Why armenians were targeted in genocide

The majority of the Armenians in Constantinople, the capital city, were spared deportation. In , however, the Young Turk regime took the war into the Caucasus, where approximately 1,, Armenians lived under Russian dominion. Ottoman forces advancing through East Armenia and Azerbaijan here too engaged in systematic massacres. The expulsions and massacres carried by the Nationalist Turks between and added tens of thousands of more victims.

By the entire landmass of Asia Minor and historic West Armenia had been expunged of its Armenian population. The destruction of the Armenian communities in this part of the world was total. Were there witnesses to the Armenian Genocide? There were many witnesses to the Armenian Genocide.

Although the Young Turk government took precautions and imposed restrictions on reporting and photographing, there were lots of foreigners in the Ottoman Empire who witnessed the deportations. Foremost among them were U. They were first to send news to the outside world about the unfolding genocide. Some of their reports made headline news in the American and Western media. Also reporting on the atrocities committed against the Armenians were many German eyewitnesses.

The Germans were allies of the Turks in W. Numerous German officers held important military assignments in the Ottoman Empire.

Some among them condoned the Young Turk policy. Others confidentially reported to their superiors in Germany about the slaughter of the Armenian civilian population. Many Russians saw for themselves the devastation wreaked upon the Armenian communities when the Russian Army occupied parts of Anatolia.

Many Arabs in Syria where most of the deportees were sent saw for themselves the appalling condition to which the Armenian survivors had been reduced. Lastly, many Turkish officials were witnesses as participants in the Armenian Genocide. A number of them gave testimony under oath during the post-war tribunals convened to try the Young Turk conspirators who organized the Armenian Genocide. What was the response of the international community to the Armenian Genocide?

The international community condemned the Armenian Genocide. In May , Great Britain, France, and Russia advised the Young Turk leaders that they would be held personally responsible for this crime against humanity.

There was a strong public outcry in the United States against the mistreatment of the Armenians. At the end of the war, the Allied victors demanded that the Ottoman government prosecute the Young Turks accused of wartime crimes.

Relief efforts were also mounted to save "the starving Armenians. On the other hand, despite the moral outrage of the international community, no strong actions were taken against the Ottoman Empire either to sanction its brutal policies or to salvage the Armenian people from the grip of extermination. Moreover, no steps were taken to require the postwar Turkish governments to make restitution to the Armenian people for their immense material and human losses.

They were later executed. Armenians in the Ottoman army were disarmed and killed. Armenian property was confiscated. Several senior Ottoman officials were put on trial in Turkey in in connection with the atrocities. A local governor, Mehmed Kemal, was found guilty and hanged for the mass killing of Armenians in the central Anatolian district of Yozgat. The Young Turks' top triumvirate - the "Three Pashas" - had already fled abroad. They were sentenced to death in absentia.

Historians have questioned the judicial procedures at these trials, the quality of the evidence presented and the degree to which the Turkish authorities may have wished to appease the victorious Allies.

Argentina, Brazil, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia and Uruguay are among the more than 20 other countries which have formally recognised genocide against the Armenians. In some cases the recognition has come in parliament resolutions, not from governments. Among the most significant was that of the US Congress in US governments had held back for decades, partly because Turkey is the second-biggest military power in Nato and strategically vital for the West.

The US hosts the largest Armenian diaspora after Russia, estimated at more than a million. Turkey reacted angrily after Pope Francis called it "the first genocide of the 20th Century" in the run-up to the centenary commemorations. Turkey recalled its Vatican ambassador and accused the Pope of having "discriminated about people's suffering". The Pope "overlooked atrocities that Turks and Muslims suffered in World War One and only highlighted the Christian suffering, especially that of the Armenian people", the Turkish foreign ministry said.

France has a large Armenian diaspora and since it has officially commemorated "the Armenian genocide" on 24 April, including a ceremony at a Paris monument. The killings are regarded as the seminal event of modern Armenian history, binding the diaspora together. Armenians are one of the world's most dispersed peoples.

In Turkey, public debate on the issue has been stifled. Article of the penal code, on "insulting Turkishness", has been used to prosecute prominent writers who highlight the mass killings of Armenians.

A teenage ultra-nationalist, Ogun Samast, was jailed for nearly 23 years in July for murdering Dink, a Turkish-Armenian who edited a bilingual newspaper. And in March two Turkish ex-police chiefs were jailed for life over the murder of Dink. The European Union has said Turkish acceptance of the Armenian genocide is not a condition for Turkey's entry into the bloc.

Yes - they have no official diplomatic ties. After decades of hostility there was a slight thaw, but since there has been no real rapprochement.

One of the most effective ways to carry out this goal was by suppressing the ethnic minorities living within their borders to ensure no further uprisings, and to send a message to the newly autocratic peoples that their recently gained freedom would not last for long.

These radical Muslim leaders found the perfect group to send the message in the Armenian population within Turkey, a population accustomed to maltreatment, and an economically successful ethnic and religious minority. During the Balkan War, many Armenians in the eastern reaches of the Empire had, in fact, joined forces with the Balkan uprisers and the Russians, much to the dismay of the Turkish government Case.

After the humiliating defeat at the hands of their former subjects, the Turks decided to round up the Armenians from these provinces, and relocate them into concentration camps. Naturally, they were subject to innumerable and unimaginable abuses such as murder, rape, beatings, and food deprivation throughout the course of the journey, in what was the beginning of the massacre. As previously mentioned, the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire at the time was quite wealthy, which is not a problem in and of itself, but became an issue because the Turkish population, and the government itself, were far from financially secure.

Working as craftsmen and farmers, Armenians paid a lot of taxes to the Empire. To make matters worse, the first several years of World War I had been a complete disaster for the Ottoman Empire, and the new Young Turk government was running out of the funds needed to wage war. In light of this, it is reasonable to assume that part of the reason for the genocide was to acquire the wealth, which had been amassed by the Armenians Armenian.

The Armenian populations in Tiflis and Baku controlled the majority of the local wealth—wealth which was desperately needed both by the Islamic civilians of the area, as well as the Young Turk government.

Aside from the financial struggles in the war, the fighting itself was going poorly, and the Armenians caught the blame for this as well. As the government continued to turn its people against the Armenians, they portrayed the minority as the reason for the militaristic defeats, claiming that they were being undermined from within.

To back up this claim, and to prevent any resistance to the impending assault, the Turkish government disarmed all of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. Another cause for the persecution of Armenians between and was the religious tension created by the fact that they were a large group of Christians living under the rule of an Islamic nation. The Ottoman and Seljuk Empires had a unique geopolitical location in that they were located on the border between the Islamic Middle East and the Christian eastern Europe.

The two empires had always viewed themselves as guardians of the Islamic faith, and believed it was their role to spread the Islamic faith throughout their territories. Furthermore, Armenia was not simply a Christian nation, but in the 4th century A. While the level of religious freedom and tolerance within the Ottoman and Seljuk Empires had fluctuated over the years, the Young Turks wanted to establish Islamic dominance throughout the region more so than any of the leading groups before them.

However, it is important to note that many Islamic religious leaders protested the deportation and execution of the Armenians, and later testified on behalf of the persecuted minority during war crime trials. Despite this, it would be difficult to deny that religious animosity, of which the region has had an extensive history, played a major role in the events which were to unfold between and With the main causes for the genocide having been examined, it is time to investigate the persecution itself.

In the year , there were approximately 1. By the end of the persecution in , as many as 1. It is widely accepted that the first several assaults upon the Armenians were carried out by civilians; the government authorities and troops also contributed to the destruction as the persecution blossomed.

Armenians were killed in all sorts of horrific ways, but the vast majority died during the forced marches, during which the Ottoman military and civilians alike herded Armenians, sometimes entire towns at a time, and simply marched them into the desert without resources and left them there to perish.

They are hungry, they are thirsty, they are cold in the night air. They have no place to rest. They cannot freely move their bowels. They are suffering. They are visualizing the unbearable journey of the next day and its horrors, and they are going mad. The young girls and prettier women are being snatched away, and zaptiye Turkish soldiers satisfy their lusts on them. There are secret murders. Those who were lucky enough to survive had to simply continue walking until, and if, they reached the border and safety.

Very few were this lucky. The situation only worsened with the Treaty of Brest Litovsk, in which the Russians gave many of their southern provinces to the Ottoman Empire in exchange for peace. This spelled doom for the thousands of Armenians who had fled the Ottoman Empire to the safety of Russia.

The Ottoman Turks, with thousands of new Armenians within their borders, were reinvigorated in their efforts to eradicate the Armenians, especially because a large number of them had been attempting to set up an independent state in the formerly Russian land.

Enraged, the Turks promptly smashed this fledgling group with more vigor and tenacity than had been seen at any other time during the genocide. The effects of this horrific event can be seen throughout history, and are still felt today. Hitler followed the Young Turks blueprint almost exactly, dehumanizing and scapegoating an economically successful racial and religious minority during a time of crisis.

Germany, just like the Ottoman Turks, was reeling after having suffered a military defeat in World War I, and was attempting to regain lost prestige. Germany, too, was struggling economically, and had a new and unstable government after Kaiser Wilhelm had abdicated, similar to the situation with the Sultan in the Ottoman Empire. A wealthy ethnic and religious minority was humiliating to the ruling race in Germany, just as the Armenians were to the Turks before the genocide.

Had the tragedy in the Ottoman Empire been fully understood throughout the global community, then perhaps the leaders of the world in the s would have seen the warning signs, and prevented such a tragedy from happening again. This view believes that the Turks were justified in their actions against the Armenians, and argue that very few were actually killed, rather, that they were simply deported from their homeland.

Others concede that the Armenians did suffer great losses, but refuse to accept the fact that the atrocities were carried out by the Ottoman Empire and its military. Instead, they suggest that the Armenians were victims of pillaging Kurds who were in the area at the time Case.

That being said, the belief that the events of through were in fact genocidal in nature is held widely throughout the international community among scholars.