Germany, Turkey, and Armenia: A Selection of Documentary Evidence Relating to the Armenian Atrocities from German and other Sources

By Good Press

Germany Turkey and Armenia is a book that provides documentary evidence relating to the Armenian Atrocities committed in Persia during the early 20th century.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Good Press
• Release date: May 19, 2021
• ISBN: 4064066153991

Book preview

Anonymous

Germany, Turkey, and Armenia

A Selection of Documentary Evidence Relating to the Armenian Atrocities from German and other Sources

Published by Good Press, 2022

[e-mail]

EAN 4064066153991

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION.

A. THE INVASION OF PERSIA.

1. LETTERS FROM GERMAN MISSIONARIES IN N.W. PERSIA.

B. THE SIX ARMENIAN VILAYETS.

2. VAN AFTER THE TURKISH RETREAT.

3. MOUSH.

4. ERZINDJAN.

5. THE TOWN OF H.

6. MALATIA.

C. CILICIA AND NORTHERN SYRIA.

7. EXILES FROM ZEITOUN.

8. Information regarding Events in Armenia, published in the Sonnenaufgang (Organ of the German League for the Promotion of Christian Charitable Work in the East) , October, 1915; and in the Allgemeine Missions-Zeitschrift , November, 1915.

9. Extracts from the Records of a German who died in Turkey.

10. Narrative of a German Official of the Bagdad Railway.

11. THE AMANUS PASSES.

D. ALEPPO.

12. A word to the accredited representatives of the German people, by Dr. Martin Niepage, Higher Grade Teacher at the German Technical School at Aleppo, at present at Wernigerode.

13. ALEPPO.

E. PLACES OF EXILE.

14. Der-el-Zor: Letter, dated 12th July, 1915, from Schwester L. Möhring, a German Missionary, describing her Journey from Bagdad to the Passes of Amanus; Published in the German Journal, Sonnenaufgang, September, 1915.

15. Exiles from the Euphrates: Report from Fräulein O.

APPENDIX.

Reports by Mohammedan Officers in the Turkish Army as to incidents witnessed by them.

(1) A.B.’s Report.

(2) C.D.’s Report.

INTRODUCTION.

Table of Contents

The blue book as to the treatment of the Armenians which has recently been issued (Miscellaneous, No. 31, 1916) contains a large mass of evidence relating to facts which, incredible as they are, have been so incontrovertibly established that no doubt as to their existence can possibly be entertained by any reasonable person. The greater part of the documents included in the blue book does not, however, throw much light on the attitude taken by the German public and the German Government with reference to the crimes which have been committed. The object of this pamphlet is to bring before the public a collection of documents specially selected for the purpose of throwing light on this subject. Some of them are included in the blue book, but the documents Nos. 1, 6, 9, 10 and 12 have not, as yet, been published in Great Britain or the United States. The two documents printed in the Appendix have no direct bearing on the questions relating to the German attitude. But as they came into the possession of the British authorities after the publication of the blue book and are of special interest as giving the impressions of two intelligent Turkish officers,1 it was thought right to include them.

A perusal of the documents included in this collection must convince the reader of three things: (1) that the Germans in Armenia are as full of indignation, and as anxious to see a stop put to the methods of extermination applied by the Turkish Government, as the most ardent friends of the Armenian cause in this country; (2) that, owing to the wilful or reckless perversion of the facts in the German press and the German pamphlet-literature, and owing also to the indifference and credulity of the general German public, the true state of things is unknown or ignored by the majority; (3) that the German Government could have stopped the outrages if they had desired to do so and that their non-interference was not in any way due to ignorance of the true facts.

One very interesting document which has come to the Editor’s notice is of too confidential a nature to be reproduced in this place. It is a Memorandum written by a distinguished German scholar, whose name for obvious reasons has to be suppressed, but whose good faith and whose critical acumen would be acknowledged by every one of his countrymen whose powers of judgment have not been perverted by the passion of war. This Memorandum contains ample evidence of the fact referred to above, that in consequence of the misstatements or suppressions of fact of which German writers on the subject have been guilty, public opinion in Germany has entirely failed to realise the horrors of the Armenian situation, and that some influential persons even approve of the action of the Turkish authorities. The old legend about the unscrupulousness of the Armenian traders and their exploitation of Turkish innocence and trustfulness—of which the groundlessness is convincingly demonstrated by the author of the Memorandum—seems to be firmly believed throughout Germany, and is made use of by those German politicians and journalists who approve cruelty, provided only it serves the cause of German world-dominion. Thus Count Reventlow in a passage quoted in the Memorandum refers to these matters in the following terms: The Turk is unsuspicious and good-natured; everywhere he furnishes a convenient object for exploitation—up to a certain point and to a certain degree; then despair seizes him and he rises against his tormentors. Regrettable as such unlawful self-defence may be from the point of view of civilisation, it is obvious that the Armenians ... least of all deserve the pity and the compassionate emotions of the civilized world.

The author of the Memorandum disposes of this tirade by saying that it is of course unknown to the writer of the passage quoted by us that 80 per cent. of the Armenian population, and particularly those who were affected by the deportations, are peasant farmers, who presumably were not engaged in the exploitation of the Kurdish brigands by whom they were surrounded.... The assumption that the deportation and annihilation of the Armenian race was in the nature of unlawful self-defence is so far removed from the true facts that it does not require any refutation.

The whole German press—as stated by the author of the Memorandum—reproduced an interview with Dr. Rifaat, a member of the Committee of Union and Progress, originally published in a Danish paper, in the course of which the interviewed politician spoke of a conspiracy embracing the whole Armenian population residing in Turkey, threatening the very existence of the country and intended to play Constantinople into the hands of the Allies. He further stated that the plot was discovered before it had ripened, that many of the conspirators, including the Arabian Chief Abd-ul-Kerim, had been arrested and punished, and that 21 of the adherents of the latter were hanged. The author of the Memorandum makes the following comment on this statement: "If Dr. Rifaat knows anything of an Arabian conspiracy, it is impossible for us to verify this finding. In any case an ‘Arabian’ conspiracy is not an ‘Armenian’ conspiracy. But the number of the 21 conspirators hanged and the other contents of the ‘interview’ lead inevitably to the conclusion that Dr. Rifaat did intentionally mislead public opinion, by representing the plot of the Turkish opposition which had already been discovered before the war,2 and which aimed at the fall of the present government and the murder of Talaat Bey and other Young Turk leaders, as ‘a conspiracy embracing the whole Armenian population residing in Turkey.’"

The interview with Dr. Rifaat is also one of the trump-cards played in a pamphlet published in Berlin under the title of The Armenian Question by C. A. Bratter, a person describing himself as a Citizen of a neutral State and a German Journalist. This pamphlet (which was written in order to counteract the influence of an appeal in favour of the Armenians over the signatures of a number of distinguished Swiss residents) is minutely analyzed by the author of the Memorandum, together with its pretended sources of information; and he demonstrates irrefutably its utter untrustworthiness as well as the bad faith of its writer. He significantly adds: "How forgetful and how uncritical must any reader be to whom it is possible to present such lies."3

Being ourselves in a position of greater freedom, we can say that this forgetfulness and this want of critical power are not surprising in the German public, having regard to the fact that their Government is in close alliance with the perpetrators of the crimes which Bratter and other persons of the same mental and moral calibre try to explain away or justify, and which could and would have been prevented long ago if that Government had not disregarded the elementary dictates of humanity.

The German scholar’s Memorandum contains some very interesting evidence showing: (a) that the Armenian leaders, far from engaging in an anti-Turkish conspiracy either before or during the war, were entirely loyal to the Turkish Government, in fact so loyal that this was made a cause of complaint by some of the Turkish opponents of the Committee of Union and Progress; (b) that the policy finally adopted with regard to the Armenians was originally opposed by some of the members of the ruling party, but when so adopted was a deliberate policy of extermination; (c) that the acts of resistance on the part of the Armenians, which are relied upon as an excuse for their treatment, were isolated acts due in each case to particularly grave provocation; that, in every instance except that of Zeitoun, they were later in date than the beginning of the deportations, and were in fact provoked by the fear of suffering the fate which had already overtaken neighbouring Armenian communities [see historical summary in blue book]; (d) that some of the other excuses put forward are so much at variance with the well-known facts that they could only deceive persons unable or unwilling to ascertain the truth.

As regards the loyalty of the Turkish Armenians, it is shown by extracts from leading papers, circulars sent out by the ecclesiastical dignitaries and by the Dashnakzagan (the only influential party organisation of the Armenians), as well as by several official announcements of the Turkish Government or of its agents, issued as late as August, 1915, that that loyalty was not only the policy declared by the Armenian leaders and carried out by the bulk of the population, but that it was also fully acknowledged by the authorities.

In a letter dated the 26th February, 1915, written by Enver Pasha to the Armenian Bishop of Konia, the former says: I avail myself of this opportunity to tell you that the Armenian soldiers in the Ottoman Army conscientiously perform their duties in the theatre of war, as I can testify from personal observation. I beg of you to communicate to the Armenian people, whose perfect devotion to the Ottoman Government is well known, the expression of my satisfaction and gratitude. Several other testimonies of a similar kind are quoted in