[ 
.. 10 11 12 13
14
15 16 17
18 19 .. ] 
[ .. 10 11 12 13
14
15 16 17
18 19 .. ]
Le second
groupe de faits se rapporte plus précisément aux événements de 1915 et
à ceux qui les ont immédiatement précédés ou suivis. La seconde moitié
du dix-neuvième siècle est l'époque des nationalismes pour les
différentes ethnies qui composent l'Empire ottoman. C'est un courant
d'idées qui pousse chaque peuple à entreprendre une lutte armée pour
pouvoir fonder son propre Etat sur une partie du territoire de
l'Empire. Presque tous réussirent. A l'exception des Arméniens, dont la
lutte pour l'indépendance diffère des autres luttes nationalistes sur
un point essentiel : peuple laborieux doué de qualités artistiques et
artisanales et fidèle à l'autorité du Sultan, les Arméniens se sont
répandus partout en Asie Mineure et même sur le territoire européen de
l'Empire, de sorte qu'ils perdirent leur majorité sur les terres qu'ils
habitaient avant l'arrivée des Turcs. Ainsi a la fin du dix-neuvième et
au début du vingtième siècle, il n'y avait plus aucun département
d'Ana-tolie orientale ayant encore une ma-jorité arménienne. Et, pour
employer un terme à la mode aujourd'hui, il n'y a pas eu de mouvement
de libération nationale arménienne sur un territoire bien défini qu'on
pourrait appeler “l'Arménie”, mais des émeutes et des actes de
terrorisme commis par des groupes d'Arméniens dans différents coins du
pays. Comme tout Etat qui se respecte, l'Etat ottoman a pris des
mesures, parfois assez sévères, pour se protéger contre ces activités.
Survînt alors la première guerre mondiale. En
1915, l'Empire ottoman se battait sur plusieurs fronts. Pendant qu'on
se battait à l'ouest pour résister à I'attaque des Alliés dans les
Dardanelles, l'est du pays était menacé par l'invasion des armées de la
Russie tsariste. Il ne faut pas oublier que la Russie avait été l'une
des grandes puissances qui s'étaient intéressées à la question
arménienne pendant toute la seconde moitié du dix-neuvième siècle dans
le but d'accélérer la désintégration de l'Empire ottoman, dont elles
espéraient retirer un intérêt. Pendant la guerre, les dirigeants russes
se sont servis de leur attachement à la cause arménienne afin
d'ébranler les lignes de défense ottomanes. Ainsi naquit une
collaboration entre l'armée russe et les insurgés Arméniens, y compris
ceux qui faisaient leur service militaire dans l'armée du Sultan.
C'était peut-être, aux yeux des dirigeants de la révolte arménienne,
une coopération nécessaire dans la voie de l'indépendance nationale;
mais pour les Ottomans, c'était une trahison. Il y a donc eu, dans ces
circonstances de guerre, des soulèvements, des rebellions, des
représailles et des tueries mutuelles. C'est alors que le gouvernement
a été obligé de prendre une décision difficile: 1 ) transférer les
militaires armé-niens des troupes combattantes à des unités
non-combattantes; 2) évacuer les populations arméniennes de la zone
d'opérations vers le sud-est de l'Anatolie et le nord de la Syrie
actuelle, qui faisait encore partie de l'Empire à l'époque. C'étaient
des mesures nécessaires afin d'assurer la sécurité des troupes et de
protéger les voies de ravitaillement de l'armée.
Ce fut un déplacement pénible. Le transfert de
toute la population arménienne s'est effectué dans des conditions très
strictes, à travers une région très montagneuse et aride. Les
transports manquaient et la plupart du temps les déplacés étaient
obligés de couvrir de longues distances à pied, souvent harcelés et
attaqués par des tribus qui échappaient à l'autorité de l'Etat. Il
régnait à l'époque des épidé-mies et aussi une famine, qui frappai-ent
toute la population civile et même les militaires. Parfois, à la
sévérité des circonstances s'ajoutait l'excès de zèle de certains
administrateurs qui, dans leur hâte à remplir les ordres du
gouvernement, se souciaient peu des mesures à prendre pour la
protection des déplacés. Bref, une tragédie humaine a été vécue à
l'époque dans cette partie d’Anatolie, mais c'était une tragédie
commune, faite de souffrances mutuelles et de centaines de milliers de
victimes des deux côtés. Mais ce drame ne
mérite pas le nom de génocide. Car il y manque l'élément essentiel,
c'est-à-dire I'intention de détruire l'ethnie arménienne en tant que
telle. il s'agit d'un acte de guerre, décidé dans les circonstances
d'un conflit armé, au sein d'un Empire agonisant ou régnaient le
désordre et la désorganisation. Le déplacement de l'élément arménien a
évidemment eu des conséquences qui, au premier abord, semblent remplir
les conditions exigées par la convention de 1948 : il y a eu meurtre
des membres du groupe, surtout par le fait de membres irresponsables de
tribus locales. Il y a eu des souffrances physiques, surtout en raison
des conditions géographiques et climatologiques dans un pays dévasté
par la guerre. Il est vrai aussi que des orphelins ont été adoptés par
des familles musulmanes. Mais ce n'était nullement dans l'intention
d'opérer un "transfert forcé d'enfants du groupe à un autre groupe",
pour employer le langage de la convention, mais au contraire dans
l'esprit de solidarité et de charité inspiré par la coexistence
pacifique qui avait lié les familles anatoliennes pendant des siècles.
L'intention de détruire une ethnie, en tout ou en partie, est absente
de toute cette série d'événements, puisque toutes les sources, même les
plus militantes en faveur de la cause arménienne, admettent que les
Arméniens des régions du pays éloignées du front et ceux des grands
centres comme Istanbul et Izmir n'ont pas été assujettis aux mêmes
mesures. D'autre part, plusieurs fonctionnaires, même des sous-préfets,
bien que d'origine arménienne, sont restés en poste pendant les
événements qui frappaient l'est du pays, faisant continuer ainsi la
longue tradition de l'Etat ottoman consistant à ouvrir les portes de
son administration aux éléments non musulmans. En effet, on compte
plusieurs ministres, ambassadeurs (même dans les grandes capitales
telles que Berlin, Vienne, etc...) et hauts fonctionnaires arméniens
dans l'administration ottomane. En ce qui
concerne l'Anatolie orientale, nous sommes en possession, dans les
archives ottomanes, d'innombrables documents, lettres, télégrammes,
circulaires, etc... (dont certains ont été publiés récemment), dans
lesquels les autorités gouvernementales s'efforcent, en dépit des
circonstances tragiques d'une guerre The second group
of facts is rela-ted more precisely to the incidents of 1915 and to the
events, which led to or followed these. The second half of the
nineteenth century was the era, of nationalism for different ethnic
groups, which formed the Ottoman Empire. It vas a new current of
thought which prompted each people to engage in an armed struggle in
or-der to establish its own state on parts of the imperial territories.
Almost all of them succeeded, with the exception of the Armenians whose
struggle for independence differs on excepti-onal front from the other
national fights: as hard working people en-dowed with many
talents in arts and artisanry and faithful to the Sultan's authority,
the Armenians spread throughout Asia Minor and even to the European
territories of the Em-pire, so that they lost their majority status in
the lands which they inhabited before the times of the Turks. In this
way there was not a single part of Eastern Anatolia by the end of the
nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century. That was
inhabited by an Armenian majority. Therefore, there was no national
liberation movement, to use a fashionable term, in any specific part of
the territories of the Empire, which could be called "Armenia". There
were only uprisings and acts of terrorism committed by the Armenians in
different corners of the country. As any self-respecting state the
Ottoman state took some measures, sometimes very severe, to protect
itself from these activities.
Then the First World War started. In 1915 the Ottoman Empire was fighting on several fronts. While it fought in the West to resist the at-tacks of the allied forces in the Darda-nelles, the East was threatened by the invasion of the Armies of Czarist Russia. We must note that Russia was one of the main great powers that took an interest in the Armenian question, during all of the second half of the nineteenth century with the aim of accelerating the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire from which it hoped eventually to benefit to a great extent. During the war the Russian rulers made use of their involvement with the Armenian cause with a view to devastate the Ottoman lines of defense. This brought about collaboration between the Russian Army and the Armenian rebels, including those who were doing their military service within the Sultan's army. In the eyes of the lea-ders of the Armenian revolt this may have been a necessary cooperation on their path to their national independence. But for the Ottomans it was treason. In this atmosphere of war there followed a series of insurrections, rebellions, reprisals and mutual killing. It is at this time that the government had to take a difficult decision: 1) to transfer the Armenian soldiers from the combat troops into the non-combating troops; 2) to evacuate the Armenian population from the zone of operations in south-eastern Anatolia and to the North of present-day Syria, which at the time was still part of the Empire. These were measures necessary to ensure the security of the troops and to protect the passages for the provisioning of the Army.
It was a painful relocation. The transport of all the Armenian population was carried out in very strict conditions, across a very mountainous and arid region. Means of transportation were scarce and the people being displaced generally had to cover long distances on foot, often harassed and attacked by some tribes who had escaped the authority of the state. At the time epidemics were running strong as well as famine that hit the whole civilian population and even the military. At times, the overzealous attitude of some administrators who, in their efforts to fulfill the government orders, did little in the way of measures to be taken for the protection of the displaced persons, aggravated the unfavorable circumstances. In brief a tragedy was lived in those days in that part of Anatolia, but it was a, common tragedy, causing mutual suffering and taking thousands of victims on both sides. But this tragedy cannot be called genocide. Because it lacks the essential element for the qualification of genocide, that is the intention to des-troy the Armenian ethnic group as such. It is a question of wartime ac-tion, decided upon in an atmosphere of armed conflict, in the heart of a dying Empire beset by disorder and disorganization. The relocation of the Armenian element obviously had consequences that at first glimpse may fulfil the conditions set out by the 1948 Convention. There were killings involving the members of the group especially by irresponsible members of some of the tribes of the region. There was physical suffering due especially to the geographical and climatic conditions in a country already devastated by the war. It is also true that some orphans were adopted by Muslim families. But that was in no way prompted by the intention to bring about a “forced transfer of the children of one group to another group”, to use the language of the convention, but on the contrary, in-spired, in a spirit of solidarity and charity, by the centuries of peaceful coexistence which had tied together the Anatolian families. The intention to destroy an ethnic group, in part or as a whole is absent in all this series of events, since all the sources, even the most ardent advocates of the Ar-menian cause, accept that none of these measures were applied to the Armenians in the areas distant to the war fronts or to the Armenians who had settled in the big cities such as Istanbul and Izmir. On the other hand, many civil servants, even district officers of Armenian origin maintained their position during all these incidents which hit the eastern regions of the country, continuing in this way the long tradition of the Ottoman State to open the doors of its adm-inistration to non-Muslim elements. In fact the Ottoman administration boas-ted of several Armenian ministers and ambassadors (even to important capitals such as Berlin and Vienna etc.) and high ranking offices in its service. As to the eastern Anatolian region, Turkey is in possession of innumerable documents in its Ottoman archives - letters, telegrams, circulars etc. (of which some have been recently published), in which governmental authorities display
Then the First World War started. In 1915 the Ottoman Empire was fighting on several fronts. While it fought in the West to resist the at-tacks of the allied forces in the Darda-nelles, the East was threatened by the invasion of the Armies of Czarist Russia. We must note that Russia was one of the main great powers that took an interest in the Armenian question, during all of the second half of the nineteenth century with the aim of accelerating the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire from which it hoped eventually to benefit to a great extent. During the war the Russian rulers made use of their involvement with the Armenian cause with a view to devastate the Ottoman lines of defense. This brought about collaboration between the Russian Army and the Armenian rebels, including those who were doing their military service within the Sultan's army. In the eyes of the lea-ders of the Armenian revolt this may have been a necessary cooperation on their path to their national independence. But for the Ottomans it was treason. In this atmosphere of war there followed a series of insurrections, rebellions, reprisals and mutual killing. It is at this time that the government had to take a difficult decision: 1) to transfer the Armenian soldiers from the combat troops into the non-combating troops; 2) to evacuate the Armenian population from the zone of operations in south-eastern Anatolia and to the North of present-day Syria, which at the time was still part of the Empire. These were measures necessary to ensure the security of the troops and to protect the passages for the provisioning of the Army.
It was a painful relocation. The transport of all the Armenian population was carried out in very strict conditions, across a very mountainous and arid region. Means of transportation were scarce and the people being displaced generally had to cover long distances on foot, often harassed and attacked by some tribes who had escaped the authority of the state. At the time epidemics were running strong as well as famine that hit the whole civilian population and even the military. At times, the overzealous attitude of some administrators who, in their efforts to fulfill the government orders, did little in the way of measures to be taken for the protection of the displaced persons, aggravated the unfavorable circumstances. In brief a tragedy was lived in those days in that part of Anatolia, but it was a, common tragedy, causing mutual suffering and taking thousands of victims on both sides. But this tragedy cannot be called genocide. Because it lacks the essential element for the qualification of genocide, that is the intention to des-troy the Armenian ethnic group as such. It is a question of wartime ac-tion, decided upon in an atmosphere of armed conflict, in the heart of a dying Empire beset by disorder and disorganization. The relocation of the Armenian element obviously had consequences that at first glimpse may fulfil the conditions set out by the 1948 Convention. There were killings involving the members of the group especially by irresponsible members of some of the tribes of the region. There was physical suffering due especially to the geographical and climatic conditions in a country already devastated by the war. It is also true that some orphans were adopted by Muslim families. But that was in no way prompted by the intention to bring about a “forced transfer of the children of one group to another group”, to use the language of the convention, but on the contrary, in-spired, in a spirit of solidarity and charity, by the centuries of peaceful coexistence which had tied together the Anatolian families. The intention to destroy an ethnic group, in part or as a whole is absent in all this series of events, since all the sources, even the most ardent advocates of the Ar-menian cause, accept that none of these measures were applied to the Armenians in the areas distant to the war fronts or to the Armenians who had settled in the big cities such as Istanbul and Izmir. On the other hand, many civil servants, even district officers of Armenian origin maintained their position during all these incidents which hit the eastern regions of the country, continuing in this way the long tradition of the Ottoman State to open the doors of its adm-inistration to non-Muslim elements. In fact the Ottoman administration boas-ted of several Armenian ministers and ambassadors (even to important capitals such as Berlin and Vienna etc.) and high ranking offices in its service. As to the eastern Anatolian region, Turkey is in possession of innumerable documents in its Ottoman archives - letters, telegrams, circulars etc. (of which some have been recently published), in which governmental authorities display