Talk:Armenians in Turkey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Armenians in Turkey article.

WikiProject Turkey This article is part of WikiProject Turkey, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Turkey-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Armenians in Turkey is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to better improve and organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.

it's not true that armenians are the largest minority group in turkey today. there are far mor kurds! since the genocide, armenians in turkey are a very small group and in their original homeland (northeast-anatolia/western armenia) there are almost no armenians any more. --Severino 15:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Question

Why were the following removed?

...intergroup tensions prompted the emigration of possibly...

Armenians outside Turkey refer to the deaths of 1915-16 as an instance of genocide, and over the years various Armenian political groups have sought to avenge the tragedy by carrying out terrorist attacks against Turkish diplomats and officials abroad.

We can rename "terrorist" to "militant" or something else, per Wikipedia:Words to avoid, but I'm not sure why the rest was removed. —Khoikhoi 20:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed it because I didn't find it to be related to the topic at hand, the Armenians of Turkey. I feel that this article had been written with a pro-Turkish POV, and for example tying in Armenian terrorists/militants of the 1970s directly with the victims of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 have little to do with each other. Of course those attacks happened because of the unrecognized nature of the genocide, however I did not see why they should be brought up in the same sentence, or even at all. Keep in mind these attacks happened in the Diaspora, and were not carried out by the Armenians of Turkey, making it an even more irrelevent non-sequiter aimed at making Armenians look bad (as if to argue, yeah they might have been victims of a genocide, but 50 years later some of them were terrorists too! It all equals out!). I did not remove it because I want to hide it, it is a sad part of the sad story of the legacy of the Armenian Genocide, however it does not belong in this article and was likely placed there with more sinister rather than informative motives. Also, I had removed the phrase intergroup tensions because I found it to be a euphamism for the Hamidian massacres, mention of which was completely absent despite the fact the vast majority of Armenians that left did so to flee those massacres. I guess that phrase can stay now that there is reference to the Hamidian massacres, however I think a series of massacres goes far beyond the term "ethnic tensions". Vartan84 12:53, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually, everything except the final paragraph was directly copied from the Library of Congress country profiles (in the public domian), so I don't think it was biased towards the Turkish side. Anyways, I see what you're saying. I wasn't aware that attacks carried out by the ASALA were mostly from the diaspora.
As for the Hamidian massacres, you might want to respond to this comment. —Khoikhoi 18:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hamshenis

there should be a link to the hamshenis-article --Severino 10:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

added --Severino

[edit] The Armenians are not the wealthy and prominent minority of Turkey they once were

The article ( rosy according to me and many Turkish Armenians in the first paragraphs) will create the impression that the Armenian community (estimated around 50,000 people) of Turkey meaning İstanbul is wealthy and politically powerful, happy a with high confidence which is totally false. Unfortunately the opposite is true, especially concerning their status as citizens - second class citizens. Yes the Armenians like the Greeks used to be wealthy merchants and traders with international connections - but in Ottoman times especially before 1915! That is not the case anymore after the foundation of the Turkish Republic and especially after the very violent and destructive Istanbul Pogroms of 6-7 September 1955. Just like the Greeks, this traumatic turning point not only ruined them ecocnomically, it also practically disenfriched them; and they became withdrawn form Turkish society economically and psychologically wounded, and constantly frightened abouth their future. This tension was further heightened by the assasinations of the Turkish diplomats by ASALA in the 1970's and 1980's. They became regarded with hostility and suspision (a fifth column ) not only by the society but also by the Turkish state, as if they were behind the assasinations. They were (and still are) constantly intimidated, harrased by the authorities as if they were the terrorists or harboured them. Now having a "perfect excuse" with the attacks, the jingositic press and the government further fueled hatred and tension of the Turkish society against the already marginalized Armenian community stepping up their immigration to the West and putting all sorts of petty and legal discriminations against them in their daily lives. This continues up to today. Yes the Armenians in Turkey have their newspapers and minority schools (whicha are well equipped by Turkish state education standarts indeed by any standart), but they are all in Turkish ! The Armenian minority schools' curriculum ,except Armenian language lessons of course, and including religion classes is completely in Turkish. They are not taught about Armenian history and culture of course (unthinkable anyway); only officialy sanctioned Turkish history courses where Armenians and Greeks are villified as the enemy, which humiliates and dispirits the Armenian pupils who are supposed to be the future generation and citizens of Turkey. This is one of the reasons why Armenians mostly speak Turkish as a mother language at home and more so among the public because of these discriminatory and destructive policies and because of the fear of being detected as Armenians or Greeks for that matter, by the Turkish public. This fear goes so far that many Armenians turkify their names and surnames. Their names may not be Turkish names but "neutral sounding" enough not be detectable. Another reason why the Turkish language Armenian weekly Agos was founded that many Armenians especially the younger generations cannot speak or read Armenian, as well as to integrate the inward looking Armenian community ( still unsuccessfuly) with the mainstream society. As I have mentioned before, as well as the above mentioned reasons of the Armenian community, they are constantly suffering from petty and legal discriminations which makes them practically second class citizens. For instance they have not been legally represented since 1960, the last time an Armenian MP was elected to the Turkish parliament. Even though there are no legal barriers on piece of paper, they are not allowed to become soldiers or civil servants or have any other government job, simply because they are regarded as "disloyal" and "treacherous" people who are bound to stab Turkey in the back at any moment. This is also the view of the vast majority of the Turkish society. Though with roughly 50,000 members (definately compared to the doomed Greek minority of Turkey) the Armenian community may look robust, but is suffering from steady decreasingly numbers because of immigration to the West mainly U.S.A and Europe (France particularly), low birth rates, high death rates, and gentrification. In addition to that some of their schools have been closed due to low enrollment and transfer to Turkish schools. I know what I described is very gloomy but sadly this is the reality of the Armenians in Turkey they are enduring today. If the Turkish goverment does not change and reforms its human and minority rights records, the Armenian community will also suffer the fate of the Greek minority of Turkey, who have suffered even more under the Turkish state due to the on and off conflict with Greece over the decades, and have been reduced to less than 2,000 mainly elderly people who are heading to certain extinction.

Thank you for the above observations. While they won't be particularly new to anyone who knows the actual conditions on the ground, they will be for those who think that the wikipedia article in its current form in any way reflects reality. It's so far gone it's not worth editing out all the errors, errors which are mostly deliberate.
You have pointed out some of the inaccuracies. Other include -
We are told "Following the tragic events of 1915-1917, some Armenian children became orphans." What piece of **** human could use the word "some" in this context! Hundreds of thousands became orphans. The majority of children who survived were orphans! Nor were many "adopted by local Muslim families" - unless you think the word enslaved also means adopted. We are told "some 1.5 million Armenians lived in eastern Anatolia" - firstly, this is an inacurate inflated figure, secondly, it implies (deliberately) that all the Armenians before 1915 lived in eastern Anatolia. Actually most lived in central or western anatolia, and the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire was at least 2 million. We are then told "In 1915 the Ottoman government ordered all Armenians deported from eastern Anatolia" with the implication that either (again) all Armenans lived in this region (thus leading the way for the "just an evacuation from a war zone" excuse to be use by genocide deniers) or that Armenians in other parts of the Ottoman Empire continued to lived happily without being deported or killed. We read the phrase "Following the tragic events of 1915-1917". What about the "tragic events" of 1918, or 1919, or 1920, or 1921, or 1922. And what about the events of every year until the 1930s, when tens of thousands of Armenians per year would arrive at the Syrian border having been deported from Kemalist Turkey. And finally, the Hemshinli are not "crypto-Christians" and none have ever, to my knowledge, conveted back to Christianity.

Meowy 15:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Let's cut the yada yada

The title of the article is Armenians in Turkey, so when I came across this article, I was expecting to find some info about Armenian culture in TR, such as Turkish artists of AR origin, Agos - an Armenian NewsP, Armenian schools, and something that is very important as well: recent migratory movements to TR from Armenia, there are 70 thousand armenian citizens who work in TR and I think that that could have been mentioned too.. But no.. same old, same old: was it 1916, or 1917??, were the Hemshinli crypto Christians or were they not? Gees.. Pls take that them to the talk pages of relevant articles, Arm Gen and Hamsheni, respectively.. regards Baristarim 22:35, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The section is not called "Armenians in contemporary Turkey", or "Armenians in the Turkish Republic". And even if it were called that, some historical background will be required and there is no justification for all those deliberate ("Library of Congress country profiles"?) distortions I have mentioned to remain. Meowy 00:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
Again.. This is exactly what I was talking about.. What makes you think that I was asking for that info or any others to be deleted, or not added??? That's why I added the expandarticle and sections tags.. In any case, Turkey means Republic of Turkey, there is already an article called armenians in ottaman empire if i am not mistaken, even if Turkey was the successor state, they don't refer to the same thing.. But that's beside the point anyways.. What happened to the assumption of good faith dude? Have u read my post above? What about trying to add info about what I mentioned above.. Articles always have background or history sections, therefore I fail to see why you r trying to justify its existence, since it is already a given!! :)) I was just trying to point out the fact that some people are too busy squabbling over petty details (were the Hemshinli crypto-Christians, or were they not? :))) Where is the mention of turkish artists of armenian origin? where is the info about Agos, the main armenian NewsP? Recent armenian immigrantion to TR? No.. of course they will never be there, coz it is easier to argue if Hamshenis were crypto-christians than actually going out there and digging up sources about what I just mentioned.. Anyways, i hope that u were able to follow me :)) cheers! Baristarim 01:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

in a way you are right,baristarim, especially your points regarding contemporary armenians in turkey and contemporary armenian life in turkey. but i think its no mistake to mention the hamshenis as they still exist (you wrote "were") and their (part) armenian origin is quite trusted. --Severino 20:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Second-class citizen

The Armenians were also targetted during the Istanbul pogrom. The Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople, is also deprived from its rights. The Armenian Gregorians still do not have the same privilleges with the Sunni muslims. The Armenians in Turkey were also victims of the law "for the unification of education" (violation of the Lausanne Treaty), etc. Seems like Second-class citizens to me... Hectorian 15:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

It was more than 50 years ago. The Istanbul pogrom was an agent-provocateur act. The unification of education is only to make the education system secular but is not applied to the defined minorities in the Lausanne treaty. There are Armenian schools in Turkey, so no violation to Lausanne. E104421 11:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Saying that it happened long ago does not justify the exclusion of the category, having in mind that the pogrom's effects are still obvious: the Armenian community has shrunk, due to the porgom. No matter if it was an agent-provocateur act, the pogrom was state-sponsored (and even the Turks accept this). According to the law of the unification of education and its supposed "secular" aspects, it did apply to the minorities as well. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, the 3 recognised minorities (Greeks, Armenians, Jews) were supposed to organise and maintain their schools on their own. In violation of the treaty, the turkish government appointed Turkish heads on the schools, not to mention that the teaching of the minority language was minimized, and many of those schools were closed... The fact that there are todays some armenian and greek schools (only in Istanbul, apparently), cannot hide the fact that the treaty was violated... Perhaps these schools are the only who managed to "escape" the law (or were left operating on purpose for diplomatic reasons). Above i said other things as well, on which u did not comment: do the armenian gregorians in turkey have the same rights with the sunnis? does their patriarchate still has the proverty it had upon the sign of the Lausanne Treaty? if all that i said are true (and they are) the Armenians are treated as second-class citizens and so the category has every right to stay. Regards Hectorian 12:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
You're mixing the issues. First, if you compare the number of schools per population, you'll see that your argument is not correct. The schools are mostly in Istanbul, cause they are mostly living in istanbul. It is impossible to open a school for few students. There is not enough fund to maintain all. That's why some are closed. If there are enough students, there is no problem for them to be re-opened. The head of the schools should be Turkish citizen does not mean that they should be ethnically Turkish. Nothing has minimized, there are about 70000 armenians in Turkey, and enough schools for them. There is no diference between a turk and armenian legally in turkey. Your another pov that i do strongly disagree is that you're forgeting that turkey is a secular country. 90% of the population is muslim, but this does not mean that turkey is an islamic country. Turkey is a secular republic, there is no difference due to religion in turkish laws. Furthermore, there is no restriction on any language. E104421 14:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I have explained above everything that has to do with the reasons to have this category. Secularism is something usually quoted by the Turkish government, but really is not that... The Sunni muslims are the privilleged by the turkish system, all the rest are under various degrees of discrimination (the Alevis also). The Treaty of Lausanne does not say that the head of the school should not be turkish citizen, quite the contrary: turkish citizenship but' member of the minority. this was not respected by the law of the "unification of education" (another violation of the treaty which states that no national law is allowed to lift the treaty's articles). Hectorian 14:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you're misunderstood, by saying turkish citizen, i mean an armenian, a greek, or a jewish but being turkish citizen. There is nothing to dispute about this. Turkey does no have to import the teachers from outside. E104421 18:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)