



Produced by Jeroen Hellingman and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net/ for Project
Gutenberg (This file was produced from images generously
made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)









                       GERMANY TURKEY and ARMENIA

                  A selection of documentary evidence
                  relating to the Armenian Atrocities
                     from German and other sources



                                London.
                       J. J. KELIHER & CO., Ltd.
                                 1917.







TABLE OF CONTENTS.


                                                                  Page

A. THE INVASION OF PERSIA                                           17

    1. Letters from German Missionaries in North-West Persia        17


B. THE SIX ARMENIAN VILAYETS                                        21

    2.  Van after the Turkish Retreat                               21
    3.  Moush. Statement by a German Eye-witness                    23
    4.  Erzindjan. Statement by two Danish Red Cross Nurses,
        formerly in the service of the German Military Mission
        at Erzeroum                                                 30
    5.  H--: Statement made by a Danish Red Cross Nurse             44
    6.  Malatia. Statement by a German Eye-witness                  51


C. CILICIA AND NORTHERN SYRIA                                      53

    7.  Exiles from Zeitoun. Diary of a Foreign  Resident,
        communicated by a Swiss gentleman                           53
    8.  Information regarding events in Armenia published in two
        periodicals issued by German Missionary Societies           61
    9.  Extracts from the Records of a German who died in Turkey    66
    10. Narrative of a German Official of the Bagdad Railway        80
    11. The Amanus Passes. Statements by two Swiss Ladies,
        resident in Turkey                                          86


D. ALEPPO                                                           93

    12. "A word to the accredited representatives of the German
        people" by Dr. Martin Niepage, teacher in the German
        Technical School at Aleppo                                  93
    13. Message dated 17th February, 1916, from a German Lady
        (Fräulein O.)                                              112


E. THE PLACES OF EXILE                                             113

    14. Der-el-Zor. Letter from a German Lady Missionary           113
    15. Exiles from the Euphrates: Report from Fräulein O.         119


APPENDIX. REPORTS BY MOHAMMEDAN OFFICERS                           123

    (1) A.B.'s Report                                              123
    (2) C.D.'s Report                                              127







INTRODUCTION.


The blue book as to the treatment of the Armenians which has recently
been issued (Miscellaneous, No. 31, 1916) contains a large mass of
evidence relating to facts which, incredible as they are, have been so
incontrovertibly established that no doubt as to their existence can
possibly be entertained by any reasonable person. The greater part
of the documents included in the blue book does not, however, throw
much light on the attitude taken by the German public and the German
Government with reference to the crimes which have been committed. The
object of this pamphlet is to bring before the public a collection
of documents specially selected for the purpose of throwing light on
this subject. Some of them are included in the blue book, but the
documents Nos. 1, 6, 9, 10 and 12 have not, as yet, been published
in Great Britain or the United States. The two documents printed in
the Appendix have no direct bearing on the questions relating to the
German attitude. But as they came into the possession of the British
authorities after the publication of the blue book and are of special
interest as giving the impressions of two intelligent Turkish officers,
[1] it was thought right to include them.

A perusal of the documents included in this collection must convince
the reader of three things: (1) that the Germans in Armenia are
as full of indignation, and as anxious to see a stop put to the
methods of extermination applied by the Turkish Government, as
the most ardent friends of the Armenian cause in this country;
(2) that, owing to the wilful or reckless perversion of the facts
in the German press and the German pamphlet-literature, and owing
also to the indifference and credulity of the general German public,
the true state of things is unknown or ignored by the majority; (3)
that the German Government could have stopped the outrages if they
had desired to do so and that their non-interference was not in any
way due to ignorance of the true facts.

One very interesting document which has come to the Editor's notice is
of too confidential a nature to be reproduced in this place. It is a
Memorandum written by a distinguished German scholar, whose name for
obvious reasons has to be suppressed, but whose good faith and whose
critical acumen would be acknowledged by every one of his countrymen
whose powers of judgment have not been perverted by the passion of
war. This Memorandum contains ample evidence of the fact referred to
above, that in consequence of the misstatements or suppressions of
fact of which German writers on the subject have been guilty, public
opinion in Germany has entirely failed to realise the horrors of the
Armenian situation, and that some influential persons even approve
of the action of the Turkish authorities. The old legend about the
unscrupulousness of the Armenian traders and their exploitation of
Turkish innocence and trustfulness--of which the groundlessness is
convincingly demonstrated by the author of the Memorandum--seems to
be firmly believed throughout Germany, and is made use of by those
German politicians and journalists who approve cruelty, provided only
it serves the cause of German world-dominion. Thus Count Reventlow
in a passage quoted in the Memorandum refers to these matters in
the following terms: "The Turk is unsuspicious and good-natured;
everywhere he furnishes a convenient object for exploitation--up to
a certain point and to a certain degree; then despair seizes him
and he rises against his tormentors. Regrettable as such unlawful
self-defence may be from the point of view of civilisation, it is
obvious that the Armenians... least of all deserve the pity and the
compassionate emotions of the civilized world."

The author of the Memorandum disposes of this tirade by saying that
"it is of course unknown to the writer" of the passage quoted by us
"that 80 per cent. of the Armenian population, and particularly
those who were affected by the deportations, are peasant farmers,
who presumably were not engaged in the exploitation of the Kurdish
brigands by whom they were surrounded.... The assumption that the
deportation and annihilation of the Armenian race was in the nature
of unlawful self-defence is so far removed from the true facts that
it does not require any refutation."

The whole German press--as stated by the author of the
Memorandum--reproduced an interview with Dr. Rifaat, a member of the
Committee of Union and Progress, originally published in a Danish
paper, in the course of which the interviewed politician spoke of
"a conspiracy embracing the whole Armenian population residing in
Turkey, threatening the very existence of the country and intended
to play Constantinople into the hands of the Allies." He further
stated that the plot was discovered before it had ripened, that
many of the conspirators, including the Arabian Chief Abd-ul-Kerim,
had been arrested and punished, and that 21 of the adherents of the
latter were hanged. The author of the Memorandum makes the following
comment on this statement: "If Dr. Rifaat knows anything of an Arabian
conspiracy, it is impossible for us to verify this finding. In any
case an 'Arabian' conspiracy is not an 'Armenian' conspiracy. But the
number of the 21 conspirators hanged and the other contents of the
'interview' lead inevitably to the conclusion that Dr. Rifaat did
intentionally mislead public opinion, by representing the plot of the
Turkish opposition which had already been discovered before the war,
[2] and which aimed at the fall of the present government and the
murder of Talaat Bey and other Young Turk leaders, as 'a conspiracy
embracing the whole Armenian population residing in Turkey.'"

The interview with Dr. Rifaat is also one of the trump-cards played
in a pamphlet published in Berlin under the title of "The Armenian
Question" by C. A. Bratter, a person describing himself as "a Citizen
of a neutral State and a German Journalist." This pamphlet (which was
written in order to counteract the influence of an appeal in favour
of the Armenians over the signatures of a number of distinguished
Swiss residents) is minutely analyzed by the author of the Memorandum,
together with its pretended sources of information; and he demonstrates
irrefutably its utter untrustworthiness as well as the bad faith of
its writer. He significantly adds: "How forgetful and how uncritical
must any reader be to whom it is possible to present such lies." [3]

Being ourselves in a position of greater freedom, we can say that this
forgetfulness and this want of critical power are not surprising in
the German public, having regard to the fact that their Government is
in close alliance with the perpetrators of the crimes which Bratter
and other persons of the same mental and moral calibre try to explain
away or justify, and which could and would have been prevented long
ago if that Government had not disregarded the elementary dictates
of humanity.

The German scholar's Memorandum contains some very interesting
evidence showing: (a) that the Armenian leaders, far from engaging
in an anti-Turkish conspiracy either before or during the war, were
entirely loyal to the Turkish Government, in fact so loyal that this
was made a cause of complaint by some of the Turkish opponents of the
Committee of Union and Progress; (b) that the policy finally adopted
with regard to the Armenians was originally opposed by some of the
members of the ruling party, but when so adopted was a deliberate
policy of extermination; (c) that the acts of resistance on the
part of the Armenians, which are relied upon as an excuse for their
treatment, were isolated acts due in each case to particularly grave
provocation; that, in every instance except that of Zeitoun, they
were later in date than the beginning of the deportations, and were
in fact provoked by the fear of suffering the fate which had already
overtaken neighbouring Armenian communities [see historical summary
in blue book]; (d) that some of the other excuses put forward are
so much at variance with the well-known facts that they could only
deceive persons unable or unwilling to ascertain the truth.

As regards the loyalty of the Turkish Armenians, it is shown by
extracts from leading papers, circulars sent out by the ecclesiastical
dignitaries and by the "Dashnakzagan" (the only influential party
organisation of the Armenians), as well as by several official
announcements of the Turkish Government or of its agents, issued
as late as August, 1915, that that loyalty was not only the policy
declared by the Armenian leaders and carried out by the bulk of the
population, but that it was also fully acknowledged by the authorities.

In a letter dated the 26th February, 1915, written by Enver Pasha to
the Armenian Bishop of Konia, the former says: "I avail myself of this
opportunity to tell you that the Armenian soldiers in the Ottoman Army
conscientiously perform their duties in the theatre of war, as I can
testify from personal observation. I beg of you to communicate to the
Armenian people, whose perfect devotion to the Ottoman Government is
well known, the expression of my satisfaction and gratitude." Several
other testimonies of a similar kind are quoted in the Memorandum.

In the days of Abd-ul-Hamid the "Dashnakzagan" were closely allied
with the Committee of Union and Progress, and several of the members
of that Committee received considerable help and protection from the
Armenians. Those among them, whose sense of gratitude was not entirely
destroyed by racial fanaticism, were therefore inclined to oppose the
sinister schemes of their less scrupulous colleagues. These schemes,
however, were the natural result of the tendencies which had gradually
gained the upper hand in the Committee of Union and Progress, which
Committee, as is well known, had met with considerable opposition
in some powerful sections of the Turkish population, and for the
sake of removing that opposition had been driven into a policy of
Pan-Islamism. This policy had already been proclaimed in a report
presented to the Congress of the Young Turk party held in 1911,
on which occasion it was urged that "sooner or later the complete
Ottomanisation of all Turkish subjects must be carried through,
but that it was clear that this object could never be obtained by
persuasion, and that the force of arms would