had seen aflame.

Virgil assures him he is not in any personal danger:

Here, son, there may be

Torment, but not death.

And he urges Dante to overcome his fears:

Put fear aside, lay all fear aside.

Turn this way, come, enter unafraid.

Dante knows all too well on a rational level that he must follow Virgil’s advice, but he is nonetheless paralyzed. His mind tells him to move, but his limbs do not respond.

And I stood still, against my will.

It is only when Virgil tells him that Beatrice, his beloved, is on the other side of that Wall of Fire that he is emotionally freed from fear and the obsession with himself; now he is able to think of the Other and can thus plunge confidently into the flames. And they do burn!

Once I had entered, I would have cast

My body into molten glass, to cool it:

Such was the fire without measure.

Virgil continues to provide him fatherly comfort, assuring him Beatrice is nigh:

Her eyes it seems I can already see.

Dante is thus enabled to brave the torment and to join his celestial guide who will lead him into Paradise.

This episode is the turning point in the entire Comedy. I offer it as a fitting metaphor for the awesome emotional challenge posed to the parties in conflict treated in this book, be they in the Middle East, or in Armenia and Turkey. They, like the poet, are called upon to shed fears associated with the past, to overcome bestial emotions such as hatred, rage, arrogance and desire for vendetta, and above all to transcend their petty provincialism. Dante challenges his compatriots to abandon the bell-tower mentality that defines them as Florentines, Romans or Bolognese and embrace identities as citizens of a nation.

Traversing the Wall of Fire means entering a qualitatively higher realm, in which utterly different laws govern. In Paradise, there is no longer the rule of irrationality that characterized Hell, where men are driven to violence through discord, murder, fraud, hypocrisy and treachery. In Paradise, there is no longer the rule of a merely formal morality, as in Purgatory, where men follow established codes of behaviour imposed to keep them from tearing at each other’s throats. There, in Paradise, a superior moral ordering prevails, founded on the concept of love, understood as the pursuit of development of the Other. Beatrice guides Dante on a voyage through the celestial spheres which unfolds as a conceptual dialogue in which he discovers the laws governing the universe, and, in so doing, realizes the powers of his own mind to comprehend them. In this process of scientific and self-discovery, Dante grasps what it means to be human. He learns how human society must be organized so as to establish justice as a reflection of the divine harmony. Paradise is the realm of just rulers, men of virtue who wield their political power in pursuit of the common good.

This entry into Paradise could never have occurred without the pilgrim’s journey through Hell and Purgatory. The same holds true for the political antagonists treated here. They must hear the truth straight from those who suffered, in first-hand unadorned accounts. They must confront the brutal reality of the Hell that the Armenian orphans of 1915 went through, the deprivation and suffering that years of embargo and two wars visited on Iraq’s children and the raw injustice meted out to the Palestinians in 1948 and beyond.

Furthermore, when emotionally facing the facts of such historical tragedies, they must identify those responsible, and name the names as Dante did. Was it, as certain biased literature would have us believe, “the Turks” who killed 1.5 million Armenians in 1915? Was it “the Americans” who nearly wiped Iraq off the map? Was it “the Jews” or “the Israelis” who sought to annihilate the Palestinians and all other Arabs? Anyone who swallows these all-too-accommodating facile explanations is ignoring the much more complex and differentiated historical record. As I present in detail in Part One, my Armenian parents were deprived of their families by the massacres, but they, as children, were saved by Turks – not government officials or humanitarian aid organizations, but simply everyday Turks – people who saw what was happening and intervened on a strictly personal level, even risking punishment to come to the aid of their fellow man, in this case Armenian orphans. By the same token, in the vicious war against Iraq in 1991, it was also Americans who defied their government to organize humanitarian aid for the victimized children of that war and launch political campaigns to denounce the Bush regime for war crimes. Even in the 2008–2009 Israeli aggression against Gaza, there were Israelis and groups of Jewish intellectuals abroad who had the courage to speak out and denounce the Israeli government for exploiting the Holocaust as a justification for massacres against Palestinians.

In short, there is no such thing as “collective guilt”. Genocidal policies, as we have witnessed in the twentieth century, have been conceived, organized and implemented by clearly identifiable groups of political forces who have had their just-as-clearly-identifiable financial and political backers. Here, I have tried to document who did what to whom, after reviewing source material from all sides.

In the course of this research, one comes back again and again to that watershed in modern history which was the First World War, dubbed by its protagonists as the “Great War”. Its only grandeur, in my view, lies in its having cemented into the political process the predominance of geopolitical strategic thinking and manipulation associated earlier with the “Great Game” between the British Empire and Russia. Otherwise, the only thing that was “great” about the First World War was the toll it took on human life and relations among peoples. It was an unmitigated disaster, which led not only to the slaughter of entire peoples, but also to the establishment of puppet states in the Middle East, as foreseen by the British–French Sykes–Picot Treaty, and the perpetuation of conflict. Iraq was one such puppet state, Jordan another. The Ottoman Empire was dismantled by that war, and the genocide of the Armenians was woven into the process. The fate of Palestine was to become part and parcel of this imperial poker game set up by London and Paris. The actual perpetrators of the disasters of the First World War, and of the enduring festering sores they would create, were the British geopolitical scenario-spinners, the likes of Halford Mackinder, Lord (Alfred) Milner, Bertrand Russell, H.G. Wells, Cecil Rhodes and their colleagues in the Round Table, the secret society they set up to establish world government.

The guilty party is the geopolitical mind, a mode of thinking which disposes of peoples and nations as mere objects. This fact seems to me to be of utmost relevance in seeking reconciliation and durable peace among nations and peoples who have been pitted against each other in artificially orchestrated conflicts. If those treated like puppets can be made to see who the puppet-masters are, and read the script cast for them, they may be enabled to reach up and cut the strings which have been moving their limbs. In this light, recent developments in Turkey, indicating a desire on the part of the Turkish population to face up to the historical record and be freed of the burden of collective guilt for what the Young Turk government did in 1915, are to be welcomed. I firmly believe that, if the Turkish–Armenian issue were to be solved politically to the satisfaction of both sides, it could provide a powerful impetus for dealing with similar conflicts. The same is to be said of recent interventions by Israeli intellectuals to force an open debate on the deeper implications of the events of 1948. Exposés of Anglo–American machinations to prepare two wars against Iraq fulfil a similar function. Working through the historical record and redefining the adversary relationship demands precisely that bold step into and through the Wall of Fire.

A last word should be said on the very definite limitations of this book. I do not pretend to deal with genocide, war or ethnic cleansing as such, and have deliberately restricted the scope of this work to these three cases of aggression. The Armenian genocide was the first of the twentieth century, but, unfortunately, not the last. After that came the “final solution” to the Jewish question by the Nazis (Hitler in 1939 asked rhetorically, “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”), the extermination of entire peoples by the Soviets in Eastern Europe, the more recent cases of Cambodia under Pol Pot, the Tutsi genocide in Rwanda, just to name a few. If I have not treated these horrendous cases of mass murder in this book, it is not out of negligence, or disinterest or disrespect, but simply because I do not have the first-hand material or the in-depth knowledge of events required to present an honest account. My aim has been to use my personal experience with these three seminal examples – Armenia, Iraq and Palestine – in order to argue the case for reconciliation. If I can convince my reader to rethink his or her previous assumptions about these historical tragedies, I will be grateful. I want to lead the reader up to that Wall of Fire, and hope he or she will muster the emotional strength to enter it.

Finally, if I have had recourse to poetic licence, it has been exclusively in the pursuit of poetic justice.

Part One

Armenia

Chapter 1

The Loss

Orphans play a very special role in social history, especially those who have been robbed of their parents through the trauma of war. They are unwitting participants in events of historical import, which they are utterly unequipped at the moment to grasp. What they experience are the raw acts of brutality against their loved ones, acts for which they can find no rational explanation. Theirs is not to explain or understand, but to bear witness, struggle to survive and, above all, remember. They are like the prime actors in Friedrich Schiller’s ballad, The Cranes of Ibykus. They behold a heinous murder and live to haunt the assassin with his crime.

Turkish Interior Minister Mehmed Talaat, who issued orders for the systematic killing of Armenians in 1915, had probably never read Schiller, although his associates were Germanophiles. According to reports, he initially believed that the orphans would not be able to testify to his crimes. In a directive dated 12 December 1915, regarding what should be done with the Armenians, he wrote: “Pick them up and take care only of the orphans who will not be able to remember the atrocities that their parents were subjected to. Send the others with the caravans [i.e. to be killed].” One month later, he appeared to have rethought the matter. Some orphanages, he complained, were taking in children of “certain persons” deemed to be dangerous, so, he said, “it is against the wishes of the government, if these children are fed and their lives prolonged, as if one should be allowed to have sympathy with them. …” Then, on 7 March 1916, he issued the following order: “Using the pretext of having the Deportation Administration take care of them, and without arousing suspicion, the children of certain persons gathered up and cared for by the rear area troops on orders of the War Ministry are to be rounded up en masse and exterminated. We await a response.”1

Talaat was dead wrong in his estimation that the orphans would not remember. And, even after he had reviewed the issue and decided to silence the children “of certain persons”, still, that failed to kill the truth. It is in fact thanks to the accounts of the survivors of the genocide – especially those like my mother and father who were orphaned children at the time – that a clear picture of those tragic events has come to light. And their recollections document most convincingly two historical facts. First, what was perpetrated against the Armenians culminating in 1915 was genocide – that is, the deliberate campaign to annihilate an entire people. Second, that it was not “the Turks” who were responsible, but specific, identifiable groups of political leaders in the Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire in 1915. Many of those who survived – including my parents – were saved by Turkish families. Historical records show, in turn, that the entire Young Turk project was part of a far broader geopolitical game orchestrated by the Great Powers.

It took time for many of the orphans to grapple with what had befallen them. The traumas they had undergone were so painful that they dealt with them by exercising what psychologists call “removal”: they simply “forgot” the brutal experiences for as long as they could. But then, a contemporary event, ostensibly unrelated, could trigger a recollection, unleashing the floodgates, letting memories flow which had been consigned to oblivion.

This was the case with my mother. Having successfully blocked out all but the most harmless reminiscences of her earliest years, her subconscious was suddenly, rudely shaken by the tumultuous events of the earthquakes that hit Soviet Armenia in 1988. Scenes of desperate civilians fleeing their destroyed homes, which were flashed across television screens in the US and the entire world, evoked echoes of similar dramas, as moving as they were inchoate. The conflict that broke out a few years later over the contested Nagorno-Karabagh again showed Armenians in struggle. Images of the gruesome wars that later ripped through the Balkans further juggled her psyche, calling up unwelcome nightmares. No matter whether the girls being raped and killed, or the men being corralled into fields to be executed, were Bosnians or Croats, the message transmitted by the pictures on the TV screen was unequivocal: innocent civilians, caught up in war, were being slaughtered, and the world seemed to look in another direction.

Then, in 1992, on a visit home, I showed my parents some slides my husband Michael and I had taken of Iraqi children victimized by Desert Storm, the Anglo–American-led war against Iraq in 1991. We had been involved in a relief effort which provided them some humanitarian assistance. Those images utterly shattered the psychological block. I told my mother the tale of Sabreen, a four-year-old Iraqi girl who had been injured and traumatized in the war, even to the point of losing her mother tongue. Through her treatment in a German hospital, she regained her power of speech, but in a new idiom. Her story, and the photos, detonated a minor explosion in my mother’s mind, and she began telling me stories of her childhood that I had never heard before.

It was as if my mother had found a long-lost key to a mental chest in which she had stored photos and letters and memoirs. Her account, which I later encouraged her to put into writing for the benefit of her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, is a precious historical document – naive, unassuming, fresh and totally candid.

I was born on November 15, 1915, in the small village called Tsack, near the town of Arabkir.2My father, who had been away to the United States for fifteen years, had returned to his native land in 1910 to be with his family, and perhaps persuade his father and mother to leave Turkey and go to America. He was married to Mariam Dedekian, one of the prettiest girls in the village. They both came from middle-class families. They were landowners and my grandfather, Krikor Yeramian, was the town treasurer, who would lend money to young men to go to America, to work and make money, and help their families at home. He was very secure and comfortable in his native land, so why should he go off to a foreign land? He persuaded my father, Garabed, the only son, to stay in Turkey and raise a family and live together.

My mother, Mariam, lived with her in-laws and obeyed whatever her in-laws wanted her to do. That was the custom: the good “hars”, the bride – she was always introduced to outsiders as the “hars”, the bride of the family, no matter how old she was or how many years she had been a bride. She was always our “hars”.

My mother had had children, but none of them lived. When I was born, my grandmother Maigir made a novena, “ooquth” in Armenian. She went and collected forty different pieces of silver from the silversmith and neighbours, and had a bracelet made to be worn by the infant. Of course, it was blessed by the church priest and my mother inscribed “Artemis” on it and, when I was christened, the word “Abrisse” – “May you live” – was added. They also had a pinafore made with forty different kinds of fabrics. The baby wore the dress over and over again. My family was very happy to have a living child, even though I was not a boy. Boys were always more desirable, because they carry the family name. Anyway, I lived.

In 1913, the Turkish government closed all its doors. No one could leave the [Armenian] country, no communication with the outside world. No letters came in or went out of the country. This was the beginning of the plan, the “genocide”.

I was just an infant when the mass killings started, 1915–1916. Our village people were gathered in the church hall; all the men, women and children were kept there for days. Then the gendarmes, the Turkish soldiers, took groups at a time to a distance of five or ten miles, and shot them to death. My mother, my grandmother and other women and children were grouped, and shot to death. My mother held me, her infant baby Artemis, to her breast, so that the baby would die with her. But the bullet missed me.

Digin [Mrs.] Bakerian survived the massacre. She saw me, knew I was alive, but where could she go with a little baby? If it cried, she would be caught, so she left me there with the dead bodies. She made her escape to the nearest village and was saved by Turkish neighbours.

A few days later, a Turkish shepherd grazing his sheep nearby, heard an infant crying among the dead bodies. He picked up the little infant and carried her, and left her on the steps of a Turkish mosque. I don’t know for how many days this infant was left outdoors. Then one day came a gendarme of this town, called Omar. He took pity, seeing this infant, carried her home and asked his wife Gulnaz to take her in. They had no children. She refused to take her in; she was not going to take care of a “giavour” child, a Christian, and she said she was too old anyway to take care of an infant. But, finally, she consented to keep her overnight.

The next morning, she took the child and left her at the mosque doorstep. While sitting there talking with her neighbours, what happened was, the little one crawled over to her and held on to her skirt. Right then and there, tears came to Gulnaz’s eyes, and she vowed that Allah had sent this child to her, and that she would love me and care for me as long as she lived. They named me Noveria, and I was known by that name.

She loved me dearly, and I grew up and called her “Ana”, which means “mother” in Turkish. I had the best of everything: beautiful clothes – was the only baby who wore red buckled shoes – and the best of food. I spoke only Turkish. I remember at dinner time, that is the evening meal, the muezzin would sing the evening prayer from the minaret, and then we would start to eat our meal. This was a ritual.

I didn’t know I was an Armenian child, they kept it secret from me. Then, about 1917 or so, the Armenians who had survived returned to their homes. There was nothing left but bare walls. In order to make a living, some of these women went out to Turkish homes to do housework, and got food in return. It happened that one of my aunts, Margret Dedekian, came with another woman to our house. She recognized me immediately, but Gulnaz Hanim at first denied that I was an Armenian child. Then, after a fashion, she told the ladies how she had found me. She showed them the little pinafore dress, all stained with blood, and my silver bracelet. There was a warm friendship among these ladies. My relatives did their housework and went home happy, knowing that I, too, was alive and well taken care of. They went back to their village and told my cousin, Joovar Millian, that Artemis was alive and living with a Turkish family.

Shortly after 1917, the Armenians who had survived the genocide were allowed to travel freely. My cousin Joovar came to visit me, but I did not know who she was. I remember being very shy and uneasy with her. You see, I had been told I was Turkish and she was “giavour”. She made many visits, it was quite a distance. She walked all day to make the trip. She did not have a horse or buggy, she just walked all day, just to come to see me. Joovar’s father and my father were brothers. Her father had died and she lived with her mother and grandmother. My cousin Joovar had no children of her own. She had taken in an orphaned half-sister Siranoush, and Boghos, a nephew of her husband, and lived in the house in Tsack village. She had lots of farmland, which belonged to her family and mine, with vineyards. Her husband was in America, but she had no communication with him until 1918 or 1920.

One day I was playing with the children, and I came home to find lots of people at our house, and I wanted to know why. My father, the Turkish gendarme, Omar, had been taken ill and died suddenly. To this day, I remember all the village people coming, crying, the old people huddled together in grief. I was crying too. I had no father to take me horseback riding or to buy me pretty clothes. What was to become of me? But I had my Ana, who loved me more than ever. She was a very warm and loving person, always cuddling me, always looking after my needs. I loved her dearly, my Ana, my mother.

Shortly thereafter, maybe a year or so, my mother married a young Turkish soldier, handsome, and much younger than her first husband, Omar. Gulnaz Hanim was a rich widow so this young man married her for her wealth. He had another wife and children. In those days, the Turkish men were allowed to have more than one wife.

Perhaps a year or two passed. My cousin still visited me and they were all on friendly terms. When Omar was alive, he had warned my cousin Joovar, she should never, never think of taking me away from him; he would have killed her instantly. His warning did not scare her, she kept coming as often as possible. When he died, things changed. The new husband of Gulnaz didn’t care about me, as he had children of his own. They talked it over with my cousin Joovar. If she wanted me, she could have me.

Also at that time, the Turkish government passed a new law saying, if there were any Armenian children living with Turkish families, they should be returned to their Armenian relatives – mothers, sisters, brothers or cousins – who would claim them rightfully by law. This was in good faith; out of all evil, some good comes.

So my Ana dressed me up in pretty clothes, a beautiful silk dress and red shoes. She and her husband took me to Tsack village. We rode on horseback. I rode in the front of the saddle with my mother, and her new husband led us. I don’t remember how long a journey it was. We reached the village at dusk and it happened to be the day before Easter. All the people in the village came to welcome us, with home-made goodies, cheoreg bread, cheese, eggs, and kharma, cooked lamb. We had a great dinner. What a celebration! Everyone here was Armenian, and I could not understand one word of Armenian.

The next morning, my Ana and her husband left again for Agin, their home town. I cried and cried after them. I wanted to go back with them. I stayed. I had to. The only person I knew here was Joovar (Ablah), my cousin. I held on to her wherever she went. There was Siranoush, her half-sister, a couple of years older than I, and Boghos, the nephew of her husband.

Siranoush did not like me, she used to call me “Turk” because I did not speak Armenian. Within six months or so, I began to learn to speak Armenian. We went to an Armenian school in the village and I made many friends there. In this village, there were only women and children, no men. I never remember seeing a wedding or a newborn baby. We who survived were orphans of the massacre.

My father had a similar tale to tell, but the circumstances which brought it to light were different. In 1965, on the fiftieth anniversary of the genocide, he had been approached by the producers of a television station in Boston who were eager to interview survivors of the genocide for documentaries. My father talked it over with my mother, and they both agreed after heart-rending searches that it would be too painful to bring such traumatic memories to consciousness, and therefore they graciously declined the invitation. However, years later, in 1988, debate broke out about a book by one Justin McCarthy, a revisionist historian who denied the existence of the genocide.3 Perhaps because it coincided with the terrible earthquakes in Armenia, my father responded this time differently. Informed of McCarthy’s thesis, he decided to draft a letter to the author:

Dear Mr. McCarthy,

My name is John Mirak. I was born in Arabkir, Turkey in 1907. My family residence was a village near Arabkir. As there are many villages in the surrounding area, in 1914 a large plaque was hung up in the centre of the town, which meant that the Turkish government was at war approximately six months after. All the Armenians were told to surrender their weapons so there would be peace in our area, and the Armenians obeyed this order. Some time had passed; approximately 1915 a group of Turkish soldiers on horses entered the village and rounded up all the able-bodied men, including my father, the priests, the teachers, bound their hands and marched them out of the village, about ten miles, next to the Euphrates River. They killed some and drowned the rest. This was called the First Massacre.

The Second Massacre took place about six months later. They took all the boys, girls and women of 12 years or older, about four miles out of town and killed them. My family and my cousins were included.

The Third Massacre took place approximately in the middle of 1916. It included all the old people, men and women, and children. They gathered them and locked them in the church for four days and, on the fifth day, they brought them to the centre of the town. I then ran to my house, which was about 100 yards away. As I entered the house, my grandmother was lying on a couch, she was very ill. I ran into the back stable to hide. I then heard Topal Nury come and ask my grandmother where I was. She told him she had not seen me, he then left. Topal Nury was the chief executioner of the whole region of that part of the Turkish province. “Topal” in Turkish means “lame”, so it must have been a nickname.

The final massacre took place less than a mile outside of town. Because of their inability to walk any further, they were all killed there.4 Approximately a month later, I was near the village square with our neighbour, a Turkish woman. Topal Nury arrived on a horse and he grabbed me and shouted, “You were the one that escaped.” Then the Turkish woman looked at him and shouted back, and said, “Haven’t you killed enough? Why don’t you leave the boy alone to care for his grandmother, who is dying, and his young infant brother?” So he left me alone. Within a week, my grandmother died. I asked the lady’s husband if he would help me bury her, and he was kind enough to dig a grave in our land and bury her. A week later, I went to him again to bury my brother, who was less than a year old and had died from starvation. I was the only Armenian left in the village. Another kind Turkish woman who felt sorry for me gave me shelter and food, and I worked for her for a few months.

Then it was 1917. By that time a law was passed that no Turkish individual could keep an Armenian child against its will. One day my aunt appeared out of the blue sky looking for her three children, who had been killed in the Third Massacre. She heard that I was alive and came to take me. I was afraid to leave the Turkish woman, but she said for me to go with my aunt and not to be afraid. We then walked all day and night to reach Arabkir. After we arrived there we found two other Armenian women. The only means of food we had was American-sponsored Near East Relief every week. I used to go and get an allowance of wheat for two, and that was enough for the week. The man in charge of Near East Relief was Mr. Knapp. We all thought he was God.

We were in Arabkir for almost a year. I had distant relatives in Aleppo, Syria. We wrote to them and they helped us to get there by caravan. We lived with them for about a year, then I had to go to an orphanage, and my aunt stayed with them, but her husband, my uncle, was in America, in Boston. He had come [to America] in 1912, she finally wrote to him about us, and he was able to bring us to America. We landed in Ellis Island in New York, on January 20, 1921.

Mr. McCarthy, I would be happy to pay all your travel expenses, if you would join me to travel to Arabkir to my village, so that I may show you our school, our church, if the remains are still there, our very kind Turkish woman’s home, who saved my life, and give you the names of our Turkish neighbours. I will take you to my home next door and show you its remains and if the beautiful soil stands undisturbed in our yard, I will uncover the earth and show you the bones of my grandmother and my infant brother, so you may not call it alleged.

He concluded his letter saying that if he could not convince the historian, whom he dubbed a “first class hypocrite”, that what had occurred was indeed genocide, then he would donate one million dollars to a charity of McCarthy’s choice. Due to my father’s age, and certain other considerations, the letter remained among his papers, which I discovered after his death. But the message was clear.

Witnesses from Afar

Buttressing the accounts of the orphans are the reports by unimpeachable sources who were eyewitnesses to the nature and dimensions of the genocide – for example, Dr. Jakob Künzler, a Swiss orderly who had travelled to Turkish Armenia, in answer to a call to help his fellow man. Künzler had been invited to Urfa, in East Anatolia, by Dr. Johannes Lepsius, the famous German doctor and pastor, to work at the Deutsche Orient-Mission hospital which he had set up there. Künzler, himself orphaned at the age of eleven, had been deeply moved by his reading about the Hamidian massacres in the 1890s.5

Like many towns in East Anatolia, Urfa was a potpourri of different ethnic and religious communities. At the outbreak of the First World War, two-thirds of its 60,000 inhabitants were Muslims, including Turks, Kurds and Arabs, while the minority Christians were Armenians and Syrians of different denominations, most of them Armenian Apostolic.6 Urfa was also the transfer point for deportees from Sivas, Erzerum and Mamuret ul-Aziz, the latter being the province where Arabkir, the home of my parents, was located.

Whereas my father saw the groups of men, women and children being taken out of the city to be shot, Künzler witnessed the deportations that were organized to slay Armenians by the thousands. The first deportation trains arrived in Urfa at the end of June, from Harput and Erzerum. On 10 August 1915, two top officials from the Young Turks were on the scene to coordinate the elimination of Armenian men and boys and the “evacuation” of the women and children. A group of 1,000 Armenian men, pulled together as a labour battalion, was marched to a location where the men were ordered to take off their clothes (except for a shirt) and were tied together in twos, then led to the edge of a cliff. Those who had led them there “took off the ropes from the two in front. One after the other they had to jump off the cliff, but not before running between two gendarmes armed with long knives, each of whom stabbed the victim.”7

Many Armenians, knowing what awaited them in the deportations, were so desperate that they sought death by quicker means. Some women Künzler visited in a camp who were being readied for extermination, begged him to give them, not bread, but poison to end their misery. “And the mothers with their infants,” he wrote. “Their milk had long since run out, and there was no other source of nourishment. Few mothers found the courage to throw their infants in the stream, so that they could be quickly released from their suffering. They were laid out in the courtyard, row after row. They cried there until they could cry no more. When the crying stopped, they gasped a few more times for air until death released them. Most often in the morning, the previously mentioned stream was filled with the bodies of women and girls who wanted to escape the deportation this way.”8

The so-called deportations were in reality death marches. And they were planned to be such. Künzler had it from the horse’s mouth. He was fluent in Turkish (as well as Arabic and Armenian) and, in his humanitarian aid capacity, had access to Turkish authorities. One day, he was commissioned to accompany two Persian princes, guided by Turkish officers, on a trip to Baghdad, the reason being that one of the princes had injured an ankle and needed a doctor.

Künzler reports: “During the journey, Major Nefiz Bey, the head of our expedition, discussed the Armenian question one evening. He was a leader of the Young Turks and had made a name for himself. … Therefore, his remarks were of special interest to me. ‘We Turks,’ he explained, ‘must either exterminate the Armenians utterly and completely or force them to emigrate. Life with them within the boundaries of our empire is completely out of the question.’”9

Künzler’s testimony is rare and rich in implications, because he was totally neutral. Not only because his nation, Switzerland, was not a party to the war, but because he was a humanitarian, a medic with no other agenda than to offer aid to the suffering. Since, however, Künzler’s experience was limited to Urfa, one might be tempted to consider it an isolated case. Instead, it was all too typical of what unfolded throughout Turkish Armenia.

Johannes Lepsius was a German, whose country was allied with Turkey in the war. It is thus all the more extraordinary that he should be the one to sound the alarm in his homeland about the ongoing massacres in an attempt to mobilize public opinion to intervene. Lepsius, who was in Germany at the time, got word of the massacres in June 1915, when he was given access to a telegram sent to the Berlin Foreign Ministry by their then-ambassador in Constantinople, Freiherr von Wangenheim. The telegram, dated 31 May, reported that War Minister Enver Pasha had determined to make use of emergency war powers to move against the Armenians, allegedly to “rein in Armenian espionage and prevent new Armenian armed uprisings”. Schools were to be closed, communications interrupted, newspapers censored and “all families not totally free from suspicion to be deported”. Lepsius grasped the import of the message immediately, and told the authorities that one did not need to deport families to prevent armed insurrection, and that “mass deportations are mass massacres”. On this basis, he requested permission to go to Constantinople, and thence, to the interior. His request was rejected by the Interior Minister Mehmed Talaat; he was allowed to go to Constantinople, but no farther.

There he was granted an audience with Minister of War Enver Pasha, and also had a meeting with the Armenian Patriarch in Constantinople, Archbishop Zaven. Lepsius arrived in Constantinople on 24 July, a national holiday commemorating the 1908 reinstatement of the Constitution under the Young Turks. Since he was forbidden to travel to the interior, he concentrated on meeting with Armenians and others who reached the capital from inland areas, who could give him their reports of events. Lepsius was also briefed by the US ambassador Henry Morgenthau, who allowed him quite unbureaucratically to examine certain discreet documents and to take notes on them.10

Lepsius spent three weeks in the capital gathering such accounts from eyewitnesses, and on that basis compiled his Report on the Situation of the Armenian People in Turkey, which appeared in 1916.11 His book identified three regions where the systematic genocide was organized: Cilicia and Northern Syria; East Anatolia; and West Anatolia. The operations in the first region began in March 1915 and continued through May; at the end of May, they began in East Anatolia and continued through June. West Anatolia was targeted from early August into September. His comprehensive overview documents the modus operandi of the massacres, confirming that what eyewitnesses like Künzler had seen in limited locales was part of a general strategy. Long after the actual killings and deportations had begun, a “Temporary Law of Deportation” was presented to the Council of Ministers and approved on 30 May 1915, which permitted the military to suppress armed resistance, and to deport those “whom they suspect of being guilty of treason or espionage (article 2)”.12

The first action undertaken by the Turkish authorities to prepare the massacres was to round up the leaders of the community, the intellectuals, priests, teachers and village elders, precisely as my father had reported. In the East Anatolian vilayets, widespread arrests of such community leaders were conducted between 21 April and 19 May. Parallel to the mass arrests of intellectuals in Constantinople on 24/25 April, which affected about 600 leaders, elsewhere dozens, then hundreds, of civic leaders were taken into custody and deported or assassinated. Also in Urfa, as Künzler recounts: “Two well-known Armenians, members of parliament, Vartkes [Serenkiwlian] and [Krikor] Zohrab, came through Urfa as prisoners. They were allowed to continue in a sprung carriage. However, they met their fate an hour outside of Urfa. A Turkish officer escorting them shot them.” (A municipal doctor, sent there to issue a death certificate, was ordered to say the cause of death was typhus!)13

“The general rule in operation here,” Lepsius observed, “had the aim of robbing the Armenian people of their leaders and spokesmen, so that the deportations could be carried out silently and without resistance.”14 Once the local leaders had been neutralized or killed, the Turks moved against the hapless civilians, sending them to their death. Emblematic was the case of Harput. According to a report by an American missionary there, cited by Lepsius, the American College in Harput was devastated, its professors arrested, tortured and killed and its students deported. The US Consul Leslie A. Davis from Harput depicted the horrors of the deportations in his 11 July report.

If it were merely a matter of moving from here to another place, that would be tolerable; but everyone knows that what is involved in the current events is going to death. If there were still any doubts about this, they could be swept away through the series of transports which carried many thousands of people from Erzerum and Erzingjan. I have visited their camps many times. A more pitiable sight cannot be imagined. They are almost without exception ragged, filthy, hungry, and sick. That is not surprising in view of the fact that they have been on the road for nearly two months with no change of clothing, no chance to wash, no shelter, and little to eat. The government has been giving them some scanty rations here. I watched them one time when their food was brought. Wild animals could not be worse. … To watch them one could hardly believe that these people were human beings.15

One of the most terrible fates awaited women who gave birth during the deportation marches. “They were hardly given time,” Lepsius reports, “to bring their children into the world. One woman bore twins during the night. In the morning she had to move on by foot, the two children on her back. After two hours’ march, she collapsed. She had to leave the two newborns, to lay them down under a bush and was forced by the soldiers to move on with the other travel companions. Another woman gave birth along the way, had to keep moving, collapsed and died.” A great suffering endured by the deportees was that they were not allowed to bury their dead children.16

Although the massacres were scrupulously organized and executed, they did not occur without resistance. In several instances, Armenian civilians put up a determined fight. Künzler was an eyewitness to the opposition of the Urfa Armenians, a struggle as heroic as it was desperate. Members of the Armenian population of Urfa in the years of the First World War still had living memories of what had happened in 1895, when thousands of innocent civilians had been shepherded into the church and set afire with kerosene. But it was the martyrdom of Vartkes and Zohrab in 1915 that triggered their resistance. One enterprising Armenian disguised himself as a Turkish officer, outfitted friends with similar garb and Turkish names and went to Aleppo to procure weapons, while Urfa blacksmiths started manufacturing hand grenades. The first shots were fired on 29 September and a fierce fight ensued for weeks until the militarily superior Turks bombed the Armenian buildings, forcing their surrender on 16 October. A massacre followed and the victims were buried in mass graves. Dr. Vahakn N. Dadrian, director of the Zoryan Institute, has highlighted the heroic role of young women and girls. “Many boys, 10–14, and particularly dozens of female teenagers,” he recounted, “proved themselves intrepid fighters. Their death-defying bravery reportedly astounded General Fahri [Fahreddin Turkkan], the commander of the 13th Army Corps, who was in charge of suppressing the insurrection.”17 One is reminded of Hripsime and Gayané, nuns who had fled Rome for Armenia in the fourth century and embraced martyrdom rather than betray their faith.18

Zeitun and Van were other examples of armed resistance. Zeitun was a key city in Cilicia, whose inhabitants had demonstrated their Ottoman loyalty in war.19 Nonetheless, the Armenians came under harassment. Following the overall mobilization ordered in August 1914, there were sporadic cases of Turkish gendarmes dishonouring women. In December, the Armenians obeyed orders to turn in their weapons. In springtime, further insults against Armenian girls sparked clashes with casualties on both sides. The Armenians fled to a cloister, while the Turks mounted a disproportionate response. In early March 1915, “to the astonishment and fear of the inhabitants”, Lepsius wrote, a huge military contingent of somewhere between 4,000 and 6,000 soldiers arrived from Aleppo. Although the inhabitants raised white flags of surrender, those in the cloister opened fire, killing numerous soldiers. The 20,000 inhabitants of Zeitun were then deported to the Arabian desert, the city was resettled with 20,000–25,000 Turks and the name was changed to Sultaniyeh.20

In Van, the official Turkish view was that the Armenians had organized a revolutionary upsurge in cahoots with the Russians, something which both Lepsius and later historians refuted. According to an American missionary’s report cited by Lepsius, in mid-February, Enver Pasha’s brother-in-law Jevded Bey (who was the Vali of Van) had set up for assassination four political leaders of the Dashnaktsutium party (the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, or Dashnags), including a deputy. In late April, Jevded organized massacres throughout the province, killing 55,000 Armenians, 2,500 in one day. The survivors sought refuge in Van, which then came under siege. On 20 April, 1,500 armed Armenians erected barricades to protect the 30,000 city inhabitants, and fighting began. The resisters set up an ad hoc administration to run affairs, and organized production of munitions, bullets, gunpowder and even mortars. On 16 May, the Turks were forced to withdraw and Russian troops advanced toward the city.21

The most famous case of resistance was that mounted by the citizens of Musa Dagh, in a saga immortalized by Franz Werfel in his novel, The Forty Days of Musa Dagh.22 Instead of acquiescing to the deportations, the community took refuge in the highlands, on a “Mountain of Moses”, not far from the Gulf of Alexandretta and, under the military leadership of an Armenian who had fought in the Ottoman army, succeeded in staying alive for over one month. Through brilliant military flanking manoeuvres and subterfuge, the armed men managed to repel three successive attacks by Turkish forces. An extraordinarily efficient mode of social organization allowed them to produce food, build shelters and provide medical as well as spiritual care to all. Just as their supplies were running out and a renewed Turkish attack was being mounted, the 4,048 survivors were rescued by the French warship “Guichen” and taken to safety.

Speaking with the Devil