What is in the name?...

As April 24th, the Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day, is fast approaching, it is appropriate to ruminate on the origins of the word 'genocide.' The word 'genocide' did not exist until 1944. It was invented by a lawyer named Raphael Lemkin, a Polish Jew who fled the Germans during World War II. Genos is the ancient Greek word for the 'tribe,' and -cide is a suffix that means killing. It was his term to describe the barbaric 'crime without a name.' His focus was on the idea that this 'crime' was the destruction of entire peoples, not just a number (even large) of human beings. When in 1921, Soghomon Tehlirian shot and killed Talaat Pasha, one of the masterminds of the Armenian genocide, in Berlin, Raphael Lemkin began his campaign to have genocide declared a crime. Allegedly Lemkin as a student asked his professor why Talaat Pasha had never been prosecuted. When he was told that there was no law that technically prohibited states from killing their own nationals, he was shocked, "It is a crime for Tehlirian to kill a man, but it is not a crime for his oppressor to kill more than a million men? That is most inconsistent."

It was Lemkin's efforts that made 'genocide' an international crime, codified first in Nuremberg indictments and later in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The definition of 'genocide' legally is very different from other crimes against humanity. 1) Genocide is a specific intent crime, unlike other crimes against humanity, which require only general intent. 2) Genocide requires an attack on specific protected groups-- racial, religious, national or ethnic. Crimes against humanity merely require an attack against civilian populations, even if these are not protected groups. 3) Genocide requires intent to destroy the protected group as 'such.' Lemkin's theory was that destruction of a group, such as a nation, is a profound loss to the humanity and thus, is a crime above all crimes.

"Nations are essential elements of the world community. The world represents only so much culture and intellectual vigor as are created by its component national groups. Essentially the idea of a nation signifies constructive cooperation and original contributions, based upon genuine traditions, genuine culture, and a well-developed national psychology. The destruction of a nation, therefore, results in the loss of its future contributions to the world." "Our whole heritage is a product of the contributions of all peoples. We can best understand this when we realize how impoverished our culture would be if the so-called inferior peoples doomed by Germany, such as the Jews, had not been permitted to create the Bible, or to give birth to an Einstein, a Spinoza; if the Poles had not had the opportunity to give to the world a Copernicus, a Chopin, a Curie; the Czechs, a Huss, a Dvorak; the Greeks, a Plato and a Socrates; the Russians, a Tolstoy and a Shostakovich." [Raphael Lemkin]

The distinctive characteristic of the 'genocide' from other international crimes is very important. It was the hatred of a specific group, 'Armenians', by Turks that fueled and drove the annihiliation of 1.5 million of Armenians. It was the targeting of a very specific group, 'Jews,' that resulted in the Jewish Holocaust. It was also the targeting of Tutsis by Hutus that was the force behind the Rwandan genocide. It is a very specific intent, to exterminate a very specific group of people. That factor elevates and distinguishes genocide from the rest. Why is it a 'crime' above all crimes? By its nature it sounds unbelievable. How can a group of people dare to even contemplate to exterminate another group of people! It assails the very essence of humanity... It is so antithetical to the moral 'code' upon which the humanity is established that one cannot comprehend it, nor tolerate it! Well, of course, killing of a single human being is by itself inhuman and beastly.  Wars are crimes by their very nature... In fact, under international law an armed conflict is acceptable only for self-defense! The philosophical distinction of the 'genocide' is in the idea that this crime is targeting a group of people for its destruction... The idea of wiping out an entire 'nation' is mentally and emotionally abhorring. That is the reason Lemkin was so driven to crown this crime with a special legal meaning. The goal was to make it an international crime-- its commision with severe legal consequences, i.e. prosecution by international tribunals. The magnitude of the act of extermination of a single group is such that indeed requires a special recognition in the eyes of the world community. It has received that special meaning and since 1945 the word 'genocide' has achieved a very special and elevated status in the hallways of international psyche... The crime itself preceded the legal term invented to describe it... Unfortunately, it took the world a Jewish Holocaust to coin and recognize the Armenian genocide... Alas, the awe that the very word instills in the minds of people, did not prevent occurrence of genocides afterwards...

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide: 

Article I: The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and punish.
Article II: ... genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
a) Killing members of the group;
b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The most forceful words to me, among others, are in Article I: 'prevent and punish'. That should be the goal!

For more read here.

Change is on the way?...

Promises for fundamental change in the United States policies and practice, specifically from those of Bush Administration, filled our hearts and minds not long ago... Inspired and excited we went to the polls...

The wisdom of the saying "Do not promise if you cannot deliver," has come back to haunt. President Obama has reneged on his promise to uphold long-held principles of human rights and has refused even to call the Armenian genocide by its name. (see here)

Has also not stood firm in his pledge to close the Guantanamo. By the very fact that he is supporting military commissions, he is following deeply-flawed policies of Bush. (see here)

Does change come half-way?

Celebrating 20th Anniversary

Yesterday we gathered at Glendale Hilton in celebration of the 20th Anniversary of the Armenian Bar Association. The association was founded in 1989 and has been a great vehicle for professional developement and enhancement of the Armenian bar.

It was nice to see how many non-Armenian members of the California bar also gathered with Armenians to celebrate this special event. The Hrant Dink Freedom Award was presented to Raffi K. Hovannisian, a great individual who has incessantly fought for freedom of Armenia and preservation of Armenian identity and heritage. He made an inspiring and soul-startling speech yesterday. "Freedom and fear are mutually exclusive. Speak the truth to power," were his words.

With a tumultous and tragic past, Armenians in America are not losing sight of the opportunities ahead, their deep responsibilities to the world and the Armenian community, and the great fortunes bestowed on them by the United States. They also are not losing hope that one day, some day, the truth will finally triumph and history will be reclaimed with respect to the Armenian genocide.

The past makes Armenians determined that they will not allow the same happen in the future. 'No more' and 'Enough is enough' have been the slogans behind the Armenian support and assistance for Nagorno Karabakh.

There come times in the history of nations when the fight is for life or death and survival is at issue. Armenians throughout their history constantly faced such moments but their survival, clenched with blood and in agony, inspired them to go on and prosper. Even today Armenians cling very closely to their identity fearful to lose it. Their grip has become tighter and tighter with each blow of history.


Perhaps the Armenian will to survive and commitment to truth will inspire other nations in the world to come together for peace and prosperity for all.

Arthur Meschian "All of it for you."

Glance at history

As a result of World War I and the Armenian genocide, the forceful exodus and extermination of Armenians from their historic lands brought up the issue of demarcation of Armenian-Turkish borders. From 1918 to 1923 five treaties determined the Armenian-Turkish border. The Sevr Treaty was signed on 10 August, 1920. It was followed by the Alexandropol Treaty (3 December, 1920), the Moscow Treaty (16 March, 1921), the Kars Treaty (13 October, 1921), and finally, the Lousanne Treaty (24 July, 1923). More notably are the Sevr Treaty and the Lousanne Treaty.

The most important point is that the Armenian-Turkish border was determined by the arbitration award of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson. Armenia was among the winners of World War I and put its signature under the Sevres Treaty. Wilsonian Armenia refers to the boundary configuration for a proposed Armenian state drawn up by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson for the Treaty of Sèvres.

The proposed state incorporated Erzurum, Bitlis, and Van Provinces, which were parts of the region referred to as Ottoman Armenia (also referred to as Western Armenia). This region was extended to the north, up to the west side of Trabzon Province to provide the Democratic Republic of Armenia with an outlet to the Black Sea at the port of Trabzon.

The Turkish War of Independence forced the former wartime Allies to return to the negotiating table prior to ratification of the Treaty. The parties signed and ratified the Treaty of Lausanne in 1923, which annulled the Sèvres Treaty, and also established the current borders of Turkey. This included the previously established eastern borders obtained by the Treaty of Alexandropol, signed on November 2, 1920, and the Treaty of Kars, signed on October 23, 1921 and ratified in Yerevan on September 11, 1922, the Treaty of Lausanne confirming them.

While the Sevres Treaty was not ratified, it remains valid. Today, the Republic of Armenia is still claiming that the Wilsonian Armenia as it is mapped out above is more reflective (still not fully) of historic Armenia than what was established by the Lousanne Treaty. In fact, the Lousanne Treaty was a political compromise among allies with no attention to the real grievances of Armenians against Turkey. Turkey's denial of the Armenian Genocide carries two-fold policy: reject the very occurrence of the genocide, and close any avenues for renegotiation of the border.

Bribing scholars?

One of my awesome commentators below brought this study/report conducted by Southern Poverty Law Center to my attention. The report insinuates on the 'bribery' by Turkey of certain American scholars to join them in the denial of the Armenian genocide. It suggests that academicians, not only politicians are vulnerable to injustice. Well, I would call these pseudo-academicians... But that is dangerous. Because, if scholars, who have such a great influence on the development of the civilization, are complicit in human rights violations, then there is really not much of a hope...

See here

April 24th

This statue entitled 'Mother Armenia' was erected in Yerevan, Armenia in 1967. Today, in remembrance of the innocent victims of the Armenian Genocide, this statue should symbolize the determination of the humanity never again to repeat the history!!! The Mother will be a vigilant guard for our safety, dignity, and peace for all times...

Moment of silence

April 24th is the Remembrance Day for the Armenian Genocide. Join me in this solemn duty not only for all Armenians all around the world, but for all of humanity!

A moment of silence is sometimes required to fill the halls of human conscience-- often slumbering and deaf...

Click here for Arthur Meschian

Turkey and EU

Turkey has long worked to join the European Union. It is a candidate country. But most Europeans, as suggested by studies and analysis, are not willing to embrace Turkey into their Union for a host of reasons. First, culture and religion. While Turkey strives to be a secular state, its Constitution is strongly cultural in enshrining extreme nationalism, Ata-Turk. Culture is the strongest link to religion. Given the recent wave of Islamic extremism, Europeans are expressing deep concerns over Turkey's cultural heritage. Second, very importantly, the Turkish denial of the Armenian Genocide and the historic battle with Greece over Cyprus is really disappointing to many Europeans, especially Austria, Germany and France (here). Jacques Chirac, the former French President, repeatedly mentioned this issue when faced with Turkey's bid for the membership. (here) While UK is the most optimistic, given US-Turkish relations and the NATO membership, most Europeans are simply pessimistic. Given Germany's full acknowledgment of its past atrocities and the Jewish Holocaust, Turkish denial seems so immoral to most conscientious Europeans.

The studies have in fact shown that Europeans are much more willing to embrace Russia into the EU, which is elevating and inspiring for many Russians, who for decades felt deprived of any good-will on part of Western European countries. The Cold War legacy and Western criticism of Putin's policies are still a challenge for this process. But Russians seem very optimistic that they will overcome those. (here)

Another issue must be mentioned. It is not only cultural and ideological concerns that dominate in the minds of Europeans. The influx of immigrants from Islamic countries and the economic recession in Europe make Europeans (like Americans) resist immigrants and any more members joining EU. After all, joining the EU would mean fully taking part of the economic advantages.

Promise kept alive

The ANCA (Armenian National Committee of America) has just released the news that Hillary Clinton will co-sponsor the Armenian Genocide Resolution bill. Barack Obama has also expressed his intent to give careful consideration to the bill. In fact, listening to his response, it seems, he cannot give a full commitment yet by saying, 'I will check with my staff.' Here

So, Hillary (and potentially Obama) are in it for the Armenian vote, knowing how intensely the American Armenians care about this. The question is whether they will act on their promises if elected as President.

The Case of Armenian Genocide

A good book on the Armenian genocide is “The Case of Misak Torlakian” by Vartkes Yeghiayan and Ara Arabyan (here). Misak Torlakian, an Armenian Ottoman subject, was tried by the British Military Court on August 11, 1921 on charge of murdering the ex-minister of interior of Azerbaijan. Through the court case, through witness accounts, the dark and unbelievable picture of the Armenian genocide is revealed. Another famous case similar to this was the case of Soghomon Tehlirian.

For those interested to learn more about the Armenian genocide, I would recommend using British and German sources, in addition to the Armenian ones. Since Turkey has been vigilantly trying to rewrite history in its attempts to justify denial, it is important whose sources we are using to get to the truth. While history cannot be rewritten in the abstract, in reality the new generations in Turkey and Azerbaijan have been getting a completely distorted ‘rewritten’ history of the Genocide. They are even trying to sell to the world their ‘version.’

As far as the US-Turkey relationship that has been affecting the issue of recognition of the Armenian genocide in a major way, I would really call it a ‘necessity’, not an alliance. While Turkey is a member of the NATO, the US could never really consider Turkey its ‘ally’ the same way as it would consider Great Britain, for example. But since the US interests in the Middle East are serious, Turkey for a while will be a necessity. But time is soon approaching that the US will not have to ‘need’ or ‘depend’ on Turkey.

Of course, the role of Russia is of major importance here. Russian-Turkish relations have a long history of animosity. Due to the Cold War, the military bases of the US were in Turkey to countermand the perceived expansionism of the Soviet Union. To this day, Russia uses the Caucasus as a buffer against Turkey. Thence the location of Armenia is strategically important to Russia. While the US and Russia have their historic tendency to compete for world hegemony, Turkey will be ‘used’ by the US as a buffer against Russia. But again this is not necessarily settled.

World politics is constantly shifting and in flux. Therefore, today’s friends are tomorrow’s foes. I only wish justice prevailed in this process more often than it does.

History can neither be erased nor rewritten...

The current protests in Turkey here regarding the Armenian Genocide vote are puzzling, besides the fact that they are absolutely abhorring. How can Turkey even pose itself a civilized nation, denying its past atrocities? How can the people living in Turkey, intelligentsia and educated people, not condemn what their ancestors did to the Armenians? How can they not label what happened as a Genocide? How do they explain the 'events' and official proclamations that energized and gave fuel to the Genocide... How do they explain the killing of almost 2 million of Armenians, most of whom were innocent civilians... How do they explain the signature of genocidaires that was used later, very successfully, by the Nazis, who were encouraged by the silence of the world over the first 20th century genocide... The historical chronicle is very alive and cannot be erased... The Nazi leaders had this chronicle fresh in their minds, when justified their actions over the Jews...

Puzzling as these protests are, they show how the humanity has become distorted, demoralized and really mutilated by injustice and political blackmail. Turkey is using whatever political cards it has to stop America from recognizing the Genocide.. All right. Let America not recognize it and let America succumb to this blackmail (because of its realpolitik national interests). What will Turkey accomplish by that? Temporary support of its denial of the Genocide? Alliance with the US? Will that gain Turkey a favorable position in the European Union? In the world? Turkey will become a 'rogue nation' for the rest of its existence... It is for the US to determine which nations it should ally itself-- for its image and future as a world leader...

Will justice prevail?

Sometimes we get good news! The House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted the resolution on Armenian Genocide by 27 to 21 vote (here and here). This is after Bush repeatedly alarmed them not to do so! Unbelievable and truly unacceptable that to this day there is still doubt as to whether the US should fully admit the fact of the Genocide. This is not about human rights any longer! This is about history and the idea of how history can get distorted miserably... Moreover, this is about humanity understanding ramifications of denying historical realities... and accepting atrocities as natural events, not punishable and without consequences... How can Turkey still maintain its position about the Genocide in the face of history, still alive in the victims and their children... This is not only immoral, but reprehensible... I do believe, that even if man-made justice does not prevail, there is something always higher than the humanity-- the Universal Will will have its judgment and its higher justice will prevail... Sooner or later, will prevail...

On blogging and my blog

Friends and family have asked me, what is the point of my blog when hardly anyone reads it and I don't get paid for it... First, there are many blogs out there. I would compare blogging to newspapers or magazines/journals. Generally, they are not scholarship, but they do give the news, comments, often history... I will say that my blog is not focused on the news so much, as on thinking... I can say, my blog is a 'thinking blog.' I always like to think, think long, think hard and then express my deepest thoughts, usually in writing, sometimes in speeches... Even in my closing arguments as a trial lawyer, I try to connect my client's case to the universe... I love closing arguments because that is my opportunity to affect jurors and share my inner world with them.

As an attorney I have learned to structure my thoughts, because the law is a disciplined profession, with a rigid format. Liberal arts thinking is very different. Yet, I do think the law and legal concepts must be approached in an interdisciplinary way. Every legal issue receives a different light depending on what angle you take. I simply do not relate to lawyers who have not read the world classics, philosophy and who do not know history, political science, sociology, psychology, etc. Their horizon is simply too limited, regardless of what type of lawyers they are... To me they are technicians in their vocation... (I hope, I am not being too judgmental). But lawyering is a profession that requires much more than technical expertise.

So, now you know why I am blogging. It is for my inner satisfaction and sometimes frustration (when I cannot fully express what I think...) "I think, therefore I exist." (Descartes)

Finally, I should add that the very fact that my blog is dedicated to the memory of the Armenian Genocide and generally human rights, inspires me every day to write on this blog. Both my grandfathers were victims and miraculous survivors of the Armenian Genocide in Turkey. They passed away in the Soviet Armenia when I was a child, but the memory of the genocide did not die with them and will never die as long as the world is longing for peace...

White House Withdraws Hoagland Nomination...

The White House has wisely withdrawn the nomination of Dick Hoagland as US ambassador to Armenia. Click here. It was to be done, because the denier of the Armenian Genocide could not conceivably be welcome in Armenia as a representative of the US. But this followed only after the efforts of the ANCA (Armenian National Committee of America) and Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Rep Adam Schiff (D-CA). It is really ironic that the debate about whether there was an Armenian genocide is still continuing in the US politics. The political interests of the US in the Middle East and the desire not to alienate Turkey as a satellite are paramount in this debate. However, recognition of a historical reality, especially of such a magnitude as a genocide, is a moral duty of every nation, regarldess of the political expediency... Without this, the history will repeat itself and peace will turn into a dream...

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

In the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the UN General Assembly enacted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted by the Resolution 260 (III)A on December 9, 1948.
Article 1 of the Convention confirms:
"that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war is a crime under international law which they [the contracting parties]undertake to prevent and to punish."

Article 2 defines genocide as:
"any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article_4 furthermore states:
"Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals."

This Convention makes moot many of the arguments of Turkey in their justification of denial of the Armenian genocide in 1915. The Turkish government has constantly argued that the acts committed against Armenians were justified because they were during World War I and Turkey had to defend itself against 'rebellious Armenians.' First, factually it is a complete falsity. Did a huge Turkish population have to defend itself by intentionally exterminating a minority-- innocent Armenian women, children, and the elderly? The argument is so preposterous that cannot even be heard... Anyone who knows a little bit of history behind the genocide will laugh at it. In addition, the Convention clearly stipulates that there is no justification for genocide whether it is committed in time of peace or in time of war.
Second, Turkey has argued that the Ottoman empire did not authorize these acts and they were committed by the riffraff in the streets. Thus, it argues that these acts were not committed under color of law. This argument is also a factual fallacy because the history shows quite the opposite, that in fact the genocide was masterminded, organized and authorized by the public officials. But even if it this argument were true, it is not acceptable because of Article 4, which clearly confirms that private individuals can be found responsible for the acts of genocide, even if they were not acting under color of law.

Turkey has been desperately trying to rewind the tape, erase it and record a new history on the video of the new generations. But it forgets that the historical time machine does not go back, only forward and history cannot be erased.