Advertisement

Counterinsurgency as Genocidal Intent: From the Ottoman Christians to the Bosnian Muslims

  • Hannibal Travis
Part of the Palgrave Studies in the History of Genocide book series (PSHG)

Abstract

According to publications and statements by the Turkish government, the question of genocide in the late Ottoman Empire is ultimately a question of intent. The Turkish Foreign Ministry, as well as many contemporary Turkish and US-based scholars, argues that Ottoman imperial leaders lacked genocidal intent during the First World War and its aftermath because Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks rebelled against the government, killed Turkish and Kurdish civilians, and survived in some areas of the empire, including Constantinople, Smyrna, Aleppo and Mosul. These factors allegedly indicate an intention on the part of Ottoman officials to engage in military operations rather than to target civilian communities for destruction.

Keywords

International Criminal Appeal Chamber Trial Chamber International Tribunal Joint Criminal Enterprise 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 2.
    Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2007) The Armenian Allegation of Genocide: The Issue and the Facts, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/the-armenian-allegationof-genocide-the-issue-and-the-facts.en.mfa;Google Scholar
  2. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2011) Questions, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/questions.en.mfa;Google Scholar
  3. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Embassy in Washington (2007) What Others Are Saying About the Armenian Issue, http://web.archive.org/web/20120727221028/http://vasington.be.mfa.gov.tr/ShowInfoNotes.aspx?ID=121351;Google Scholar
  4. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Center for Strategic Research (2007) The Armenian Genocide? Facts and Figures, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/DISPOLITIKA/ErmeniIddialari/ArmenianGenocideFactsandFigures Revised.pdf;Google Scholar
  5. Turkish Armed Forces, Turkish General Staff [Türk Silahli Kuwetleri: Genelkurmay Başkanliği] (2005) [Ermeni Sorunu], http://web.archive.org/web/20050228091658/http://www.tsk.mil.tr/uluslararasi/ermenisorunu.htm.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    J. Salt (2014) ‘Armenians and Syria: 1915 and 2013’, AVIM Report No. 1, p. 6.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    C. Bassiouni (2012) Introduction to International Criminal Law (2nd rev. edn.) (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff ), pp. 643–4.Google Scholar
  8. 38.
    V. N. Dadrian (1998) ‘The Historical and Legal Interconnections Between the Armenian Genocide and the Jewish Holocaust: From Impunity to Retributive Justice’, Yale Journal of International Law, Vol. 23 (2): 503–59;Google Scholar
  9. M. MacMillan (2007) Paris 1919: Six Months that Changed the World ( New York: Random House ), pp. 159–60, 171, 223 and 481;Google Scholar
  10. R. Melson (1992) Revolution and Genocide: On the Origins of the Armenian Genocide ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press ), p. 139.Google Scholar
  11. 44.
    V. Dadrian (1994) ‘Documentation of the Armenian Genocide in German and Austrian Sources’, in I. Charny (ed.), The Widening Circle of Genocide: Genocide, A Critical Bibliographic Review ( New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers ), p. 109.Google Scholar
  12. 50.
    Quoted in V. Dadrian (1996) German Responsibility in the Armenian Genocide: A Review of the Historical Evidence of German Complicity ( Watertown: Blue Crane ), p. 60.Google Scholar
  13. 61.
    G. Acquaviva, M. Fan and A. Whiting (2011) International Criminal Law: Cases and Commentary ( Oxford: Oxford University Press ), pp. 214–15, citing from Jelisic´ Appeals Judgement. See Chapter 4, Robertson, on specific intent.Google Scholar
  14. 64.
    Morgenthau (1918), pp. 333–5. See also McCarthy et al. (1996); E. Erickson (2013) Ottomans and Armenians: A Study in Counterinsurgency ( New York: Palgrave Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 65.
    R. Lemkin (2008) Raphael Lemkin’s Dossier on the Armenian Genocide ( Glendale, CA: Center for Armenian Remembrance ), pp. 2–5.Google Scholar
  16. 66.
    F. D. Greene (1985) The Armenian Crisis in Turkey: The Massacre of 1894, its Antecedents and Significance ( New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons ), pp. 7, and 11–15.Google Scholar
  17. 67.
    A. Khosroeva (2007) ‘The Assyrian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire and Adjacent Territories’, in R. G. Hovannisian (ed.) The Armenian Genocide: Cultural and Ethical Legacies ( New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers ), p. 268.Google Scholar
  18. 68.
    Quoted in T. Hofmann (2012) ‘The Genocide of the Christians in the Late Ottoman Period, 1912–1922’, in G. N. Shirinian (ed.) The Asia Minor Catastrophe and the Ottoman Greek Genocide: Essays on Asia Minor, Pontos, and Eastern Thrace, 1912–1923 ( Bloomington, IN: The Asia Minor and Hellenic Research Council, Inc. ), p. 45.Google Scholar
  19. 74.
    V. N. Dadrian (2003) The History of the Armenian Genocide: Ethnic Conflict from the Balkans to Anatolia to the Caucasus ( 4th edn.) (New York: Berghahn Books ), p. 203.Google Scholar
  20. 82.
    G. Lewy (2005) The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide ( Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press ), p. 250.Google Scholar
  21. 84.
    Rummel (1998). See also J. McCarthy (2014) The Ottoman Turks: An Introductory History to 1923 ( London: Routledge ), pp. 364, and 380;Google Scholar
  22. J. McCarthy (2010) The Turk in America: The Creation of an Enduring Prejudice ( Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press ), pp. 222–3. See Chapter 2, Bijak and Lubman, for a review of McCarthy’s death toll estimates.Google Scholar
  23. 85.
    B. Clark (2006) Twice a Stranger: The Mass Expulsions that Forged Modern Greece and Turkey ( Cambridge: Harvard University Press ), p. 13.Google Scholar
  24. 86.
    S. Yee (2004) ‘The Tu Quoque Argument as a Defence to International Crimes, Prosecution or Punishment’, Chinese Journal of International Law, Vol. 3 (1): 103–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 87.
    T. Taylor (1970) Nuremberg and Vietnam: An American Tragedy ( Chicago, IL: Quadrangle Books ), pp. 140–1.Google Scholar
  26. 88.
    E. Markusen and D. Kopf (2010) ‘Was It Genocidal?’, in I. Primoratz (ed.) Terror from the Sky: The Bombing of German Cities in World War II ( New York: Berghahn Books ), p. 167.Google Scholar
  27. 90.
    R. J. Rummel (1994) Death by Government ( New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers ), p. 114.Google Scholar
  28. 93.
    United Nations War Crimes Commission (1948), Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals: Four Genocide Trials ( New York: Howard Fertig Publications ), pp. 21–39, 62–3, 90–1 and 125–37;Google Scholar
  29. H. Travis (2012) ‘On the Original Understanding of the Crime of Genocide’, Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal, Vol. 7 (1): 30–52, (31 and 36). See alsoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. W. A. Schabas (2009), Genocide in International Law: The Crime of Crimes ( Oxford: Oxford University Press ), pp. 159–66, and 388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 95.
    S. T. Katz (2009) ‘The Uniqueness of the Holocaust: The Historical Dimension’, in A. Rosenbaum (ed.) Is the Holocaust Unique? Perspectives on Comparative Genocide ( 3rd edn.) (Boulder, CO: Westview Press ), pp. 68–73;Google Scholar
  32. B. Lewis (2014) Notes on a Century: Reflections of a Middle East Historian ( London: Penguin ), pp. 205, and 209–10.Google Scholar
  33. 97.
    Trial of the War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Nuremberg, October 1946–April 1949, Germany (Territory under Allied occupation, 1945–1955: U.S. Zone), Vol. 14, Case 11: U.S. v. von Weizsaecker (Ministries case) (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1949), p. 241. See also R. Ainsztein (1974) Jewish Resistance in Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe: With a Historical Survey of the Jew as Fighter and Soldier in the Diaspora ( New York: Barnes and Noble Books);Google Scholar
  34. M. Grubsztein and M. M. Kohn (eds) (1972) Jewish Resistance During the Holocaust: Proceedings of the Conference on Manifestations of Jewish Resistance, Jerusalem, April 7–11, 1968 ( Jerusalem: Yad Vashem ), p. 222;Google Scholar
  35. S. B. Bowman (2009) ‘Freedom or Death’, in S. B. Bowman (ed.) The Agony of Greek Jews, 1940–1945 ( Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press );CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Y. D. Stefanidis (1992) ‘Macedonia in the 1940s’, in I. Hassiotis and I. Koliopoulos (eds) Modern and Contemporary Macedonia, Volume II ( Thessaloniki: Paratiritis and Papazisis ), pp. 104–37;Google Scholar
  37. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2008) Armed Jewish Resistance: Partisans, http://www.ushmm.org.Google Scholar
  38. 98.
    Ankara’s support of Lewy’s work is developed in J. A. Kéchichian (2007) ‘A Response to Michael Gunter’s Review of the Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide (IJMES Vol. 38(4) (2006): 598–601), International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 39(3): 509–12 (510).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 99.
    A. Jones (2004) ‘Introduction: History and Complicity’ in A. Jones (ed.) Genocide, War Crimes and the West: History and Complicity ( London: Zed Books ), pp. 4–25.Google Scholar
  40. 100.
    M. Shaw (2007b) ‘The General Hybridity of War and Genocide’, Journal of Genocide Research, Vol. 9 (3): 461–73;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. M. Shaw (2007a) What is Genocide? ( Cambridge: Polity Press ), p. 24.Google Scholar
  42. 101.
    M. Shaw (2011) ‘From Comparative to International Genocide Studies: The International Production of Genocide in Twentieth-Century Europe’, European Journal of International Relations (May): 1–24.Google Scholar
  43. 102.
    R. Lemarchand (2011) ‘Introduction’ in R. Lemarchand (ed.) (2011) Forgotten Genocides: Oblivion, Denial, and Memory ( Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press ), p. 9.Google Scholar
  44. 103.
    P. Bartrop (2002) ‘The Relationship between War and Genocide in the Twentieth Century: A Consideration’, Journal of Genocide Research, Vol. 4 (4): 519–32 (524) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 104.
    Hague Convention 1899; Hague Convention 1907, Annex: Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague Regulations);Google Scholar
  46. A. M. de Brouwer (2005) Supranational Criminal Prosecution of Sexual Violence: The ICC and the Practice of the ICTY and the ICTR ( Amsterdam: Intersentia ), p. 199;Google Scholar
  47. J. Henckaerts (1995) Mass Expulsion in Modern International Law and Practice ( Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff ), p. 151;Google Scholar
  48. L. Moir (2009) ‘Conduct of Hostilities–War Crimes’, in J. Doria, H. Gasser and M. Cherif Bassiouni (eds) The Legal Regime of the International Criminal Court: Essays in Honour of Igor Blishchenko ( Leiden: Brill ), pp. 518, 521 and 526; Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija, Case No. IT-95–17/1, Appeals Chamber, Judgement (21 July 2000), para. 210.Google Scholar
  49. 105.
    Travis (2012), p. 35, citing 7 UN GAOR, 3rd sess., Part 1, Summary Records of Meetings 21 September–10 December 1948, Seventy-Fifth Meeting, U.N. Doc. No. A/C.6/SR.75 (15 October 1948), pp. 115–16; Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96–4-T, Trial Chamber I, Judgement (2 September 1998), paras. 502–4; Blagojevic´ Trial Judgement, paras. 607–9; S. Gorove (1951) ‘The Problem of “Mental Harm” in the Genocide Convention’, Washington University Law Quarterly, Vol. 1951 (2): 174–80 (175) Jones (2010), pp. 13–14, citingGoogle Scholar
  50. S. R. Ratner and J. Abrams (2001), Accountability for Human Rights Atrocities in International Law: Beyond the Nuremberg Legacy ( 2nd edn.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press ), pp. 30–2.Google Scholar
  51. 106.
    R. Lemkin (1950) The Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, unpublished manuscript (New York Public Library Raphael Lemkin Papers Collection), p. 2.Google Scholar
  52. 110.
    International Criminal Court, Elements of Crimes, Art. 6(b), note 4, ICCASP/1/3 ( September 2002 ). See also, R. Cryer, H. Friman, D. Robinson and E. Wilmshurst (2010) An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ), p. 215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 112.
    K. Wergen (2014) ‘Problematic Precedents: The Conflicting Legacies in the Genocide Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia’, Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 54(2): 463–500 (470).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Hannibal Travis 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hannibal Travis
    • 1
  1. 1.Florida International University College of LawUSA

Personalised recommendations