The Burning Tigris

Last updated
The Burning Tigris
The Burning Tigris.jpg
Author Peter Balakian
LanguageEnglish
GenreHistory
Publisher HarperCollins
Publication date
2003
Publication placeUnited States
Pages465
ISBN 978-0-06-019840-4
OCLC 51653350
956.6/2015 21
LC Class DS195.5 .B353 2003

The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America's Response is a book written by Peter Balakian, and published in 2003. It details the Armenian genocide, the events leading up to it, and the events following it. In particular, Balakian focuses on the American response to the persecution and genocide of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire from 1894 to 1923.

Contents

Summary

The book begins with the state of the Ottoman Empire in the 1880s. Abdul Hamid II came to power in 1876, and there are many issues in the country that he is expected to solve. Specifically, the empire was losing money and land. Abdul Hamid II blamed these issues on non-Muslims in the country, and in particular, the Armenians. Over the course of the 1890s laws are passed limiting the rights of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. By the early 20th century, there was extreme overtaxing, robbery, and murder against Armenians, all going with no repercussion. The government began supporting these actions by creating the mostly Kurdish Hamidiye regiments, who largely made their living by robbing the Armenians.

Owing to the "Macedonian Question", a state of low-level civil war in Ottoman Macedonia and the empire's chronic failing finances, Abdul Hamid II lost popularity, leading to a popular revolution in August 1908, set off by an erroneous rumor that a summit between King Edward VII and the Emperor Nicholas II had led a secret Anglo-Russian agreement to partition the Ottoman Empire. The garrison in Salonika (modern Thessaloniki, Greece) declared itself against Abdul-Hamid and marched on Constantinople, only for Abdul-Hamid to proclaim he had been misled by his "evil" advisers and to announce that the constitution of 1876 he himself had suspended would be restored. A brief moment of joy swept across the Ottoman Empire and most Armenians supported the Young Turk revolution, believing that the restoration of the constitution would make them equal. Abdul Hamid II was overthrown in April 1909 by a revolutionary group called the Committee of Union and Progress, better known as the Young Turks, after he attempted a coup aimed at taking back the power he had lost in 1908. The new regime promised a fresh start, saying that henceforward all of the peoples of the Ottoman Empire would be equal.

The Armenians by and large welcomed the new government, thinking that they would be treated as equals once more. Instead, the new government ordered massacres' and death marches starting in 1915. Armenians were rounded up and killed. The ones lucky enough to escape the massacres were deported to the vilayet (province) of Ottoman Syria (modern Lebanon and Syria). The United States Red Cross was permitted into the country starting in 1915. The help they could provide was limited. The genocide received an immense account of media coverage in the United States, leading to the Near East Relief Committee being set up to save the Armenians in September 1915. The Near East Relief Committee commissioned the first film about the genocide Ravished Armenia (known as The Auction of Souls in Europe), a film telling the true story of Aurora Mardiganian. Ordinary Americans contributed about $100 million US dollars to the Near East Relief while over a 1, 000 Americans, most of them women, went to the Middle East to serve as aid workers.

The United States Government was also considering trying to help the Armenians by creating an independent Armenia after the First World War. Woodrow Wilson and some members of Congress supported this idea, but it never worked fully because the United States had oil interests in the Ottoman Empire and wanted to remain on good terms. What was left of Armenia instead became a state in the Soviet Union. The United States had ambitious plans for what to do with the Armenians, but economic issues prevented the United States from helping in any meaningful way. Other European powers at the time also did not do much. More than one hundred high-ranking government officials from the Ottoman Empire were put on trial for war crimes, fewer than 20 were convicted, and none of them served their full sentences.

Reception

In a mixed review for The New York Times, Belinda Cooper called the book "timely and welcome" but criticized it for lack of cohesion and analysis, writing that it "presents a disorganized, largely descriptive narrative that ultimately raises more questions than it answers". Cooper wrote that Balakian leaves some questions unaddressed, such as the role of Turks who opposed the genocide and of Armenians who continued to declare their loyalty to the Ottoman Empire. Cooper wrote that Balakian provided an "unremitting depiction of irrational barbarism by sociopathic Turkish leaders and a fanatical population against a generally unresisting minority" but "only a superficial sense of the changes in the centuries-old relationship between Turks and Armenians that could unleash such violence". [1]

In a review in The Boston Globe, John Shattuck wrote: "The Burning Tigris has major weaknesses, including its cursory explanation of what drove the Turkish government to exterminate the Armenians and its limited account of how Turkey managed for so long to block all efforts to tell the truth. Nevertheless, by reintroducing the voices of Americans who spoke up for the Armenians a century ago, Balakian honors the international human rights tradition in the United States, pointing toward the need for international laws and institutions that are now so discredited by Washington. As one of these voices, early feminist writer and champion of the Armenian cause Charlotte Perkins Gilman wrote in 1903, "National crimes demand international law, to restrain, prohibit, punish, best of all, to prevent."" [2]

In a review in The Minneapolis Star Tribune, Stephen Feinstein wrote: "Balakian makes it clear that the discourse about Armenia has not ended: Unlike the perpetrators of the Nazi Holocaust, no Turkish high official was brought to trial. And the systematic suppression and denial continues. Turkey, a NATO member and U.S. ally, has intervened in congressional attempts to label the genocide according to U.N. convention, and to this day prohibits discourse about its own history and prosecutes teachers who tell the story in their classrooms. Balakian's book should serve as a warning: Suppressed history has a way of returning with a vengeance. One can only hope that Americans, concerned with the Armenian cause in the past, will be receptive to it again, and that Turkey, long in denial of its past, will strengthen its own democratic system by dealing with it. Although Balakian's research is not based on original documents in Turkish or the languages of the region, he has succeeded in writing a lucid and engaging account that serves as a useful entry point for readers unfamiliar with a complex subject. The story of Armenia is a reminder that we live in an age of genocide, and that discourse about this history and establishment of early warning systems is perhaps the only way to prevent it from recurring." [3]

In a critical review in The Independent, Mark Mazower wrote: "The horror of it all emanates vividly from the pages of Peter Balakian's new history. The sheer scale of the massacres has an overwhelming impact and his access to the accounts of survivors and diplomats, and his understanding of Armenian culture and society, help bring to life the world that was lost with the victims. It quickly becomes clear that the Holocaust was not the first such onslaught on an entire community; indeed, the parallels with that event are frequently underlined." [4] However, Mazower harshly criticised Balkian for what he felt was his morality play view of the genocide with the Armenians as the pure, righteous victims being pursued by "malevolent perpetrators led by psychopaths such as Sultan Abdul Hamid". [4] Mazower wrote that he believed that the break-down in relations between the Sublime Porte and the Armenians was to a large extent the responsibility of the latter as he accused Armenian revolutionaries of assassinating Ottoman officials out of the hope that the Ottomans would commit atrocities that would lead to great power intervention on their behalf just had happened in the Balkans. [4] Likewise, Mazower wrote the Ottoman charge that the Armenians were a pro-Russian fifth column, through exaggerated, did have a basis in fact. [4] Mazower wrote that over a million Muslim refugees had fled to the Ottoman Empire from the Caucasus and the Balkans between 1860 and 1913, making the Muslim rage against Christians understandable, through not justified. [4] Finally, Mazower wrote that after the Ottoman Empire entered the First World War that the Ottoman forces had suffered a series of defeats with an invasion of the Russian Caucasus ending in a disaster while the Allies had landed in Gallipoli, which was the first stage of a plan to capture Constantinople, making it that appear in the spring of 1915 that the Sublime Porte was faced with destruction. [4] Mazower wrote: "None of this in any way justifies what happened to the Armenians, but it underlines the existential crisis that faced the empire's young and arrogant leadership, humiliated on the battlefield, their grand strategy in ruins...The Burning Tigris remains, understandably enough, a work of denunciation. Even so, more than denunciation will be needed to help us make sense of what happened." [4]

In a review in The Daily Telegraph, Brendan Simms wrote that Balakian "...retells the story of the Armenian massacres in an accessible way. It is not for the faint-hearted. In places, the narrative becomes an almost unbearable catalogue of cruelties and killings. If the author seems to dwell on these, the reason lies in a revisionist campaign to minimise the scope of and intention behind the massacres, sponsored by some otherwise rather eminent historians." [5] Sims noted that Henry Morgenthau Sr., the American ambassador to the Sublime Porte, was outraged by the genocide, making him into one of the book's heroes, but on the whole, the State Department was not inclined to interfere with the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire, despite all of Morgenthau's anguish. [5] Sims wrote he felt that Balakian was too harsh in his criticism of President Woodrow Wilson for not doing enough to stop the genocide, noting it was too easy for former presidents such as Theodore Roosevelt to call for Congress to declare war on the Ottoman Empire. [5] Sims further noted that as the Battle of Gallipoli had dramatically shown that in even in 1915 the Ottomans still had a formidable military that defeated an attempt by an Anglo-Australian-New Zealand-Indian-French force to seize the Gallipoli peninsula. [5] Sims noted that the best way to stop the Armenian genocide was to defeat the Ottoman Empire, which finally happened in 1918, which led him to argue that Balakian was being too glib in asserting that the United States could have done more to stop the genocide. [5]

Legacy

In 2013, the American scholar Jerry Sigman wrote it is widely asserted today that if more attention had been paid to the Armenian Genocide in World War One, then the Shoah in World War Two would have been prevented. [6] Sigman wrote that the Bulgarian Horrors of 1876, when the Ottomans repressed an uprising in Bulgaria by unleashing the bashi-bazouks (a collection of irregulars who followed the Ottoman Army on the campaigns) together with Kurdish tribesmen on the hapless Bulgarians, received a massive amount of media attention in both the United States and Europe at the time, but the only power that took action was Russia, which belatedly declared war on the Ottoman Empire in 1877, after various international conferences failed to stop the violence. [7] Sigman described the impasse created in Britain with the Liberals under William Gladstone denouncing the Bulgarian Horrors while the Conservative prime minister Benjamin Disraeli justified the Bulgarian Horrors as something the Bulgarians brought down on themselves by revolting against the Ottoman Empire as creating the template for Western responses for genocide and atrocities in general. [7] Sigman wrote that for Disraeli the most important thing to support the Ottoman Empire as a bulwark against Russia, which led his government to place realpolitik ahead of morality, which he argued was all typical of Western responses to atrocities in the 20th century. [7]

Sigman further noted that the Armenian genocide was not ignored at the time, noting that books such as The Burning Tigris had overwhelming established that the American media did not ignore the subject at the time, and instead on the contrary provided saturation coverage of the genocide. [8] Sigman wrote that despite all of the media coverage of the Armenian genocide, it failed to stop the Shoah, leading him to conclude: "Based on the information provided, it is clear that the Jewish Holocaust would have occurred regardless, as it happened in spite of the massive amounts of publicity about the Armenian Genocide that saturated the U.S. and Western European presses." [9] Sigman noted that more recently that the Rwandan genocide of 1994 also received saturation coverage in the American and European media, and unlike the Armenian genocide was broadcast live as various television crews recorded the killings first-hand, and yet the world still did nothing. [10] Sigman argued that the issue was not knowledge of genocide as it is commonly claimed, but rather the willingness to act against genocide, which he noted has been mostly lacking. [9]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Young Turks</span> Political reform movement in the Ottoman Empire

The Young Turks was a constitutionalist broad opposition movement in the late Ottoman Empire against Sultan Abdul Hamid II's absolutist regime. The most powerful organization of the movement, and the most conflated, was the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), though its goals, strategies, and membership continuously morphed throughout Abdul Hamid's reign. By the 1890s, the Young Turks were mainly a loose and contentious network of intelligentsia exiled in Western Europe and Egypt that made a living by selling their newspapers to secret subscribers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Henry Morgenthau Sr.</span> American diplomat

Henry Morgenthau was a German-born American lawyer and businessman, best known for his role as the ambassador to the Ottoman Empire during World War I. Morgenthau was one of the most prominent Americans who spoke about the Greek genocide and the Armenian genocide of which he stated, "I am firmly convinced that this is the greatest crime of the ages."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Adana massacre</span> 1909 massacre of Armenian Christians by Ottoman Muslims

The Adana massacre occurred in the Adana Vilayet of the Ottoman Empire in April 1909. A massacre of Armenian Christians by Ottoman Muslims in the city of Adana amidst the Ottoman countercoup of 1909 expanded to a series of anti-Armenian pogroms throughout the province. Around 20,000 to 25,000 people were killed in Adana and surrounding towns, mostly Armenians; it was reported that about 1,300 Assyrians were also killed during the massacres. Unlike the earlier Hamidian massacres, the events were not organized by the central government but instead instigated by local officials, intellectuals, and Islamic clerics, including Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) supporters in Adana. Professor of History Ronald Grigor Suny from the University of Michigan describes Adana as "more like an urban riot that degenerated into a pogrom rather than a state-initiated mass killing".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hamidian massacres</span> 1894–1897 massacres of Armenians and Assyrians in the Ottoman Empire

The Hamidian massacres also called the Armenian massacres, were massacres of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire in the mid-1890s. Estimated casualties ranged from 100,000 to 300,000, resulting in 50,000 orphaned children. The massacres are named after Sultan Abdul Hamid II, who, in his efforts to maintain the imperial domain of the declining Ottoman Empire, reasserted pan-Islamism as a state ideology. Although the massacres were aimed mainly at the Armenians, in some cases they turned into indiscriminate anti-Christian pogroms, including the Diyarbekir massacres, where, at least according to one contemporary source, up to 25,000 Assyrians were also killed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Talaat Pasha</span> Turkish Ottoman politician (1874–1921)

Mehmed Talaat, commonly known as Talaat Pasha or Talat Pasha, was an Ottoman Young Turk activist, politician, and convicted war criminal who served as the de facto leader of the Ottoman Empire from 1913 to 1918. He was chairman of the Union and Progress Party, which operated a one-party dictatorship in the Empire; during World War I he became Grand Vizier. He has been called the architect of the Armenian genocide, and was responsible for other ethnic cleansings during his time as Minister of Interior Affairs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Young Turk Revolution</span> 1908 restoration of constitutional rule in the Ottoman Empire

The Young Turk Revolution was a constitutionalist revolution in the Ottoman Empire. Revolutionaries belonging to the Internal Committee of Union and Progress, an organization of the Young Turks movement, forced Sultan Abdul Hamid II to restore the Constitution, recall the parliament, and schedule an election. Thus began the Second Constitutional Era.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Occupation of the Ottoman Bank</span> Occupation of the Ottoman Bank in Istanbul by members of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation

The occupation of the Ottoman Bank by members of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation took place in Constantinople, the capital of the Ottoman Empire on 26 August 1896. In an effort to raise further awareness and action by the major European powers, 28 armed men and women led primarily by Papken Siuni and Armen Garo took over the bank which largely employed European personnel from Great Britain and France. Stirred largely due to the inaction of the European powers in regard to Hamidian massacres started by Sultan Abdul Hamid II, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation members saw its seizure as a means to bring full attention to their plight. At the time, the Ottoman Bank served as an important financial center for both the Empire and the countries of Europe.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Temporary Law of Deportation</span> Relocation and Resettlement Law in the Ottoman Empire

The Temporary Law of Deportation, also known as the Tehcir Law, or officially by the Republic of Turkey, the "Sevk ve İskân Kanunu" was a law passed by the Ottoman Council of Ministers on May 27, of 1915 authorizing the deportation of the Ottoman Empire's Armenian population. The resettlement campaign resulted in the deaths of anywhere between 800,000 and over 1,500,000 civilians, in what is commonly referred to as the Armenian genocide. The bill was officially enacted on June 1, 1915, and expired on February 8, 1916.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abdul Hamid II assassination attempt in Yıldız</span> 1905 attack in Istanbul

The Yıldız assassination attempt was a failed assassination bombing attempted on Sultan Abdul Hamid II by the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) at Yıldız Mosque. The bombing took place on 21 July 1905 in the Ottoman capital Istanbul. The Times described the incident as "one of the greatest and most sensational political conspiracies of modern times."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Armenians in the Ottoman Empire</span>

The Ottoman Armenian population mostly belonged to either the Armenian Apostolic Church or the Armenian Catholic Church. They were part of the Armenian millet until the Tanzimat reforms in the nineteenth century equalized all Ottoman citizens before the law. Armenians were a significant minority in the Empire. They played a crucial role in Ottoman industry and commerce, and Armenian communities existed in almost every major city of the empire. Despite their importance, Armenians were heavily persecuted by the Ottoman authorities especially from the latter half of the 19th century, culminating in the Armenian Genocide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Abdul Hamid II</span> Sultan of the Ottoman Empire from 1876 to 1909

Abdulhamid or Abdul Hamid II was the 34th sultan of the Ottoman Empire, from 1876 to 1909, and the last sultan to exert effective control over the fracturing state. He oversaw a period of decline with rebellions, and presided over an unsuccessful war with the Russian Empire (1877–78), the loss of Egypt and Cyprus from Ottoman control, followed by a successful war against the Kingdom of Greece in 1897, though Ottoman gains were tempered by subsequent Western European intervention.

The Hamidiye regiments were well-armed, irregular, mainly Sunni Kurdish but also Turkish, Circassian, Turkmen, Yörük, and Arab cavalry formations that operated in the south eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire. Established by and named after Sultan Abdul Hamid II in 1891, they were intended to be modeled after the Cossacks and were supposedly tasked to patrol the Russo-Ottoman frontier. However, the Hamidiye were more often used by the Ottoman authorities to harass and assault Armenians living in Eastern Provinces of the Ottoman Empire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Doctor Nazım</span> Turkish physician, politician, and genocide perpetrator

Selanikli Mehmed Nâzım Bey also known as Doktor Nazım was a Turkish physician, politician, and revolutionary. Nazım Bey was a founding member of the Committee of Union and Progress, and served on its central committee for over ten years. He played a significant role in the Armenian genocide and the expulsion of Greeks in Western Anatolia. He was convicted for allegedly conspiring to assassinate Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in İzmir and was hanged in Ankara on 26 August 1926. He also served as the chairman of the Turkish sports club Fenerbahçe S.K. between 1916 and 1918.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clarence Ussher</span> American physician and missionary (1870-1955)

Clarence Douglas Ussher was an American physician and missionary in the Van region during the Armenian genocide, where he reported that 55,000 Armenians had been killed. In 1917 Ussher published a memoir regarding his experience in Van, titled An American Physician in Turkey: A Narrative of Adventures in Peace and War. It is considered one of the most detailed eyewitness accounts of the events. Ussher openly blamed the Ottoman government for the systematic massacres of Armenians. His accounts of the Armenian genocide were depicted in the 2002 film Ararat. He was the husband of Elizabeth Barrows Ussher, who was also a witness of the genocide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jesse B. Jackson</span>

Jesse Benjamin Jackson was a United States consul and an important eyewitness to the Armenian genocide. He served as consul in Aleppo when the city was the junction of many important deportation routes. Jackson concluded that the policies towards the Armenians were "without doubt a carefully planned scheme to thoroughly extinguish the Armenian race." He considered the "wartime anti-Armenian measures" to be a "gigantic plundering scheme as well as a final blow to extinguish the race." By September 15, 1915, Jackson estimated that a million Armenians had been killed and deemed his own survival a "miracle". After the Armenian Genocide, Jackson led a relief effort and was credited with saving the lives of "thousands of Armenians."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Committee of Union and Progress</span> 1889–1926 Ottoman and Turkish political party

The Committee of Union and Progress was a revolutionary group and political party active between 1889 and 1926 in the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey. The foremost faction of the Young Turks, the CUP instigated the 1908 Young Turk Revolution, which ended absolute monarchy and began the Second Constitutional Era. After an ideological transformation, from 1913 to 1918, the CUP ruled the empire as a dictatorship and committed genocides against the Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian peoples as part of a broader policy of ethnic erasure during the late Ottoman period. The CUP and its members have often been referred to as Young Turks, although the movement produced other political parties as well. Within the Ottoman Empire its members were known as İttihadcılar ('Unionists') or Komiteciler ('Committeemen').

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ernest Yarrow</span>

Ernest Alfred Yarrow was a Christian missionary and a witness to the Armenian genocide. He is also known for his leadership of a relief effort carried out by the Near East Foundation that saved and cared for tens of thousands of Armenian refugees.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Haig Tiriakian</span>

Haig (Hrach) Tiriakian (1871–1915) was an Ottoman Armenian politician and a member of the Armenian National Assembly. Tiriakian played an important role during the Ottoman Bank takeover in 1896. A member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, Tiriakian lead an active life in Armenian politic affairs. He was killed during the Armenian genocide in 1915.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Grace Knapp</span> American missionary who witnessed the Armenian genocide in eastern Turkey

Grace H. Knapp was an American Christian missionary and teacher who served in the Ottoman Empire. During her time as a missionary, Knapp was a witness to the Armenian genocide. During the Armenian genocide, Knapp was stationed in Van and eventually described the events in the region in two published books describing her experiences. The first book, The Mission at Van in Turkey in War Time, describes in detail the massacres of Armenians by Turkish soldiers during the Van Resistance. Her second book, The Tragedy of Bitlis, relates the narratives of two nurses who witnessed massacres of Armenians in Bitlis. Her recounts of Bitlis are one of the few written accounts of massacres in that area.

The Armenian Massacres in Ottoman Turkey: A Disputed Genocide is a 2006 book by Guenter Lewy about the Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire. In the book, Lewy argues that the high death toll among Ottoman Armenians was a byproduct of the conditions of the marches and on sporadic attacks rather than a planned attempt to exterminate them.

References

  1. ↑ Cooper, Belinda (19 October 2003). "Human Rights Watch". The New York Times.
  2. ↑ Shattuck, John (4 February 2004). "A limited but important look at the Armenian genocide". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 26 November 2021.
  3. ↑ Feinstein, Stephen (5 October 2003). "'Burning Tigris' fans the flames of discourse". Minneapolis Star Tribunal. Retrieved 26 November 2021.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Mazower, Mark (16 March 2004). "The Tangled roots of genocide". The Independent. Retrieved 27 November 2021.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 Sims, Brenden (6 April 2004). "The forgotten genocide". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 27 November 2021.
  6. ↑ Sigman 2013, p. 107.
  7. 1 2 3 Sigman 2013, p. 110.
  8. ↑ Sigman 2013, p. 110-112.
  9. 1 2 Sigman 2013, p. 113.
  10. ↑ Sigman 2013, p. 108-109.

Books and articles

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.