Refutation of allegations on "German fascism and armenian genocide" in the context of "soft power" terror

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

A.A. Bakikhanov Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan

Refutation of allegations on “German fascism and armenian genocide” in the context of “soft power” terror

Jabbarov E.V.

Abstract

The research object of the article is using the comparative analyses to investigate whether the material cited by authors, who try to justify the claims of Armenian genocide, who try to create the cruel portrait of perpetrators, and the scientific conclusions put forward by them are true or not. For more than 50 years Armenianist authors have been presenting the events to the public against the background of Adolf Hitler's ruthlessness in World War II in order to show the severity of the tensions around the Armenians living in Ottoman Turkey at the beginning of World War I. Although a specific newspaper article is referred to for this, but the journalistic facts in those articles are not confirmed by official documents. Other authors intervene in the topic without investigating the facts, either carry out populist ideas and anti-Turkish propaganda among the public by referring to their predecessors, or develop the essence of the issue in the direction of probabilism by propagating pseudo-facts to the scientific community.

In the 70s and 80s of the last century, certain scientific and scientific-mass books were published on this topic, but the problem was not reported at the level of comparative analysis of specific journalistic facts and official documents.

The scientific novelty of the article is that the claims in the mentioned newspaper materials are compared with the relevant official documents of the Nuremberg trial, and it is determined that the Armenianist claim is a fake fact.

Key words: terror, soft power, fascism, Armenian genocide, Armenian probabilism.

Джаббаров Е.В.

Спростування заяв про «німецький фашизм і геноцид вірмен» в контексті терору «м'якої сили»

Анотація

armenian genocide world war

Наукові дискусії навколо теми «геноциду вірмен» становлять інтерес для сучасної історіографії. Деякі автори - вірменофіли у суспільно-політичний та науковий обіг впровадили недостовірні факти. Іншим аспектом актуальності цього питання є те, що є політики (президент Франції Еммануель Макрон), які трактують сучасний вірмено-азербайджанський конфлікт у контексті «вірменського геноциду».

Таким чином, у статті робиться спроба розгляду теми «геноциду вірмен» із позиції «м'якої сили».

Ця тема досліджується з позиції деяких авторів, які поширюють серед світової громадськості інформацію про «геноцид вірмен», використовуючи популістські методи та обґрунтовуючи свої висновки посиланнями на промови Адольфа Гітлера. Головною метою цих авторів є інтерпретація подій, що відбулися в Османській Туреччині в 1915 році, шляхом прирівнювання дій німецьких фашистів у роки Другої світової війни та турків Османа в період Першої світової війни та формування на цьому тлі образу багатостраждального вірменського народу. Їх задумом є за допомогою такої тактики «м'якої сили» реанімувати «вірменське питання», вказати на продовження вірмено-турецької ворожнечі. Оскільки підхід вірменофілів до проблеми слугує розпалюванню національної ворожнечі з перспективами домогтися особливого статусу для вірмен, які проживають у Карабахському регіоні Азербайджану, необхідний аналіз цієї теми на основі документів.

Наукові висновки автора статті ґрунтуються шляхом зіставлення фактів, наведених у монографіях Кіракосяна та статей з цієї проблеми, опублікованих у газетах The New York Times та The Times від 24 листопада 1945 року, з офіційними документами Нюрнберзького процесу 1946 року над фашистськими військовими «798-ПС» та «1014-ПС».

Ключові слова: терор, «м'яка сила», фашизм, «геноцид вірмен», вірменський пробабілізм.

Problem statement

Discussions of “Armenian genocide” allegations at the scientific level are in the interest of modern historiography. In order to prove the scientific basis of the problem, Armenianist authors even involve pseudo-facts in the socio-political circulation as a historical truth. Another aspect of the urgency of the problem is that there are politicians who present the new Armenian - Azerbaijani conflict in the context of the “Armenian genocide” (President of France Emmanuel Macron). Thus, the resurgence of Armenian terror as the revenge of the “Armenian genocide” made it necessary to investigate the problem at the level of terrology.

Analysis of research and publications

In the article is touched on the refutation of allegations on the “Armenian genocide” in the context of the fight against “soft power” terror, the origin of the basic facts is investigated, and using the method of comparative analysis a scientific approach is given to positions that based on unsigned newspaper articles rather than official documents. Even today, those authors are trying to disseminate their allegations among the world community through the populist tactics, and do not hesitate to use the name of Adolf Hitler further to strengthen their views.

Spreading the events of 1915 in Ottoman Turkey by equating “fascists and Turks” among the public and forming the oppressed Armenian image against this background has reached the level of “soft power” terror. The goal of the “soft power” terrorists is to bring the “Armenian issue” to the agenda again, to create a cruel portrait of Azerbaijanis in order to protect the Armenians living in Karabakh from someone and something, also to connect the root of the Armenian -Azerbaijani conflict to the antiquity of the enmity between the two nations. Since the probabilistic approach to the problem continues, an attitude to it is shown based on real history.

The scientific position is investigated in the context of a comparison of the allegations in the relevant articles published in “The New York Times” and “The Times” on November 24, 1945 with the documents No. “798 - PS” and “1014 - PS” officially referred at the Nuremberg trial and the opinion concerned to A. Hitler is proven to be a pseudo fact.

Task statement

The purpose of the article is to support the formation of an objective position on the problem in the international social-theoretical opinion by examining the basics of the topic. The refutation of the false facts that caused the modern Armenian-Azerbaijani ethno-political conflict will ensure the creation of peace in the region.

Presentation of the main research material

a - John Kirakosyan - Adolf Hitler: a violent alliance

a - 1. A brief overview on the journalistic notes in two different newspapers based on the motives of the two reports

Adolf Hitler spoke twice at a military conference in Oberzalsburg before the war in 1939. John Kirakosyan wrote on behalf of A. Hitler with reference to newspaper materials published on the basis of the motives of those reports: “... if we want to create a great German empire, we must suppress and destroy the Slavic peoples - Russians, Ukrainians, Czechs, Bulgarians, Poles, Slovaks, Belarusians. He (A. Hitler. - E.J.) reminded the participants about the massacres of Western Armenians (he meant ethnic Armenians living on the Erzurum plateau. - E.J.) in 1915 to justify the Hannibalist demands: “Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?” [2, p. 355]. By quoting A. Hitler's opinion as a source, J. Kirakosyan tried to create the impression that the “truth” he needed himself have a proof as well. Therefore, the confident approach to Kirakosyan's position of the authors who defended the idea of “A. Hitler and the Armenian genocide” shows that they did not want to thoroughly investigate the fact (this tendency continues today as well).

They also did not objectively consider the idea of including the relevant issue of “The Times” in scientific circulation. The issue of publicizing articles on the same subject published in both “The New York Times” [4] and “The Times” [5] on the same day could not be accidental. Since a comparative analysis of the relevant facts in those articles with the known documents on which the Nuremberg trials were based, could support scientific accuracy, which the authors did not do.

Both articles are alleged to have been based on Hitler's speeches at a military conference in Oberzalsburg on August 22, 1939, and is repeated today by J. Kirakosyan and authors who share the same opinion as support for the fact of the “Armenian genocide”.

a - 2. Comparison of official documents and journalistic facts

A comparative analysis of official documents with articles based on Hitler's views on Poland and the international situation on the eve of World War II shows that both editorships made mistakes in preparing the material for publication. Therefore, it is necessary to reveal the populism and probabilism in the essence of these articles. First of all, we should note that:

The publication of the same type material (almost the same) on the same day both in England and the United States is no coincidence;

The fact that both articles were published unsigned and insured with a note “The New York Times” received it by radiogram, and “The Times” “from our special correspondent” casts doubt on the scientific origin of the materials;

a - 3. Forcible scientificization of a journalistic fact

The content of the documents adopted by the Nuremberg trials was distorted in both articles, and by “enriching” with additions and amendments for the perspective of publicist thought, but not the scientific one was conveyed to the international community. Also, in order to strengthen the foundations of scientific falsification, a foothold has been formed by referring to the relevant issues of American and British newspapers added to scientific circulation as the only source. The fact system and real content of the articles were involved in the settlement of the historical claim without specifying the facts confirmed by the documents.

Document No. “798-PS” covers A. Hitler's first speech at a known meeting [6, p.338-344]; another official document related to that meeting - “1014 - PS” - refers to A.Hitler's speech at the meeting after a lunch break [6, pp. 523-524]. A. Hitler advises his confederates to wage a life-and-death war in the forthcoming war. The report is terrifying, but not as J. Kira- kosyan insists, the idea is not based on “oppressing and destroying the Slavic peoples”. J. Kirakosyan equated the perpetrators of the “Armenian genocide” with the German fascists who massacred the Slavic peoples and acted probabilistically in accordance to his wishes and additions [3, p. 373].

The end of the article in “The New York Times” may be an additional support to the allegations about the falsification of the speech. “The New York Times” concludes: “Hitler's speech was listened to enthusiastically. Goering jumped from the table. He showered blood thirsty thanks and promises. He started dancing wildly”. However, the document states that Goering simply thanked Hitler on behalf of the participants.

a - 4. Did Adolf Hitler use that expression?

Speculation by some authors about this idea has, in fact, fueled irony and doubtful approaches. The book, published by the Turkish-American Association Assembly, once was also prepared from an alternative position [1]. However, this did not prevent those authors from taking a wrong position as well. Therefore, there is a need to overview the issue in a new context. Another factor is that the confrontation of facts was mainly based on the potential of the material in “The New York Times”. The relevant article in “The Times” was overshadowed (J. Kirakosyan considers the article published in “The Times” to be the first [3, p. 373]). Thus:

A comparison of articles published in parallel shows that the New York version relied on London edition.

At the afore-mentioned meeting, A. Hitler had not expressed the term “Armenian genocide” or the socio-legal views to support it.

The authors put forward their views without examining the text of the relevant articles in “The New York Times” and “The Times” as a source, but only indicated the title, date and page of the publication, leaving both readers and researchers under the emotional influence of the misconception. At present, many authors are following this path: they refer either to the monograph of J. Kirakosyan, or to the relevant issue of the newspaper like him; the original of the documents are not addressed.

An article in “The New York Times” is entitled: “Partial Text of Talks on Poland”. The article was published in London newspaper under the title “Nazi Germany's road to war”. Although developed in a different format and with different sub-headings, with a few exceptions it contains the above-said pro- Armenian views.1 It appears from the well-known documents adopted by the Nuremberg Trials that A. Hitler spoke at that meeting not in the context of the deliberate destruction of certain peoples, but in the context of a life-and-death war on the whole.

a - 5. Where do the populism of John Kirakosyan and his confederates come from?

The same expression - extermination was used in the articles in relation to both Armenians and Poles: (“extermination of the Armenians”, “extermination of the Poland”). Note: Taking into account the time difference between London and New York, one can understand which article was published first. The manipulation of time and place, as well as the high level of identity between the articles, do not exclude the possibility that they were written by the same author. Note: The mentioned articles say: “Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?"; "The invasion and extermination of Poland begins Saturday morning”; ”to kill without pity or mercy all men, women and children of the Polish race or language“. And document No.”1014-PS” states: “Restlose zertriimmerung Polens ist das militarische ziel". Apparently, the database for confirming the term genocide in relation to Poles is stronger. Although the opinion about Armenians is presented in a completely different context, it is being introduced to the public as an “Armenian genocide”. Populist authors also based their position just on that journalistic statement. By ramming the word “extermination” as “genocide” into brains both the meaning and the legal and political meaning of the word are falsified. On the other hand, the lexical unit “genocide” as an international legal term was known to public and scientific community before World War II (since 1933,We consider the date of the term entered to the circulation).

“Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide” was ratified after the Nuremberg Trials in 1948. If the term was not brought to the spot by the lawyers conducting the trial, it means there was an objective reason for it; or if brought, correspondents participating there would have published and insisted on spreading it as a legal term, especially in relation to Poles (the term “genocide” was brought to into legal and political circulation by a Polish-born US expert on international criminal law, Rafael Lemkin. - E.J.). But none of this has happened.

a - 6. What do official documents say?

Based on the official documents adopted by the Nuremberg trial, it can be said that A. Hitler's report does not contain any factor that would remind and justify the “Armenian genocide”. At present, the fact that some states react to the events happened in Armenian - Turkish relations in 1915 not by using the word genocide, but other words and phrases from a humanitarian position (eg, meds yegern, great crime, or their synonyms) also stems from this logic, that is, there are no real facts and documents to support it. That's why in “The Times” and “The New York Times” newspapers in relation to both Armenians and Poles not genocide, which is a political and legal expression, but just the humanitarian-publicist lexical unit of extermination was used.

Another subtlety shows that the problem is deliberately falsified: In the subtitle entitled “A Conversation with Goering”, in “The New York Times” article, is hinted to Genghis Khan's despotism. This fact was also falsely included to the article. This name is not mentioned in documents No. “798-PS” and “1014-PS”. However, those who prepared the material for publication reminded of Genghis Khan's despotism in order to increase the emotion of the text.

It does not make exception that the source of this the claim was a famous note issued by the Soviet state during the worst period of the war. The note, which coincided with the publication date of the book (1942) “What About Germany?” by Louis Lochner, stated: “The atrocities and crimes committed by Genghis Khan, Batu, and Mamai is nothing in comparison with the savagery made by the Nazi bandits against the civilian Soviet population and Soviet prisoners of war” [7, p. 3].

Conclusion

Thus, keeping the events of 1915 on the agenda at the level of “Adolf Hitler and the Armenian Genocide” is a populist allegation and aims to politicize the problem with a probabilistic approach. The official documents of the Nuremberg trial refute the journalistic position of the Armenianist authors.

Bibliography

1. Assembly of Turkish American Associations. Armenian allegations: myth and reality. A handbook of facts and documents, Washington, DC 1987, 180 pp.

2. Киракосян Дж. Западная Армения в годы первой мировой войны. Под редакцией проф. М.Г. Нерсисяна. Ереван, Издательство Ереванского Университета, 1971, 478 с.

3. Киракосян Дж. Младотурки перед судом истории, ред. M.A. Гасратян, предисловие Г.Г. Азатяна, прим. РП. Кондакчяна, заклю. А.Дж. Киракосяна, Ереван, Айастан, 1989, 495 рр.

4. `Partial Text of Talks on Poland', The New York Times, 24 november 1945, p. 7.

5. `Nazi Germany's road to war', The Times, 24 november 1945, p. 4.

6. Trial of the major war criminals before the International Military Tribunal, vol. XXVI, Nuremberg 14 November 1945-1 October 1946, published at Nuremberg, Germany, 1947, 705 pp.

7. `Нота Народного Комиссара Иностранных Дел тов. В.М. Молотова', Правда, Мoсква, 28 апреля 1942 г., с. 1-3.

Размещено на Allbest.ru