Înkara nîjadkujiya ermeniyan

Ji Wîkîpediya, ensîklopediya azad.
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Protesteke li dijî îdiayên Nîjadkujiya ermeniyan

Înkara nîjadkujiya ermeniyan îdeolojiyek e ku dibêje Împeratoriya Osmanî û partiya wê ya desthilatdar, Komîteya Îtihad û Tereqî, di Şerê Cîhanî yê Yekem de li dijî welatiyên xwe yên ermenî nîjadkujî (tawanek e ku bi gelek delîlan ve hatiye ispatkirin[1][2] û ji hêla piraniya zanyarên mezin ve tê pejirandin) pêk neaniye.

Osmanî di dema nîjadkujiyê de jî van qirkirinan înkar dikirin. Wan îdîa kir ku ermenî nehatine qirkirin, lê ji ber sedemên leşkerî cihên wan hatine guhartin. Piştî jenosîdê, belgeyên ku wan sûcdar dikir bi awayekî sîstematîk hatine tunekirin. Ji hingê ve siyaseta înkara nîjadkujiyê ji aliyê her hikumeta Komara Tirkiyeyê ve hatiye dubarekirin.

Înkara nîjadkujiyê heman ramanên ku Komîteya Îtihad û Tereqî bikar anî ji bo meşrûkirina kiryarên xwe bikar anî. Înkara ev e ku "veguheztina" ermeniyan de çalakiyek dewleta rewa bû  di bersiva serhildanek ermenî ya rastîn an têgihiştîku hebûna împaratoriyê di dema şer de tehdît dikir. Alîgirên înkarê dibêjin ku Komîteya Îtihad û Tereqî bi mebesta dersînorkirina Ermeniyan bû lê mebesta kuştina wan tunebû. Ew îdîa dikin ku jimara mirinên pir mezin hatine zêdekirin an jî mirinan bi faktorên din ve girêdidin, wek şerekî navxweyî, nexweşî, hewaya xirab, karbidestên herêmî yên hov, an komên derqanûn û Kurd. Dîroknas Ronald Grigor Suny diyar dike ku nîqaşa sereke "nîjadkujiyê çênebû, û Ermenî berpirsiyar bûn (bi înglîzî: there was no genocide, and the Armenians were to blame for it)".[3] Li gel înkarê, "retorîka xayîntiya Ermenî, êrişkarî, sûcdarî, û hewildana axê (bi înglîzî: rhetoric of Armenian treachery, aggression, criminality, and territorial ambition)" jî heye.[4]

Çavkanî[biguherîne | çavkaniyê biguherîne]

  1. Dadrian 2003, rr. 270–271; Chorbajian 2016, r. 168;
    • Ihrig 2016, rr. 10–11. "While some have gone to great lengths to 'prove" that similar American reports are not credible, especially the memoirs of American ambassador Henry Morgenthau Sr., and allege that, of course, the Entente countries produced only war propaganda, nothing of the sort can be said about the German sources... After all, they were already afraid of the very negative repercussions these events would have for Germany during and after the war. What reason could they possibly have had to forge such potentially self-incriminating reports, almost on a daily basis, for months?"
    • Gürpınar 2016, r. 234. "Contrary to the 'selected naivety' of the first part of the 'Turkish thesis', here, a 'deliberate ignorance' is essential. Armenian 'counter-evidence' such as highly comprehensive and also poignant consular reports and dispatches are to be omitted and dismissed as sheer propaganda without responding to the question of why the diplomats falsified the truth."
    • Cheterian 2018a, r. 189. "As the deportations and the massacres were taking place, representatives of global powers, diplomats, scholars, and eyewitnesses were also documenting them, and all parties knew that those events were organized by the ruling Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) with the aim to exterminate Ottoman Armenians..."
  2. * Bloxham 2003, rr. 23–50. "Despite growing scholarly consensus on the fact of the Armenian Genocide..."
    • Suny 2009, r. 935. "Overwhelmingly, since 2000, publications by non-Armenian academic historians, political scientists, and sociologists... have seen 1915 as one of the classic cases of ethnic cleansing and genocide. And, even more significantly, they have been joined by a number of scholars in Turkey or of Turkish ancestry..."
    • Göçek 2015, r. 1. "The Western scholarly community is almost in full agreement that what happened to the forcefully deported Armenian subjects of the Ottoman Empire in 1915 was genocide..."
    • Smith 2015, r. 5. "Virtually all American scholars recognize the [Armenian] genocide..."
    • Laycock 2016, rr. 311–313. "... important developments in the historical research on the genocide over the last fifteen years... have left no room for doubt that the treatment of the Ottoman Armenians constituted genocide according to the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide."
    • Kasbarian 2016, rr. 92–104. "... the denialist position has been largely discredited in the international academy. Recent scholarship has overwhelmingly validated the Armenian Genocide..."
    • "Taner Akçam: Türkiye'nin, soykırım konusunda her bakımdan izole olduğunu söyleyebiliriz". CivilNet (bi tirkî). 9 tîrmeh 2020. Roja wergirtinê: 19 kanûna pêşîn 2020.
  3. Suny 2015, rr. xii–xiii. "The Turkish state and those few historians who reject the notion of genocide have argued that the tragedy was the result of a reasonable and understandable response of a government to a rebellious and seditious population in time of war and mortal danger to the state's survival... There was no genocide, and the Armenians were to blame for it. They were rebellious, seditious subjects who presented a danger to the empire and got what they deserved... Still—the denialists claim—despite the existential threat posed by the Armenians and their Russian allies to the survival of the empire, there was no intention or effort by the Young Turk regime to eliminate the Armenians as a people."
  4. Bloxham 2005, r. 234

Bîbliyografî[biguherîne | çavkaniyê biguherîne]