Armenians Faced Systematic Massacre, More Commonly Known as Genocide

I am writing to express my displeasure with the clarification that appeared on the second page of last Wednesday's edition of The Daily Californian. The note attempted to defend the author and the editor's use of the word alleged to describe the Armenian Genocide, stating that when "referring to incidents or crimes that are in dispute ... the preferred word choice is 'alleged.'" The clarification continued by saying that the word alleged was selected to "present an accurate, fair presentation of a documented dispute."

The Armenian Genocide is clearly disputed, but The Daily Californian has failed to acknowledge the source of the dispute: the successors of the genocide's perpetrators. The Turkish government's refusal to accept the crimes of the Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire is based not on any corroborated evidence, but on half-truths and reinterpretations of events. The murders of nearly all the Armenian men at this time are justified as acts of war - a defense of the Ottoman state from revolutionaries. Forced marches of women, children and the elderly through the Syrian desert without food or water is presented as attempts to relocate them to safer areas. No Turkish official will acknowledge the torture, rape and murder of the innocent civilians at the hands of Ottoman troops.

Countless sources from the time document the events as nothing short of systematic, including the memoirs of Henry Morganthau, U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Even Germany, the Ottoman Empire's ally during the war, recently acknowledged the Armenian Genocide and its own guilt in allowing it to happen. Most importantly, there are the thousands of elderly survivors, many of whom live in California, who can recount the personal horrors they experienced. The question then arises, "If the Armenian Genocide is so well documented, then why is it not universally accepted?" The answer is politics and money.

The United States, which openly acknowledged the genocide and called for reparations during the war, today is afraid to offend Turkey because it serves as a strategic military site connecting U.S. forces to the Mediterranean Sea and the Middle East. The Turkish government has hired high-profile lobbyists to fight any national or state commemoration of the genocide and to block aid to an impoverished Armenia. It is no secret that the Turkish government has attempted to influence higher education, including UC Berkeley, and propagate its lies through large endowments for the establishment of department chairs.

The only reasonable conclusion is that the writer and the editor in charge are both ignorant about the genocide and the continuous fight by Armenians around the world for the recognition of truth over the power of money. Had either of these journalists bothered to educate themselves on the issue, then there would be no need for this embarrassing and painful ordeal. The fact that the Turkish government continues to dispute the genocide does not justify the use of the word alleged. Neo-Nazis dispute the occurrence of the Jewish Holocaust, claiming it is part of an international conspiracy. However, no self-respecting newspaper, including the Daily Cal, would ever label it as alleged. While the Daily Cal strives "to retain its tradition of objective reporting," it also has a duty to present the truth. By inserting the word alleged three times in Matt Bowman's April 10 news brief, the Daily Cal failed on both counts, as it added credence to the Turkish claim and hindered the pursuit of truth.

Tags: