So I read today that Pope Francis called the killing of 1-1.5 million Armenians during World War One a genocide, and that this angered Turkey. My question is: How can Turkey legitimately refuse to call these killings genocide?
EDIT:
Ok wow, this post has had a pretty big response. Thank you all for your answers.
"Genocide" is a legal term of art that Lemkin coined in 1943 and that was not defined as an international human rights violation until the 1951 Genocide Convention. Furthermore, international law generally prohibits the retroactive application of treaties unless specified by the treaty itself. The Genocide Convention is silent on retroactivity.
This is the debate surrounding the application of the legal term and its consequences, which is what Turkey has long held to as its justification for denying a "genocide".
Turkey also asserts demographic inconsistencies between the number of Armenians in turkey and those alleged to have perished, disproportionate numbers of Muslims who were killed during this period compared to Armenians, instances of Armenians rebelling against Armenians, and other reasons to explain non-genocidal motives.
A full explanation of Turkey's arguments can be found on the website of the ministry of foreign affairs, and is available in English. The International Center for Transitional Justice, a US based human rights organization, has published a summary of the legal arguments surrounding the application of the term genocide.
Have a look at this thread on "why is the Armenian genocide debated?" for some discussion of this subject.
I'm not a historian, but I can give insight to what is taught, and what the general Turkish consensus is. Let me know if this answer is inappropriate though as it may be breaking the 20 year rule.
Around a decade ago the Turkish education system ignored the genocide altogether. World War One is a rather embarrassing time for Turkish history (with the exception of Gallipoli), and was almost completely ignored. This resulted in ignorance, most Turks didn't know much about the genocide; at most they knew that after a rebellion and a massacre of Turks, some Armenians were killed. These the days the education on the genocide is more aggressive. The story goes that the Armenians stayed loyal to the empire during the surge of nationalism in Europe, but in World War One saw an opportunity to establish their own state, effectively 'betraying' the empire. With the support of the Russians they were making ground, and the government decided to start a program of relocation to protect the empire and the citizens living in Eastern Europe. The relocation resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths or Armenians due to starvation, rouge killings (people from the Balkans and Caucuses that wanted revenge), Kurdish irregulars, and disease/famine.
This honestly isn't really that different then what was taught to me in high school in Canada. In Canada their is more of a focus on the context of genocide, earlier massacres against Armenians, and the general mistreatment Armenians faced in the empire. It also focuses on the three pashas, the nationalist movement, and puts the causalities at 1.5 million instead of around 600,000.
So both sides agree that the events in 1915 happened and many Armenians died. Here are the main differences in dialogue:
-Intentions: In Turkey the intention was protection of citizens of empire after an Armenian rebellion. They state that the government did not intend to ethnically cleanse Armenians. In Canada the intention is taught as being a scapegoat against the horrible Caucasus campaign, revenge killings, and as a result of Turkish nationalism.
-Who did the killings: In Turkey the bulk of the deaths are blamed on the general atmosphere of the war. While Armenians starved so did Turks, that these sort of things happen in war. The ones that were intentionally killed were killed by mad villagers who's family had been killed in the war, Turks from the Balkans, and Kurds. That there was no order to kill. In Canada, they put the blame on forced starvation, the army (who they also say had no official orders but they all knew that they were doing), and Kurdish and Turkish irregulars that were armed by the government (again in Turkey its taught that people outside their control were doing the killers, while in Canada they state the government armed them).
-Numbers: This one is simple, Turkey puts the number of Armenians that perished at around 600,000 but also puts a similar number for dead Turks. In Canada it ranges from 1 to 1.5 million.
So what does this all mean. Well the Turkish dialogue gives the impression that it wasn't a genocide. Asking why does Turkey deny the Armenian genocide gives a bit of a wrong idea since really no one denies that Armenians didn't die, the debate is on if it should be classified a genocide.
Why does Turkey not classify it as a genocide? It both a matter of politics, pride, and the fact that many Turks don't actually believe it is a genocide. Its wrong to think that if you don't classify it as a genocide your automatically ignorant of the events that took place.
hi! there have been a few good posts on this; check these out
Does anyone know exactly what is wanted as compensation from Turkey: money, half of the countries north eastern territory, both?
I am a Turk. Our leaders are fucking idiots(tayyip especially). But I'm not going to talk about them. I will talk about the genocide.
In our schools we learn that there was no genocide. But our teachers are not certain when they talk about this.
Btw i an not throwing shit on my country. I love my country.
After i search for this subject i find out that we did the genocide. But it is not like 'we are going to kill every Armenian on the planet earth.'. We try to move them out of Ottoman to stop their uprisings. So we move them. But the objective is "we are going to move them no matter what".
The genocide comes from this thinking. At least this is what i know.
I am Turkish and I admit that Armenian Genocide happened. but our presidents don't want to admit it.
Turkish here. I admit that there was a genocide. The reason why we dont admit that is, turkish goverments dont want to pay that much money to armenia.
Because it never happened. Is nothing more than Armenian Attorneys trying to get paid for something that never occurred. Like their insurance fraud schemes and such...