Full Text of the Debate in the National Assembly of Wales - 16 May 2002
The Armenian Community in Wales and Genocide in Turkey
Cynog Dafis, Mid and West Wales Assembly Member (regional Member): During the last two years I have attended a number of meetings organised by Wales-Armenia Solidarity. One reason for forming that organisation was to persuade the National Assembly to make a statement to the effect that it officially recognises the authenticity of the Armenian genocide in Turkey in 1915.
A special service of remembrance was held in Cardiff’s Temple of Peace on 24 April 2001—the anniversary of the start of the genocide—at which Rhodri Morgan and Jenny Randerson were present. A year earlier, an exhibition was held there of the shocking pictures taken by Armin Wegner, which form a key part of the evidence for the genocide. There was also an exhibition in the Assembly. Important speeches have been given in the Temple of Peace on other occasions and on 25 April 2002 a service and presentation was held at the Assembly.
The events of 1915 were not the first example of the Armenians being brutally persecuted in Turkey. Between 1894 and 1896, for example, over 100,000 Armenians were killed by special forces on the sultan’s orders. However, the events of 1915 and the following years were different: it was genocide in the true sense of that terrifying word. The word is overused, but not in this case where there was a systematic and organised process to exterminate an entire population.
In 1915 there were 2 million Armenians living in Turkey: 10 per cent of the country’s population. During 1915, 1.5 million of them were killed, and the majority of the rest was taken away. In May 1918, as the Turkish army made an eastward incursion, a further 100,000 were killed. The ‘Armenian difficulty’, in David Lloyd George’s bitterly ironic words, had been ‘simplified’. When Kemal Ataturk came to power in 1920, the work, of destroying every trace of the Armenians’ heritage, including architectural masterpieces, libraries, archives, and entire cities and villages continued just as systematically—destroying 3,000 years of history.
What is the evidence that all this happened? There was evidence from Germans who were in Turkey at that time, including Armin Wegner in particular, who left a massive archive of photographs. There were eyewitnesses among American diplomats and missionaries. Articles were published in the western press, and the Governments of Britain, France and Russia issued a warning to Turkey that members of its Government would be held accountable for the events.
In February 1916, the historian Arnold Toynbee and others were commissioned by the British government to collect the evidence and publish it in a parliamentary blue book. We in Wales know all about parliamentary blue books, but this was an exceptionally important blue book. There is no doubt about the facts: genocide had been perpetuated.
In 1939, Lloyd George talked of the 1915 holocausts. The word ‘holocaust’ is significant, particularly when used in 1939. You will have noticed the chilling similarity between these events and the philosophy behind them, and what the Nazis did to the Jews a quarter of a century later. According to Michael Joseph, who has studied the history, this was no coincidence. Rather, the lessons of the Armenian genocide were brought back to Germany by soldiers who joined the Nazis on returning from Turkey, and were applied to Adolf Hitler’s project. In an address to his generals in August 1939, while planning the merciless slaughter of the Poles, Hitler said:
‘Who, after all, talks nowadays of the annihilation of the Armenians?’
He went on to say that it was their intention to introduce a policy of repatriation. He told them to think of the Biblical diaspora and the massacres of the Middle Ages, and to remember the extermination of the Armenians.
His point was that it was possible to commit genocide without facing punishment and that the event would be forgotten. He was referring to the Poles at the time, but it is obvious that he was also thinking about the Jews.
Do we need to ask, therefore, why it is important to recognise the Armenian genocide? How do we judge those who seek to deny the authenticity of Hitler’s efforts to exterminate the Jews? To leave such a terrible crime against humanity unrecognised is a crime in itself.
Who recognises this indisputable genocide? We will start close to home. Throughout the first world war, Aneurin Williams, a Welsh Member of Parliament about whom I know nothing, drew the Foreign Office’s attention to the threat, and then the reality, of a massacre in Turkey. He may also have been influential in the subsequent inquiry set up by the British Government. Lloyd George’s use of the words I quoted earlier were an unambiguous recognition of the genocide. Even closer to home, during the memorial service at the Temple of Peace, the Assembly Minister, Jenny Randerson, said that:
‘Turkey can certainly be blamed for its modern denial. And…as someone who in past life was a historian, I know how to judge evidence and weigh up the pros and cons, and to judge where the truth lies…[These] events bear all the hallmarks of genocide’.
‘Turkey can certainly be blamed for its modern denial. And…as someone who in past life was a historian, I know how to judge evidence and weigh up the pros and cons, and to judge where the truth lies…[These] events bear all the hallmarks of genocide’.
The campaign to encourage more people to recognise the genocide is ongoing. Over 100 parliaments, regional assemblies, and local councils have already done so. It is hoped that the Swiss Parliament will also do so soon. On 28 February 2002, the European Union Parliament, by a majority of 391 to 96, stated that Turkey must recognise the Armenian genocide before it could join the European Union. Amen to that. I would apply other conditions, particularly the need to recognise the cultural and political rights of the Kurds.
Who is unwilling to recognise the genocide? First, of course, is the Turkish Government, which is conducting a systematic and thorough campaign to deny the genocide outright. Jenny Randerson said that representatives of the Turkish Government brought pressure to bear on her to be silent after she spoke out on this issue. What else would you expect from a country that so cruelly oppresses its Kurdish minority, indeed, denies its very existence—a country with such a terrible record on human rights?
I spent a day in a court of law in Ankara, during the trial of a Kurdish Member of Parliament, who was facing charges relating to his use of the Kurdish language and referring to the Kurdish problem. That was his crime and he was on trial. A picture of Kemal Atatuk was hanging on the wall above the bench, and his spirit permeated the place.
However, what is even worse is the remarkable hold that the Turkish Government has over Western countries, particularly Britain, the United States and Germany. These countries refuse to acknowledge that what was suffered by the Armenians was genocide. They acknowledge that these atrocities took place, but they refuse to use the correct word or the proper name for them—in the same way as the British Government refuses to acknowledge that slavery was a crime against humanity. They should be ashamed of themselves—that is what I call double standards. What would the Government say to those who refused to recognise the Jewish holocaust for what it was?
What can we do? Unfortunately, we cannot pass a resolution of acknowledgement with the aim of putting pressure on the UK Government to acknowledge the genocide. That would be ideal. However, a statement of opinion No. 2000-0029 was tabled in March 2000. The statement acknowledges the true nature of the genocide. It asks Turkey to end its economic blockade on the Republic of Armenia. That is another issue. The Republic of Armenia, which is situated to the east of Turkey, used to be part of the former Soviet Union, and it is being blockaded by Turkey. The statement also calls for the British Government to oppose Turkey’s entry into the European Union until it acknowledges the genocide and ends the blockade on the Republic of Armenia.
At the moment, only 15 Members from only three parties have signed the statement. If a majority of Assembly Members signed, that would be as good as a majority resolution following a debate. It would be even better if it were an overwhelming majority.
That is my appeal today, not only to Members present in the Chamber, but to all Assembly Members. In such an extraordinary case, it may be possible to make an exception to the rule that party leaders and Cabinet Members are not allowed to sign such statements.
I quote Jenny Randerson again:
‘We must work together within the Assembly and throughout society to ensure that this massacre, this genocide, is fully recognised [by the British Government], because recognition and commemoration are the vital steps to ensure that it never happens again’.
An acknowledgement of genocide would also be a key element in securing peace in that region, which borders Europe and Asia. Signing a statement of opinion is a small gesture. However, it would not be a small gesture for the National Assembly for Wales to make a declaration. It would boost the campaign in Wales and beyond. We must have general acknowledgement of the truth of what happened in Armenia in order to begin to right these appalling wrongs. I appeal for the support of all Assembly Members.
Carwyn Jones, Minister for Rural Affairs and Assembly Business: There is no doubt that the first world war had tragic consequences, not just for the people of Western Europe but for the peoples of the former Ottoman Empire and the former Austro-Hungarian Empire. In 1918, at the conclusion of that war, the victorious powers—Britain, France, USA and Italy—met to discuss and sign the Treaty of 
Versailles. At the time, it was said that the first world war was a war to defend small nations. In 1918, Woodrow Wilson, the US President, attempted to recognise and protect the rights of small nations. They proved to be fine words at the time. The aftermath of the events of 1918 was quite different; those events led directly to the rise of Nazism and the second world war.
Many of the victorious powers—including Britain—abdicated their responsibility of protecting emerging small nations. Britain and France, in particular, were guilty of taking over former German territories with no intention of allowing them self-determination. We know what happened in what was then called Arabia and in Palestine. The right to self-determination, as far as Britain was concerned at that time, did not extend to Ireland. It took four years for that recognition to be granted. Armenia was caught up in all of this. It was supposedly offered the protection of the victorious powers, but that protection was subsequently withdrawn. Recognition of an independent Armenia was never forthcoming.
The turmoil after the end of the first world war and the defeat of the Ottoman armies led to much death, mayhem and displacement across the Caucasus and in parts of what was then the Ottoman empire. Turkey became a secular state in the early 1920s. When Kemal Ataturk took over the country, the move from a religious sultanate was completed, and Turkey became a secular state in the western fashion. The banning of the fez was one example of what happened in Turkey at that time. Turkey still prides itself on being a secular state. Pictures of Kemal Ataturk are still seen in many cafes and shops in Turkey, and he is still revered as the founding father of modern Turkey.
The Armenian people contend that a massacre that amounted to genocide took place in the years preceding the first world war and, in particular, in the years after the war ended—in 1918 to 1923 and perhaps beyond. It is ingrained in the folk memory of the Armenian people, who refer to it as metz yeghern—the time of great evil. There is evidence to suggest mass displacement of Armenian people around Europe at that time. The Turkish Government contends that what happened was regrettable but that it was nothing more than the fortunes of war, and that it did not amount to genocide.
It is difficult to judge. Many victims of the holocaust during the second world war, as well as many of those who liberated the death camps, are still alive. I have had the honour of meeting members of the British armed forces who liberated the camp at Belsen, and hearing of their experiences. The evidence before us of the holocaust is strong, as there is living evidence and evidence on film. The only conclusion that a sensible person can draw is that mass murder on a grand scale occurred against the Jewish people. When trying to justify the holocaust to his staff, Hitler said that no one would remember in time because ‘who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?’ That is a chilling quotation. I am unqualified to judge as to what happened in this case, although there is strong evidence to suggest that what happened amounted to a massacre. However, many people in Europe do not know of the full extent of what happened, and need to know more about it.
Cynog Dafis: I draw the Minister’s attention to the overwhelming evidence included in the parliamentary blue book, which was prepared by Arnold Toynbee and the British Government. That document confirms that genocide took place, as an entire population of Armenians in Turkey were annihilated. Does the Minister accept that the only people who allege that they have academic evidence against the claim of genocide are the Turks themselves? That evidence cannot be taken seriously. Any historian who considered this matter would reach the conclusion that genocide occurred and that there is clear evidence that it was a model for Hitler. Will the Minister acknowledge that this morning?
Carwyn Jones: There is no question that the weight of evidence suggests that a mass displacement and killing of Armenian people took place at that time. The Turkish Government contends that there is alternative historical evidence; history teaches us that there is always someone who will say something unusual. One historian in particular believes that the holocaust never happened. You will always find people to back up your case in terms of history and science.
I cannot ignore the fact that there is strong evidence to suggest that such a massacre or genocide took place. I cannot ignore the fact that so many national and regional parliaments, including those of France, Belgium, Sweden and the European Parliament, have taken the same view. Most importantly, the Lebanese Parliament also shares that view. One of the allegations that is sometimes thrown at those who contend that genocide took place is that it is the result of anti-Muslim feeling—that it is a conspiracy by Christian governments and parliaments to deprecate a state where the majority of people are Muslims. To say that we live in Christian states in western Europe is an oversimplification. The drive of Christianity is more blunted now than it was 100 or 200 years ago. It is important that the Lebanese Parliament took that view because its state has a majority of Muslims, and that has been the case for some time. We know from the history of the Lebanon in the early 1980s that it also has a large Christian population. However, it has a Muslim majority, therefore Muslims cannot allege that this is an example of prejudice against them.
The Turkish Government needs to reconsider carefully what happened in the years after the first world war. It is not good enough to say that this is a plot by non-Muslims or by those who are trying to prevent Turkey from joining the EU; it is not as simple as that. Turkey has the right to exist, as does the new state of Armenia. Turkey should reconsider carefully all of the evidence, not only the parts that it considers to be important.
Other states have recognised their past misdemeanours and crimes. Those states have grown and prospered as a result of that recognition. They have cleared the decks. People have accepted that difficult and bad incidents have occurred and now they can move on. In reconsidering what happened to Armenians between 1909 and 23, the Turkish Government must decide whether it wants to clear the decks, whether it should recognise that something different to its point of view occurred, and whether a recognition of that would lead to the matter being laid to rest and to a greater respect for how Turkey deals with its history. That is a matter for the Turkish Government. We cannot ignore the fact that so many national parliaments and regional assemblies believe that genocide occurred and that so many academics have unearthed evidence of what could be described as genocide.
Successive British Governments have not been persuaded that the evidence is sufficiently unequivocal to categorise the Armenian massacres as genocide, as defined by the 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide. That does not suggest that what happened should be forgotten, or that it can be brushed under the carpet, or that there are people who will not continue to delve and work so that the truth is made known. It is important that the Welsh Assembly Government—for what it is worth, because we do not have a foreign policy role—urges the Governments of Armenia and Turkey to look to the future, to build a better relationship, and to work towards peace, security and mutual understanding in a region that, for so much of its history, has been torn by strife and war. The recent visit to Wales by delegates from the National Assembly of Armenia helped in that process.
The one thing that the history of Armenia teaches us, as indeed does the history of the second world war and the history of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, is that we cannot simply sit back and hope that the problem goes away. The massacres and the genocide that took place in Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, which we saw on our television screens, was a disgrace. What happened in Bosnia-Herzegovina, particularly to those Muslims who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, was a disgrace that is only now being rectified. It would have been better if there had been some form of intervention at the time rather than bringing people to trial 10 years after the event. However, in the finest tradition of western European foreign office departments, people sat on their hands and did nothing, and indeed deprived one side of the weapons that the other side was receiving via other countries to the east of Yugoslavia.
We must never forget what is done in the name of one race against another, by one country against another, or say that what we need to do is just sweep it under the carpet and forget about it. If we do that, it shows that as human beings we never learn from mistakes. We can never allow that to happen. While the Assembly Government cannot give a definitive answer to Cynog’s short debate, and I am aware of the statement of opinion that Cynog mentioned, we must bear in mind what the weight of evidence actually is. When people examine that weight of evidence, they may wish to draw certain conclusions.
I emphasise that there has been no pressure on me, and there has been no communication from the Turkish Embassy and the Turkish Government, or from the Foreign Office in London. This is my individual viewpoint, and I speak today on behalf of the Government. If any attempt had been made to put pressure on me, I guarantee that I would have told you, because I am not prepared to buckle under such pressure. Much still needs to be done to inform people of what happened in those terrible years in Armenia and what happened to the people of Armenia. We must encourage those organisations, which Cynog mentioned, that seek nothing more than the truth.