April 1980 Page 2 |
Previous | 2 of 12 | Next |
|
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
Page 2 Hye Sharzhoom April, 1980 A closer look at Armenian terrorism By Mark Malkasian The Armenian Question has reached a critical juncture. At issue: How should we pursue the Armenian Question? Through 1) briefcase-toting lobbyists hosting champagne brunches,or through 2) sinister gunmen belonging to organizations with sinister-sounding names? The lobbyists tell us that they are making progress. They send us photos of prominent Armenians posing next to government officials in the Oval Office. The terrorists tell us they are making progress. They send us photos of bullet-ridden bodies heaped on European sidewalks. Both the lobbyists and the terrorists share much in common. Both consider the Turks enemy No. 1 (although they consider each other enemy No. 2). Both are working toward the re-establishment of the Armenian homeland (I presume). And both have pursued a rather predictable and unimaginative course. The lobbyists have been criticized for their "hypocrisy" and "insincerity." (In terms of sacrifice and dedication, attending champagne brunches cannot compare with sleeping in dingy tenements with a .38 automatic under your pillow.) We are, of course, all familiar with the "lobbyist" type. He may be our neighbor, or the lawyer who handles our income-tax returns. Generally, he's like "us" (or at least like the image of "us"). He wears fairly conservative business suits, always gives a hand at church functions and graciously asks local politicians to put in a good word about "the Armenian" in their next foreign-affairs speech. The "lobbyist" type is a good man. Obviously, he does possess a genuine interest in the Armenian Question, even if he perhaps does not fully perceive the political ramifications. But, plainly, our likable Mr. Armenian lobbyist is the natural fall guy for the failings of the Armenian people. When something goes wroncr ~ when President Carter attends a Jewish observance of the Holocaust on April 24 instead of meeting with Armenians or when the "Christian Science Monitor" groups Armenians with Muslims — we attack our community leaders. And, of course, with all their goodwill and hand shaking, they take our abuse, almost gladly. They are public figures, threatening to no one, and inevitably they become targets of Armenian frustration. The terrorist, however, is nerceived quite differently. "Armenian terrorist" — 1 the term itself seems incongruent, especially to more staid Armenian-Americans. Aside from the immediate reaction of shock, we offer no criticism of the Armenian terrorist. He, of course, cannot be identified. We only see his work — the occasional bodies of Turkish diplomats bobbing to the surface of our daily newspaper. It all adds to the mystique. Occasionally, a community leader will lament that the terrorists are destroying the "Armenian image," overlooking the fact that most Armenians, even most Fresnans, know nothing about Armenians beyond shish kebab and Middle-Eastern accents. Clearly, the terrorist question demands a more thorough analysis, something more substantial than mute indignation can provide. It may make us squirm and sweat a bit but the terrorist question must be confronted ~ intelligently, seriously and, most important, critically. A primer on terrorism For some, the terrorist question is simple: Murder is morally wrong and cannot be condoned, even in the pursuit of a just cause. This is my position. The argument, however, does not end there. The nations of the world do not operate on the basis of morality, certainly not a morality that questions the power of the state to murder. Therefore, the terrorist question and the Armenian Question must also be debated as a political issue. Terrorists must be assumed to be rational people. Obviously, they have objectives ~ objectives that somehow justify murder as a means to an end. Terrorists who share common objectives form organizations ~ "strength in numbers, division of labor," etc. When terrorists attract enough support, or enough power, they may form governments, thus providing a legal sanction for murder. The issue of human life matters little once one accepts the premise that the means justify the end. Murder is but one of many means. However, it has become a common tool of terrorism (and government). Basically, terrorist groups pursue one of three objectives: 1. COERCION: Compel the government to grant concessions through a war of attrition. The aim is not to overthrow the government but to simply outlast it. Terrorists strike at the vital interests of the state in hopes of convincing the government that resistance is futile. The terrorists also hope that the people will eventually become demoralized and concede defeat. The Zionist Irgun employed coercive terrorism against the British in Palestine. Today it is practiced by the IRA in Northern Ireland and the Baluchs in Southwest Pakistan. Armenians cannot expect to pressure the Turks into establishing an Armenian homeland through coercive terrorism. Turkey's internal problems — 2,500 deaths in the past two years from political violence and an economy on the brink of bankruptcy — overshadow any injuries Armenian terrorists might be able to inflict. 2. PROVOCATION: Spark revolution by destabilizing the government. These terrorist acts are intended to contribute to the general atmostphere of confusion and undermine the people's confidence in the government. The Social Revolutionaries practiced this method in Tsarist Russia. Modern adherents include the Red Brigade (Italy), the Weathermen (United States) and Turkey's own leftists and rightists. If Armenians hope to provoke the collapse of the Turkish government, terrorism is certainly not appropriate. The present regime is much more likely to succumb through its own ineptitude, without a nudge by Armenian terrorism. In fact, Armenian-perpetrated assassinations may indeed arouse Turkish nationalism and serve as a catalyst for national solidarity. 3. PUBLICITY: Attract attention through the media. This approach has developed simultaneously with the emergence of the mass media. International publicity is expected to arouse international sympathy. Terrorist targets are selected for their "media" value. The South Moluccans (in the Netherlands) and the Croatians (plane hijackings in the United States) used this technique in the 1970s. It is largely a weapon of the powerless. Presumably, Armenian terrorism is designed to arouse international attention and sympathy. (Although the terrorists would undoubtedly insist that Armenians must be self-sufficient and cannot rely on the perfidious Western powers.) Armenian terrorism has succeeded somewhat in raising world consciousness regarding the Armenian Question. Assassination reports routinely contain an almost obligatory reference to the Armenian Genocide and the death of "800,000...one million...one and a half million...or many" Armenians. The media, however, is a fickle political vehicle. The Turkish government has only to fill newspaper libraries with "Turkish historical interpretations" of the Armenian Genocide. And, evidently, the Turks are already aware of this technique. Recently, a "New York Times" article by MarvineHowe quoted Turkish sources exclusively in an overview of Armenian terrorism and the Genocide. ("The New York Times" syndicate circulates throughout the US and throughout the world.) Among the quotes attributed to Turkish scholars and journalists were: -"Armenians probably lulled as many Turks as Turks did Armenians in earlier massacres - about one million on both sides." -"most of my family was killed by Armenians. My grandfather, who was from a village near Van, tells how when he was 16, his father was killed by Armenian rebels and along with thousands of other Turks fled south with his 4-year-old brother and mother, who died on the way." -"The Armenian community is not against the Turkish people - there are only a few hundred Armenians against the Turks." -"The Armenian Question is over and has been for years." And this comes from one of America's most reputable newspapers. Clearly, if the Armenian Question is to be decided in the Western press, the US State Department, military exigencies - and time - are on the side of the Turks. The truth would become submerged in agonizing and fruitless debate. Yes, we have bundles of documents - all verified and some even supplied by Turkish sources. The Turks, however, can submit their own documents, falsified and deceitfully manufactured, but nonetheless authentic in appearance. And if the Turks need scholarly support they can turn to such "objective" professors as UCLA's Stanford Shaw. In the eyes of the media - and consequently the eyes of the world - the first genocide of the 20th century could be reduced to another Balkanized, ethnic squabble in some remote corner of the world. Armenians would control neither the ammunition nor the participants of a media battle. Justifying murder Few Armenians have questioned the wisdom of Armenian terrorism. Generally, we approach terrorism as a "kill or not to kill" issue, with little attention paid to the Armenian Question. The terrorists themselves may have applied similiar logic: first deciding that the Armenian Genocide justified the destruction of human life and then directing their conclusion at Turkish diplomats. Undoubtedly, the Armenian Question ranks highly among terrorist causes. The Armenian Genocide was a horrendous crime - a crime compounded by Turkish continued on page 8 The apathy of CSUF Hyes By Bill Erysian It has always been the policy of this newspaper to serve as a forum for the viewpoints generated by members of the Armenian Students Organization of California State University, Fresno. Indeed, "Hye Sharzhoom" (Armenian Action) provides a distinct opportunity for all Armenian students to exercise their right of free expression. Although the ASO has witnessed a steady growth in the past two years, "Hye Sharzhoom" continues to represent the opinions of only a small minority of the group. This type of imbalance should not exist. In order for a newspaper to operate as an effective and valid organizational organ, it requires constant input from its members. A greater degree of participation, therefore, is urged of the many Armenian students this newspaper belongs to. It's crucial that members of the ASO recognizes the advantages of using the "Hye Sharzhoom." Unlike other minority newspapers on the CSUF campus, "Hye Sharzhoom" operates on a fairly independent basis from the Associated Student Senate. Apart from the budget allocation the club receives from the Senate, this newspaper has few restraints on its contents. The paper operates as a direct voice of the ASO and the Armenian Studies Program. With the emergence of the ASO as a nationally recognized group, the responsibilities of its members have increased. The ASO received a raise in its budget from $1,000 to $1,750, and also plans to host the 1981 Armenian College Students Convention. As the group flourishes, so should the exchange of ideas. What better way than to take advantages of the services of a publication that has the largest distribution of any Armenian newspaper in the nation. "Hye Sharzhoom" urges equality of expression within the ASO. In turn, the contribution of more ideas serves to boost the awareness of Armenians and foster a spirit of progress. '
Object Description
Title | 1980_04 Hye Sharzhoom Newspaper April 1980 |
Alternative Title | Armenian Action, Vol. 2 No. 3, April 1980; Ethnic Supplement to the Collegian. |
Publisher | Armenian Studies Program, California State University, Fresno. |
Publication Date | 1980 |
Description | Published two to four times a year. The newspaper of the California State University, Fresno Armenian Students Organization and Armenian Studies Program. |
Subject | California State University, Fresno – Periodicals. |
Contributors | Armenian Studies Program; Armenian Students Organization, California State University, Fresno. |
Coverage | 1979-2014 |
Format | Newspaper print |
Language | eng |
Full-Text-Search | Scanned at 200-360 dpi, 18-bit greyscale - 24-bit color, TIFF or PDF. PDFs were converted to TIF using Adobe Acrobat 9 Pro. |
Description
Title | April 1980 Page 2 |
Full-Text-Search | Page 2 Hye Sharzhoom April, 1980 A closer look at Armenian terrorism By Mark Malkasian The Armenian Question has reached a critical juncture. At issue: How should we pursue the Armenian Question? Through 1) briefcase-toting lobbyists hosting champagne brunches,or through 2) sinister gunmen belonging to organizations with sinister-sounding names? The lobbyists tell us that they are making progress. They send us photos of prominent Armenians posing next to government officials in the Oval Office. The terrorists tell us they are making progress. They send us photos of bullet-ridden bodies heaped on European sidewalks. Both the lobbyists and the terrorists share much in common. Both consider the Turks enemy No. 1 (although they consider each other enemy No. 2). Both are working toward the re-establishment of the Armenian homeland (I presume). And both have pursued a rather predictable and unimaginative course. The lobbyists have been criticized for their "hypocrisy" and "insincerity." (In terms of sacrifice and dedication, attending champagne brunches cannot compare with sleeping in dingy tenements with a .38 automatic under your pillow.) We are, of course, all familiar with the "lobbyist" type. He may be our neighbor, or the lawyer who handles our income-tax returns. Generally, he's like "us" (or at least like the image of "us"). He wears fairly conservative business suits, always gives a hand at church functions and graciously asks local politicians to put in a good word about "the Armenian" in their next foreign-affairs speech. The "lobbyist" type is a good man. Obviously, he does possess a genuine interest in the Armenian Question, even if he perhaps does not fully perceive the political ramifications. But, plainly, our likable Mr. Armenian lobbyist is the natural fall guy for the failings of the Armenian people. When something goes wroncr ~ when President Carter attends a Jewish observance of the Holocaust on April 24 instead of meeting with Armenians or when the "Christian Science Monitor" groups Armenians with Muslims — we attack our community leaders. And, of course, with all their goodwill and hand shaking, they take our abuse, almost gladly. They are public figures, threatening to no one, and inevitably they become targets of Armenian frustration. The terrorist, however, is nerceived quite differently. "Armenian terrorist" — 1 the term itself seems incongruent, especially to more staid Armenian-Americans. Aside from the immediate reaction of shock, we offer no criticism of the Armenian terrorist. He, of course, cannot be identified. We only see his work — the occasional bodies of Turkish diplomats bobbing to the surface of our daily newspaper. It all adds to the mystique. Occasionally, a community leader will lament that the terrorists are destroying the "Armenian image," overlooking the fact that most Armenians, even most Fresnans, know nothing about Armenians beyond shish kebab and Middle-Eastern accents. Clearly, the terrorist question demands a more thorough analysis, something more substantial than mute indignation can provide. It may make us squirm and sweat a bit but the terrorist question must be confronted ~ intelligently, seriously and, most important, critically. A primer on terrorism For some, the terrorist question is simple: Murder is morally wrong and cannot be condoned, even in the pursuit of a just cause. This is my position. The argument, however, does not end there. The nations of the world do not operate on the basis of morality, certainly not a morality that questions the power of the state to murder. Therefore, the terrorist question and the Armenian Question must also be debated as a political issue. Terrorists must be assumed to be rational people. Obviously, they have objectives ~ objectives that somehow justify murder as a means to an end. Terrorists who share common objectives form organizations ~ "strength in numbers, division of labor," etc. When terrorists attract enough support, or enough power, they may form governments, thus providing a legal sanction for murder. The issue of human life matters little once one accepts the premise that the means justify the end. Murder is but one of many means. However, it has become a common tool of terrorism (and government). Basically, terrorist groups pursue one of three objectives: 1. COERCION: Compel the government to grant concessions through a war of attrition. The aim is not to overthrow the government but to simply outlast it. Terrorists strike at the vital interests of the state in hopes of convincing the government that resistance is futile. The terrorists also hope that the people will eventually become demoralized and concede defeat. The Zionist Irgun employed coercive terrorism against the British in Palestine. Today it is practiced by the IRA in Northern Ireland and the Baluchs in Southwest Pakistan. Armenians cannot expect to pressure the Turks into establishing an Armenian homeland through coercive terrorism. Turkey's internal problems — 2,500 deaths in the past two years from political violence and an economy on the brink of bankruptcy — overshadow any injuries Armenian terrorists might be able to inflict. 2. PROVOCATION: Spark revolution by destabilizing the government. These terrorist acts are intended to contribute to the general atmostphere of confusion and undermine the people's confidence in the government. The Social Revolutionaries practiced this method in Tsarist Russia. Modern adherents include the Red Brigade (Italy), the Weathermen (United States) and Turkey's own leftists and rightists. If Armenians hope to provoke the collapse of the Turkish government, terrorism is certainly not appropriate. The present regime is much more likely to succumb through its own ineptitude, without a nudge by Armenian terrorism. In fact, Armenian-perpetrated assassinations may indeed arouse Turkish nationalism and serve as a catalyst for national solidarity. 3. PUBLICITY: Attract attention through the media. This approach has developed simultaneously with the emergence of the mass media. International publicity is expected to arouse international sympathy. Terrorist targets are selected for their "media" value. The South Moluccans (in the Netherlands) and the Croatians (plane hijackings in the United States) used this technique in the 1970s. It is largely a weapon of the powerless. Presumably, Armenian terrorism is designed to arouse international attention and sympathy. (Although the terrorists would undoubtedly insist that Armenians must be self-sufficient and cannot rely on the perfidious Western powers.) Armenian terrorism has succeeded somewhat in raising world consciousness regarding the Armenian Question. Assassination reports routinely contain an almost obligatory reference to the Armenian Genocide and the death of "800,000...one million...one and a half million...or many" Armenians. The media, however, is a fickle political vehicle. The Turkish government has only to fill newspaper libraries with "Turkish historical interpretations" of the Armenian Genocide. And, evidently, the Turks are already aware of this technique. Recently, a "New York Times" article by MarvineHowe quoted Turkish sources exclusively in an overview of Armenian terrorism and the Genocide. ("The New York Times" syndicate circulates throughout the US and throughout the world.) Among the quotes attributed to Turkish scholars and journalists were: -"Armenians probably lulled as many Turks as Turks did Armenians in earlier massacres - about one million on both sides." -"most of my family was killed by Armenians. My grandfather, who was from a village near Van, tells how when he was 16, his father was killed by Armenian rebels and along with thousands of other Turks fled south with his 4-year-old brother and mother, who died on the way." -"The Armenian community is not against the Turkish people - there are only a few hundred Armenians against the Turks." -"The Armenian Question is over and has been for years." And this comes from one of America's most reputable newspapers. Clearly, if the Armenian Question is to be decided in the Western press, the US State Department, military exigencies - and time - are on the side of the Turks. The truth would become submerged in agonizing and fruitless debate. Yes, we have bundles of documents - all verified and some even supplied by Turkish sources. The Turks, however, can submit their own documents, falsified and deceitfully manufactured, but nonetheless authentic in appearance. And if the Turks need scholarly support they can turn to such "objective" professors as UCLA's Stanford Shaw. In the eyes of the media - and consequently the eyes of the world - the first genocide of the 20th century could be reduced to another Balkanized, ethnic squabble in some remote corner of the world. Armenians would control neither the ammunition nor the participants of a media battle. Justifying murder Few Armenians have questioned the wisdom of Armenian terrorism. Generally, we approach terrorism as a "kill or not to kill" issue, with little attention paid to the Armenian Question. The terrorists themselves may have applied similiar logic: first deciding that the Armenian Genocide justified the destruction of human life and then directing their conclusion at Turkish diplomats. Undoubtedly, the Armenian Question ranks highly among terrorist causes. The Armenian Genocide was a horrendous crime - a crime compounded by Turkish continued on page 8 The apathy of CSUF Hyes By Bill Erysian It has always been the policy of this newspaper to serve as a forum for the viewpoints generated by members of the Armenian Students Organization of California State University, Fresno. Indeed, "Hye Sharzhoom" (Armenian Action) provides a distinct opportunity for all Armenian students to exercise their right of free expression. Although the ASO has witnessed a steady growth in the past two years, "Hye Sharzhoom" continues to represent the opinions of only a small minority of the group. This type of imbalance should not exist. In order for a newspaper to operate as an effective and valid organizational organ, it requires constant input from its members. A greater degree of participation, therefore, is urged of the many Armenian students this newspaper belongs to. It's crucial that members of the ASO recognizes the advantages of using the "Hye Sharzhoom." Unlike other minority newspapers on the CSUF campus, "Hye Sharzhoom" operates on a fairly independent basis from the Associated Student Senate. Apart from the budget allocation the club receives from the Senate, this newspaper has few restraints on its contents. The paper operates as a direct voice of the ASO and the Armenian Studies Program. With the emergence of the ASO as a nationally recognized group, the responsibilities of its members have increased. The ASO received a raise in its budget from $1,000 to $1,750, and also plans to host the 1981 Armenian College Students Convention. As the group flourishes, so should the exchange of ideas. What better way than to take advantages of the services of a publication that has the largest distribution of any Armenian newspaper in the nation. "Hye Sharzhoom" urges equality of expression within the ASO. In turn, the contribution of more ideas serves to boost the awareness of Armenians and foster a spirit of progress. ' |