It is widely recognized that World War I and II brought immense suffering to humanity. While World War II brought about even greater devastation than the first, the measures implemented in its aftermath may have effectively safeguarded Western states from internal conflicts. But today, Zionists are committing the same genocide against Muslims as Adolf Hitler did against Jews.
The World Wars were full of examinations for all nations. Millions of people lost their lives in the war between Western states, primarily in Russia, Anatolia, the Caucasus, the Balkans and the deserts of Arabia.
Reportedly, 250,000 Ottoman soldiers met their martyrdom solely on the Çanakkale front. Outside of conventional warfare in the Balkans, the number of Muslims killed by Bulgarian gangs is estimated to be 1 million.
Ironically, during World War I, Germany and Türkiye jointly decided to implement measures against the Armenians, including deportation. Indeed, the fact that the Chief of General Staff of the Ottoman state at that time was a German general underscores the substantial role played by Germany as decision-makers, leaders and administrators during the conflict.
Over the years, there has been a strange debate in the German parliament. They are also trying to claim genocide regarding the deportation of Armenians that they decided and planned at executive levels, including as the Chief of General Staff.
All nations confront their history, problems or losses. However, the Ottoman Empire, since it comes from an imperial culture, does not highlight its weaknesses and talks constantly about the millions it lost.
Armenia was different from all other states; they had no other stories in their history to create a national identity.
There is a renowned war painting of Armenians. This painting is famous in Iran and Europe as well. This historical narrative recounts the Armenians’ failed uprising against the Persians, ultimately resulting in its suppression. And they see even this defeat as a significant beginning to create their own identity.
During our visit to Armenia with the Eastern Conference group in 2004, we were struck by the somber atmosphere prevailing in the country. Despite many decades having passed since World War I and II and the onset of the Millennium Age, Armenia remains haunted by a singular issue: deportation, exile or “genocide.”
Some decades ago, Armenia forged peace with Azerbaijan and sought integration into the global community. Some politicians advocated for opening the border with Türkiye to alleviate Armenia’s economic burdens. However, radical nationalist factions silenced these voices, effectively removing them from the political arena.
Amid the delicate interplay between political realities, public relations and historical trauma, while the United States and President Joe Biden employed the term “genocide” about the Armenian issue, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan adopted a pragmatic stance, asserting, “We must now transcend the trauma of this genocide and focus on the future.” Such a stance negotiates through intricate political landscapes loaded with tough challenges.
During epochs of European dominance, discussions often revolved around concerns such as, “Armenians will make the ‘genocide’ globally recognized, demand land and claim regional rights.”
Interstate relations are primarily shaped by the dynamics of power. In other words, it is clear that even the most powerful state in the world today, let alone Armenia, cannot impose such demands on Türkiye.
In today’s world, Türkiye has emerged as a significant regional power, with its military standing among the foremost globally. Over time, our armed forces have maintained their strength and evolved into the world’s most proficient in hybrid warfare, propelled by groundbreaking technological advancements in the defense industry. Any claims to the contrary lack factual basis.
Hence, I believe it would be more beneficial for Armenia to move beyond the events of over a century ago and adopt a forward-looking approach focused on the well-being of the Armenian people. Individuals in the region must orient themselves toward the future.
There is another changing balance in the world. The Armenian diaspora in the U.S. no longer has the power to influence Armenia economically. During periods of extraordinary poverty within their country, the diaspora abroad often played an active role. But in our age, this is no longer an economic reality. Pashinyan’s statement likely stems from his conviction that the financial influence of the diaspora alone is insufficient to sustain a nation’s viability.
