Sei sulla pagina 1di 6

Ngo 1

Giang Ngo

Ms. Kennedy

AP Seminar - 4th

October 30 2018

Economic Perspectives on the Armenian Genocide

Taking in account the loss of personal possessions and property, damage suffered by each

of the Armenian families living in the country and city, the proposed worth of the community

buildings, labor costs, and the ‘value’ of human life, the “Tableau approximative" sought to

establish the cost of the Armenian genocide. The grand total of damages expressed in 1919

francs was 14.5 billion. In today’s francs it would run into the trillions of francs (Hovhannisyan).

From any perspective, the events of the Armenian genocide was horrific. From 1915 to 1917,

allegedly 1.5 million Armenians were massacred and many more very negatively impacted due

to the actions of the Turkish government. But from an economic perspective, the extent of what

happened is easily comprehensible and can lend a little insight to the singularity of the event.

Armenians were resented within the Ottoman Empire, partly because of their economic success.

These resentments eventually led to the genocide, where Armenians were murdered and the

property stolen. Even to this day, Armenians are still working to have their property returned. A

look at the Armenian Genocide from the economic view can shed a little light and help

determine the uniqueness and singularity of it.

Word Count: 202

In the past, Armenians established themselves as successful businessmen throughout the

empire and held large economic influence. According to Rouben Paul Adalian, the director of the
Ngo 2

Armenian National Institute, the Armenian people were intermediaries between European and

Eastern trade and Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirovic, a professor at Mykolas Romeris University, details

that the Armenians dominated trade overall within the country, including the cannon and

shipbuilding industries. Armenians were essential to the Ottoman Empire’s economy. They were

successful and non-Armenians despised that. “[The] deeper causes go back to Muslims’

resentment of Armenians’ economic and political successes—a reversal of traditional Ottoman

social hierarchies that had Muslims superior to non-Muslims—and to a growing sense on the part

of Young Turk leaders and ordinary Muslims that Armenians were an alien and dangerous

element within their society,” states Ronald Grigor Suny, director of the Eisenberg Institute for

Historical Studies. The amount of clout the Armenians had only held to further push the

dichotomy between them and the rest of Turkey’s population, as the latter could not stand to be

inferior. Traditional Ottoman society favored Muslims and often discriminated against other

minorities. For example, under a millet system, Armenians were subjected to higher taxes and

discriminatory practices (Reed and Goodwin). All these events eventually built up to a grudge

based upon origin and economics taking effect in 1915.

Word Count: 222

The massacre was not just an attempt to destroy the Armenian people and culture, but

also a ploy to increase Turkish influence by doing so. When the Turkish government began to

deport Armenians in 1915, Armenians were instructed to leave behind all their belongings. The

Liquidation Legislation followed shortly thereafter on June 10, defining the Armenians as

“transported persons” and their property as “abandoned assets,” giving the state power to legally

sell the property without consent of the owners (Hovhannisyan 5). The government took these
Ngo 3

supposedly “abandoned assets” and offered Turks social mobility. Due to this, a generation of

Turkish-owned firms began to flourish throughout the country and many peasants jumped to

middle class, according to Anush Hovhannisyan, a Turkologist and Senior Researcher (6). Talaat

Pasha, one of the Three Pashas that de facto ruled the Ottoman Empire, recorded in his book that

property allocated to settlers included 20,545 buildings, 267,536 acres of land, 4,390 animals,

and more (Hovhannisyan 6). Community properties were also taken, to erase the remaining

Armenian culture. Data from unpublished archives from 1913 to 1914 in the Armenian

Patriarchate of Constantinople lists 2,538 churches, 451 monasteries, and 1,996 schools. Today,

outside of Istanbul, Armenians possess six churches, no monasteries, and no schools (Kouymjian

2). Armenian culture slowly became more and more erased within the Ottoman Empire.

Word Count: 225

Though efforts were constantly being made to return property to the Armenians, Turkey

still holds on to the lands and property seized in 1915. During the Treaty of Sevres, the stolen

property was discussed, and in Article 144, it stated that the Turkish Government recognized the

injustice of the law and was to restore the stolen property (Hovhannisyan 8). However, before

any action could be taken, the Istanbul government got liquidated and the new nationalist

government abolished it. Then, in 1922, the Ankara Agreement with France protected Armenian

property in Cicilia after French withdrawal. That too eventually became nullified by a new

Turkish law “confiscating all ‘abandoned’ property in areas ‘liberated’ from the enemy,” Anush

Hovhannisyan states (9). The Turkish government was consistently working to make sure the

stolen property would not be returned, even referring to the Armenians as enemies. On August

27, 2011, Turkey’s then Prime Minister and current President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
Ngo 4

announced by Decree that ​162 recognized minority foundations may apply to regain religious

properties declared and registered in 1936 and confiscated from them by the state or they could

seek compensation within 12 months. And although it seemed promising, it was yet another

action that seemed worthless. The figure of 162 seemed to pale in comparison to the thousands

of property stolen during the Armenian Genocide.

Word Count: 222

If the Armenian massacre was recognized as a genocide, the Armenian people would be

more likely to be able to reclaim lost properties. The status of a genocide would cause the

Turkish government to seem like the villian and the assets would be deemed unfairly achieved.

But the Turkish government itself continues to adamantly deny the label of a genocide, instead

listing the ‘incident’ as self-defense during a civil war. ​Other major countries—including the

United States, Israel, and Great Britain—have also declined to call the events a genocide, in

order to avoid harming their relations with Turkey (Suny).​ Turkey functions as a major trade

route across which, oil travels to world markets. The demerit against the Turkish government

could cut their access to trade with Turkey and could severely harm the countries’ economies.

Though the United States will not call it a genocide, President Woodrow Wilson “​established the

Near East Relief organization, which continued assisting Armenians, including thousands of

orphaned children, from 1915 to 1930” (Reed and Goodwin). From 1915 to 1930, the Near East

Relief organization managed to administer ​$117,000,000 of assistance. The assistance came in

clothes, food, and building materials. It set up refugee camps, clinics, hospitals, orphanages, and

centers for vocational training. In the words of American historian Howard M. Sachar, "quite

literally kept an entire nation alive." (Adalian)


Ngo 5

Word Count: 224

The effects of the Armenian Genocide, those lasting and not lasting, can provide insight

into the singularity or uniqueness of the massacre. Even now, Armenians are struggling to

reclaim their culture and reclaim their property. They have been at it for 100 years and yet still,

little progress has been made. The Turkish government still refused to admit that it was a

genocide, and has made it illegal to talk about with schools and print sources. Because of this,

the Turkish government still holds on to the property, as abandoned property taken from the

enemy. Armenians want the world to recognize the hate and discrimination that was done unto

them, and the hate and discrimination that is still received today. Though political bodies have

yet to agree with them, majority of scholars side with Armenians. The massacre of Armenians in

1915 was deliberate, it was planned, and it was a genocide.

Word Count: 151

Total Word Count: 1246


Ngo 6

Works Cited

Adalian, Rouben Paul. “Near East Relief and the Armenian Genocide.” ​Armenian National

Institute​, ​www.armenian-genocide.org/ner.html​. Accessed 27 Oct. 2018.

Hovhannisyan, Anush. “The process of the Armenians' wealth seizing in Turkey.” docplayer.net/

37409454-The-process-of-the-armenians-wealth-seizing-in-turkey.html. Accessed 12

Oct. 2018.

Kouymjian, Dickran. “Confiscation of Armenian Property and the Destruction of Armenian

Historical Monuments as a Manifestation of the Genocidal Process.” 23 Mar. 2015, ​julfap

roject.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/confiscation-of-armenian-tate-university-fresno.pdf​.

Accessed 12 Oct. 2018.

Sotirovic, Vladislav V. “The 1915−1916 Armenian Genocide: An Ideology, Course and

Consequences.” ​GlobalResearch,​ 13 Aug. 2015, www.globalresearch.ca/the-1915%E2%

88%921916-armenian-genocide-an-ideology-course-and-consequences/5454679.

Accessed 30 Sept. 2018.

Suny, Ronald Grigor. “Armenian Genocide.” ​Encyclopædia Britannica​, 17 Apr. 2018,

www.britannica.com/event/Armenian-Genocide. Accessed 30 Sept. 2018.

Potrebbero piacerti anche