Assassination of Talat Pasha

Assassination of Talat Pasha
Part of Operation Nemesis
See caption
Courtroom during the trial
LocationBerlin-Charlottenburg
Date15 March 1921
DeathsTalat Pasha
MotiveRevenge for the Armenian Genocide
AccusedSoghomon Tehlirian
VerdictAcquittal

On 15 March 1921, Talat Pasha—former grand vizier of the Ottoman Empire and main architect of the Armenian Genocide—was assassinated in Berlin by Armenian student Soghomon Tehlirian. At his trial, Tehlirian argued, "I have killed a man, but I am not a murderer",[1] and the jury acquitted him.

Tehlirian came from Erzindjan in the Ottoman Empire but moved to Serbia before the war; he served in the Armenian volunteer units in the Russian army and lost most of his family in the genocide. Deciding to take revenge, he joined Operation Nemesis, a clandestine program carried out by the Dashnaktsutyun, and was chosen for the mission of assassinating Talat after he killed the Armenian traitor Harutian Mgrditichian in Constantinople. Talat had already been convicted and sentenced to death by an Ottoman court-martial, but was living in Berlin with the permission of the German government. His funeral was attended by many prominent Germans, and the Foreign Office sent a wreath stating, "To a great statesman and a faithful friend."[2]

The defense strategy in Tehlirian's trial, held 2–3 June 1921, was to put Talat on trial for the Armenian Genocide. Extensive evidence on the genocide was heard, resulting in "one of the most spectacular trials of the twentieth century".[3] Tehlirian claimed that he had acted alone and had not premeditated the killing, telling a dramatic and realistic, but untrue story of surviving the genocide and personally witnessing the deaths of his family members. The trial was widely reported in the international media and brought attention and recognition of the facts of the Armenian Genocide. Tehlirian's acquittal brought mostly favorable reactions.

Tehlirian became a national hero for Armenians. Talat was buried in Germany, but his remains were repatriated to Turkey in 1943 and he received a state funeral. He is still viewed positively by many Turks. Polish-Jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin read about the trial in the news and was inspired to create the crime of genocide in international law.

Background

Bodies of dozens of Armenians in a field
The corpses of Armenians beside a road, a common sight along deportation routes[4]

Talat Pasha (1874–1921) was the last powerful grand vizier of the Ottoman Empire as leader of the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP). Considered the primary architect of the Armenian Genocide,[5][6] he ordered that almost the entire Armenian population of the empire be deported to the Syrian Desert in order to cause their deaths.[7][8][9] In a cable dated 13 July 1915, Talat stated that "the aim of the Armenian deportations is the final solution of the Armenian Question".[10] Of 40,000 Armenians deported from Erzurum, it is estimated that fewer than 200 reached Deir ez-Zor.[11] When more Armenians survived than intended, Talat ordered a second wave of massacres in 1916.[12][13] In all, about 1 million Armenians were murdered.[14] In 1918, Talat told journalist Muhittin Birgen [tr] that "I assume full responsibility for the severity applied" during the Armenian deportation and "I absolutely don't regret my deed".[15]

United States ambassador Henry Morgenthau tried to persuade Talat to discontinue the atrocities; he interrupted, stating that he would not reconsider because most of the Armenians were already dead: "The hatred between the Turks and the Armenians is now so intense that we have got to finish with them. If we don’t, they will plan their revenge."[16][17] Talat also told Halide Edib that the extermination of Armenians was justified to advance Turkish national interests, and that "I am ready to die for what I have done, and I know that I shall die for it."[18] In August 1915, after learning about the Armenian massacres that Talat ordered, CUP former finance minister Cavid Bey predicted that he would be assassinated by an Armenian.[19][20]

During World War I, Imperial Germany was a military ally of the Ottoman Empire. Ambassador Hans von Wangenheim approved limited removals of Armenian populations from sensitive areas.[21][22] German representatives issued occasional diplomatic protests when the Ottomans went far beyond this; according to historian Stefan Ihrig, their goal was to "control the political, reputational, and diplomatic damage the genocide might cause".[23] Germany censored information about the genocide[24][25] and undertook propaganda campaigns denying it and accusing Armenians of stabbing the empire in the back.[25][26] Germany's inaction[27] led to accusations that Germany was responsible for the genocide, which became entangled with the war guilt question.[28][29]

Talat Pasha's exile in Berlin

Following the Armistice of Mudros (30 October 1918), Talat fled Constantinople on a German torpedo boat with other CUP leaders—Enver Pasha, Djemal Pasha, Bahaeddin Şakir, Nazım Bey, Osman Bedri, and Cemal Azmi—on the night of 1–2 November, following elaborate preparations. With the exception of Djemal, all were major perpetrators of the genocide; they left both to evade punishment for their crimes and to organize a resistance movement.[30][31] German foreign minister Wilhelm Solf had instructed the embassy in Constantinople to aid Talat and refused the Ottoman government's request to extradite him, because "Talaat has been loyal to us, and our country remains open to him".[32][17][33]

Arriving in Berlin on 10 November, Talat stayed in a hotel in Alexanderplatz and a sanatorium in Neubabelsberg [de], Potsdam[34] before moving into a nine-room apartment at Hardenbergstrasse [de] 4, at today's Ernst-Reuter-Platz.[35][32][36] The Foreign Office kept tabs on the going-on at this apartment using the former Constantinople correspondent for the Frankfurter Zeitung, Paul Weitz [de].[37] Talat's residence was legalized by decree of SPD chancellor Friedrich Ebert and in 1920, his wife Hayriye joined him.[32] The German government had intelligence that Talat's name was first on an Armenian hit list and therefore suggested that he should stay at a secluded estate belonging to former Ottoman chief of staff Fritz Bronsart von Schellendorf in Mecklenburg. Talat refused as he needed the networks of the capitol to pursue his political agitation.[17][38] He initially hoped to use Mustafa Kemal as a puppet and issued orders to generals in the Turkish war of independence from Berlin.[37]

While in exile, Talat had influential German friends from the beginning acquired status as he was seen as a representative of the Turkish nationalist movement abroad. Under the name Ali Saly Bey and using false passport, he traveled freely throughout continental Europe despite being wanted by the United Kingdom and the Ottoman Empire for his crimes.[39][17][40] His presence in Berlin was suspected by many German newspapers, and he spoke at the press conference after the failure of the March 1920 Kapp Putsch.[41][36] Many Germans, but especially the far-right, viewed Turkey as the innocent and wronged party, comparing the Treaty of Versailles to the Treaty of Sèvres and seeing a "community of destiny" between Germany and Turkey.[42] He also wrote a memoir, primarily focused on defending his decision to order a genocide and absolving the CUP from any guilt.[43] Talat and other CUP exiles were convicted and sentenced to death in absentia for the "massacre and annihilation of the Armenian population of the Empire" by the Ottoman Special Military Tribunal on 5 July 1919.[17][39][36] Berliner Tageblatt reported on the verdict, commenting: "Should fate or the gendarme reach [the convicts] one day, there would be no reason to mark that day as a day of mourning."[36]

Operation Nemesis

Russian soldiers pictured in the former Armenian village of Sheykhalan near Muş, 1915
The brothers Soghomon (right), Sahak, and Misak Tehlirian as volunteers in the Russian army

After it became clear that no one else would bring the perpetrators of the genocide to justice,[44][45] the Armenian political party Dashnaktsutyun set up the secret Operation Nemesis, headed by Armen Garo, Shahan Natalie, and Aaron Sachaklian.[46] The conspirators drew up a list of 100 genocide perpetrators to target for assassination, with Talat heading the list.[47][48] There was no shortage of volunteers, young men who either survived the genocide or lost their families, willing to carry out the assassinations.[49] Nemesis operatives did not carry out assassinations without confirming the identity of the target and were careful to avoid accidentally killing the innocent.[50]

One of these volunteers was Soghomon Tehlirian (1896–1960) from Erzindjan, Erzurum Vilayet, a city which had 20,000 Armenian residents prior to World War I and none afterwards.[49][51] Tehlirian was in Serbia when war broke out.[52] After hearing about anti-Armenian atrocities he joined the Armenian volunteer units in the Russian army; as they advanced west, they found the aftermath of the genocide that had been carried out by Ottoman forces. Realizing that his family had been killed, he vowed to take revenge.[53] His memoirs list 85 family members who perished in the genocide.[54] Tehlirian suffered from regular fainting spells and other nervous system disorder that possibly resulted from what is now called post-traumatic stress disorder; during his trial, he said that they were related to his experiences during the genocide.[55][56]

After the war, Tehlirian went to Constantinople, where he assassinated Harutian Mgrditichian, who had worked for the Ottoman secret police and helped compile the list of Armenian intellectuals deported on 24 April 1915. This killing convinced the Nemesis operatives to entrust him with the assassination of Talat Pasha.[57][45] In mid-1920, the Nemesis organization paid for Tehlirian to travel to the United States, where Garo briefed him that the death sentences pronounced against the major perpetrators were not carried out and that from exile, the killers continued their anti-Armenian activities. That fall, the Turkish nationalist movement invaded Armenia. Tehlirian received the photographs of seven leading CUP leaders, whose whereabouts Nemesis was tracking, and departed for Europe, going first to Paris. At the Droshak headquarters in Geneva, he obtained a visa to go to Berlin as a mechanical engineering student, leaving on 2 December.[58]

Despite falling ill with typhoid in mid-December, Tehlirian continued to meet with the commandos plotting assassination, which met in the residence of Libarit Nazariants, vice-consul of the Republic of Armenia.[58] He was so ill that he collapsed while tracking Şakir and had to rest for a week. At the end of February, the conspirators located Talat, whom the Dashnak Central Committee ordered them to focus on to the exclusion of other perpetrators. To confirm the identification, Tehlirian rented a pension across the street at Hardenbergstrasse 37, from which he could observe people coming and going from Talat's apartment. His orders from Natalie stated, "You blow up the skull of the Number 1 nation-murderer and you don’t try to flee. You stand there, your foot on the corpse and surrender to the police, who will come and handcuff you."[59][60]

Assassination

Street outside Hardenbergstrasse 27, where the assassination took place

On 15 March 1921 around 10:45, a Tuesday and a rainy spring day, Talat left his apartment intending to purchase a pair of gloves. Tehlirian approached him from the opposite direction, recognized him, crossed the street, closed in from behind, and shot him at close range in the nape of his neck outside of Hardenbergstrasse 27, on a busy street corner, causing instant death.[61][62][63] The bullet went through his spinal cord and exited above Talat's left eye, having destroyed his brain;[63][64] he fell down forward into a pool of blood.[65] Tehlirian at first stood over the corpse but then after onlookers shouted, forgot his instructions and ran away.[66] He threw away the 9×19mm Parabellum pistol that he used for the assassination and fled via Fasanenstrasse where he was apprehended by shop assistant Nikolaus Jessen. People in the crowd beat him severely; Tehlirian exclaimed in broken German something to the effect of, "It’s ok. I am a foreigner and he is a foreigner!"[61][64][65] Shortly afterwards he told police, "I am not the murderer; he was."[61][67]

The body was cordoned off by police. Fellow CUP exile Nazım Bey arrived at the scene shortly afterwards and went to Talat's apartment at Hardenbergstrasse 4, where Ernst Jäckh, a Foreign Office official and pro-Turkish activist, who often met with Talat at 11:30, soon arrived.[48] Şakir also found out about the assassination and identified the body for the police.[65] Jäckh and Nazım returned to the scene of the assassination, where the former attempted to convince the police to surrender the body using his authority as a Foreign Office official, but they refused to do so before the homicide squad arrived. Jäckh complained that the "Turkish Bismarck" could not be left outside in such a state for passersby to gawk at.[48][68] Eventually, they received permission to transport the body, which was sent to Charlottenburg mortuary in a Red Cross vehicle.[69] Immediately after the assassination, Şakir and Nazım received police protection.[69] Other CUP exiles worried that they would be next.[70]

Funeral

Graves honoring Armenian Genocide perpetrators Bahaeddin Şakir and Cemal Azmi in the cemetery of Şehitlik Mosque in Berlin (foreground left).[71] Both were assassinated by Nemesis operatives in 1922.[71][72]

Initially, Talat's friends hoped that he could be buried in Anatolia, but neither the Ottoman government in Constantinople nor the Turkish nationalist movement in Ankara wanted the body; it would be a political liability to associate themselves with the man considered the worst criminal of World War I.[73] On 19 March, Talat was buried in the Alter St.-Matthäus-Kirchhof in a well-attended ceremony.[74] Invitations from "Frau Talaat Pascha"[69] and the Oriental Club were sent, but the turnout was higher than expected.[74] At 11:00, prayers led by the imam of the Turkish embassy, Shükri Bey, were held at Talat's apartment. Afterwards a large procession accompanied the coffin to Matthäus, where he was interred.[69]

Many prominent Germans paid their respects, including former foreign ministers Richard von Kühlmann and Arthur Zimmermann, along with the former head of Deutsche Bank, the ex-director of the Baghdad railway, several military personnel who had served in the Ottoman Empire during the war, and August von Platen-Hallermünde, attending on behalf of the exiled kaiser.[73] The German foreign office sent a wreath with a ribbon stating, "To a great statesman and a faithful friend."[2][73] Şakir, barely able to maintain his composure, read a funeral oration while the coffin was lowered into the grave, covered in an Ottoman flag.[73] He asserted that the assassination was "the consequence of imperialist politics against the Islamic nations".[74]

In late April, national-liberal politician Gustav Stresemann of the German People’s Party proposed a public commemoration to honor Talat.[75][76] The German-Turkish Association [de] declined.[76] Stresemann was well aware of the genocide and believed at least 1 million Armenians had been killed.[77] Talat's personal belongings ended up in the possession of Weismann, the head of Berlin's Public Security Office; his memoirs were given to Şakir who had them published.[78]

Trial

Court where Tehlirian was tried

Initially Tehlirian was offered a Turkish-speaking interpreter, but he refused to speak Turkish. On 16 March the police recruited an Armenian interpreter, Kevork Kaloustian, who was also part of the Nemesis operation.[79] Tehlirian admitted that he had killed Talat out of vengeance and planned this act before he came to Germany, but told police that he acted alone.[55][80] At his trial, Tehlirian denied having premeditated the assassination and the interpreter refused to sign the document of interrogation on the grounds that Tehlirian was incapacitated by his injuries.[80] The preliminary investigation was concluded by 21 March.[81]

The Dashnaktsutyun raised between 100,000 and 300,000 marks for his legal defense, mostly from Armenian Americans.[36][54][82] Dashnak leader Vahan Zakariants, who had helped track Talat, translated Tehlirian's words into German during the trial and was also involved in paying bills, organizing the defense, and relaying the Dashnak Central Committee of America's instructions to Tehlirian.[83][84] Kaloustian performed interpretation from German to Armenian.[84] Tehlirian was represented by three German lawyers: Adolf von Gordon, Johannes Werthauer [de], and Theodor Niemeyer [de], who were paid 75,000 marks each;[84][85] their prominence resulted in even more publicity for the trial.[1] The state prosecutor was Gollnick[86] and the judge was Erich Lemberg; the case was heard by twelve jurors.[1][87]

The trial was held at the Moabit Criminal Court [de] on 2–3 June.[36][88] The courtroom was completely full. Many Armenians in Germany attended the trial as did some Turks including Talat's wife.[54][89] Many journalists for German and international newspapers were in attendance; press passes were requested, among many others, by the Daily Telegraph, the Chicago Daily News, and the Philadelphia Public Ledger.[90] According to Ihrig, it "was one of the most spectacular trials of the twentieth century".[3]

Defense and prosecution strategies

The defense strategy was to put Talat Pasha on trial for the murder of Tehlirian's family members and the other 1 million Armenians whose deaths he had ordered.[82] According to Natalie, the trial not "only became a sacred work of justice but also became an occasion to propagandize the Armenian case".[91] Natalie believed that, according to German law, Tehlirian would likely be convicted, but hoped to secure a pardon. Werthauer was more optimistic, announcing days after the assassination his certainty of achieving an acquittal for his client.[36] The Protestant missionary and activist Johannes Lepsius, who had spoken out against the killing of Armenians since 1896, worked on presenting the case against Talat.[92] Their strategy was successful, as social-democratic newspaper Vorwärts noted: "In reality it was the blood-stained shadow of Talât Pasha who was sitting on the defendant’s bench; and the true charge was the ghastly Armenian Horrors, not his execution by one of the few victims left alive."[3]

In order to maximize the probability of acquittal, the defense decided to present Tehlirian as a lone vigilante, rather than an avenger of his entire nation.[82] German police looked for Tehlirian's associates but did not uncover them.[91] The defense tried to forge a connection between Tehlirian and Talat through Tehlirian's mother by proving that her death was caused by Talat.[84] Along with the enormity of Talat's crimes, the defense argument rested on Tehlirian's traumatized mental state, which could make him not liable for his actions under German law of temporary insanity under section 51 of the penal code.[81][82]

In contrast, the German prosecution's main goal was to depoliticize the proceedings[84] and avoid a discussion of Germany's role in the genocide.[93]The trial was held in only one and a half days instead of the three requested by the defense, and six out of the fifteen witnesses called by the defense were not heard.[81][93] The prosecution also applied for the case to be heard in camera to minimize exposure, but the Foreign Office rejected this solution, fearing that secrecy would not improve Germany's reputation.[85] Historian Carolyn Dean writes that "The cynical mission of the German government—to prosecute Tehlirian quickly while using the opportunity to redeem German conduct—inadvertently transformed Tehlirian into a symbol of human conscience tragically compelled to gun down a murderer for want of justice."[94]

Ihrig and other historians have argued that the prosector's strategy was deeply flawed, indicating either his incompetence or lack of motivation to achieve a conviction.[95][96] Gollnick insisted that events in the Ottoman Empire had nothing to do with the assassination and tried to avoid the presentation of evidence on the genocide. Once the evidence was presented, he denied that Talat played a role in the Armenian atrocities and was ultimately obliged to justify the orders that Talat sent.[84] Prior to the trial, Hans Humann, who controlled the anti-Armenian Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, intensely lobbied the prosecutor's office.[97] Although he had access to Talat Pasha's memoirs, the prosecutor did not enter them into evidence at the trial.[98] Ihrig speculates that Gollnick was disgusted by Humann's lobbying and perhaps even sympathized with the defendant. After the trial, Gollnick was appointed to the editorial board of Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung.[99]

Tehlirian's testimony

Result of Armenian massacres in Erzindjan

The trial opened with the judge asking Tehlirian many questions about the genocide, the session revealing the judge's knowledge of the genocide and Turkish and German narratives about it. He asked Tehlirian to recount what he witnessed during the events.[1][100] Tehlirian said that after the outbreak of war, most Armenian men in Erzindjan were conscripted into the army. In early 1915 some leaders were arrested and reports of their massacre reached the city. In June 1915, the general deportation order was given and leaving property behind, the Armenians were forced to leave their homes by armed gendarmes. As soon as they left the city, the gendarmes began to shoot at the victims and tried to loot all their valuables.[101]

Tehlirian stated, "One of the gendarmes carried off my sister... I cannot remember this day anymore. I do not want to be reminded of this day. I would rather die now than to speak about this dark day again."[102] After prodding from the judge, he recalled how he witnessed the murder of his mother and brother and was then knocked unconscious, awaking underneath his brother's corpse. He never saw his sister again.[103] After this, Tehlirian stated, he found shelter with various Kurds before escaping into Persia with other survivors.[104] However, this testimony was false: Tehlirian was actually fighting with the Armenian volunteers in the Russian army at the time.[54][105][106] Historian Rolf Hosfeld states that Tehlirian "was extremely well groomed" and "drew an extraordinarily believable picture of the massacre in his hometown".[106] Historian Tessa Hofmann states that, while false, Tehlirian's testimony featured "extremely typical and essential elements of the collective fate of his compatriots".[54] The prosecution did not challenge the veracity of the testimony, and the truth was not uncovered until decades later.[105][52][79]

Tehlirian was asked who he had held responsible for instigating the massacres and about historical precedents such as the Adana massacre. Only then did the judge read out the charges of premeditated murder. Asked if he was guilty, Tehlirian said "no", despite having initially admitted to having carried out the assassination.[107] He explained, "I do not consider myself guilty because my conscience was clear... I have killed a man, but I am not a murderer."[108][1] Tehlirian denied having a plan to kill Talat, but stated that two weeks before the killing, he had a vision: "the images from the massacre came in front of my eyes again and again. I saw the corpse of my mother. This corpse stood up and came up to me and said: 'You saw that Talât is here and you are totally indifferent? You are no longer my son!'"[108][109] At this point, he stated, "I suddenly woke up and decided to kill that man."[108] Following additional questions, he denied knowing that Talat was in Berlin and reiterated that he had no plan to kill the Ottoman official, appearing confused.[110] The judge intervened after further probing from the prosecutor, stating that "there had been changes in his resolve".[108] During the trial, Tehlirian was never asked if he belonged to an Armenian revolutionary group or if he committed the assassination as part of a conspiracy.[111] If the court knew that the assassination was part of a premeditated conspiracy, Hosfeld argues, Tehlirian would not have been acquitted.[106]

Other testimony on the genocide

The court proceeded to hear the police officers and the coroner as witnesses to the assassination and its aftermath, as well as Tehlirian's two landladies, before calling up several Armenians who had interacted with Tehlirian in Berlin. These witnesses also gave information on the Armenian Genocide. Levon Eftian told the court that his family was in Erzurum during the genocide and both his parents were killed, but some other relatives managed to flee. Tehlirian's interpreter, Zakariants, also gave testimony later that day, stating that he lost his father, mother, grandfather, brother, and uncle during the 1890s Hamidian massacres. Mr. Terzibashian, an Armenian tobacconist in Berlin, testified that all his friends and relatives who had been in Erzurum during the genocide were killed.[112]

Christine Terzibashian

Armenian deportees in Erzurum, photographed by Viktor Pietschmann

His wife Christine, in response to the judge's question, stated that she knew nothing of the assassination, but the defense asked her to testify about the Armenian Genocide and the judge allowed this. She was also from Erzurum and stated that of her twenty-one relatives, only three survived.[113] She stated that Armenians were forced to leave Erzurum in the direction of Erzindjan in four groups of five hundred families. They had to walk over the corpses of other Armenians who had been killed earlier. She testified that after they reached Erzindjan, the men were separated from the rest of the deportees, tied together and thrown into the river.[114][115] She explained that the rest of the men were axed to death in the mountains above Malatia and thrown in the water.[115][116]

Afterwards, Terzibashian stated, "the gendarmes came and picked out the most beautiful women and girls... Those who [refused] were impaled with bayonets and their legs were ripped apart. Even pregnant women’s ribs were cut open and their babies taken out and thrown away." This caused great stir in the courtroom. She continued, "My brother also had his head cut off. When my mother saw this, she fell over and was instantly dead. Then a Turk came to me as well and wanted to make me his wife and because I did not agree, he took my child and threw it away." After recounting more gruesome details, she said that the truth was even worse than she could relate.[115][117] Asked who she held responsible for these massacres, she stated, "It happened on Enver Pasha's orders and the soldiers forced the deportees to kneel and shout: 'Long live the pasha!'"[118] The defense stated that her account was corroborated by other witnesses including two German nurses in Erzindjan. Thus, Gordon argued, Tehlirian's account was also "true to the core".[118]

Expert witnesses

Two expert witnesses were heard on the veracity of the testimonies, which the prosecutor also agreed to hear.[119][120] Lepsius testified that "The general deportation was decided upon by the Young Turk Committee, Talât Pasha as minister of the interior as well as probably also Enver Pasha as minister of war, and with the help of the organization of the Young Turk Committee it was carried out."[119] Lepsius quoted from an original document from Talat regarding Armenian deportations: "the destination of the deportations is nothingness" (Das Verschickungsziel ist das Nichts).[119][120]

Following the spirit of this order, care was taken that of the whole population deported from the East Anatolian provinces... only about ten percent reached the destination of the deportations. The other ninety percent were murdered on the way or—except for the cases in which women or girls were sold off by the gendarmes and carried off by Turks and Kurds—died of hunger and exhaustion. The Armenians—deported from Western Anatolia, Cilicia, and Northern Syria... flooded together in the concentration camps—were to the greatest extent annihilated by systematic starvation and periodical massacres. Thus, whenever the concentration camps were filled up by new convoys and there was no more room for the masses of people, they were led to the desert in groups and butchered.[119]

Lepsius noted that despite the official excuse of "preventative measures", "authoritative figures openly admitted in private that this was about the annihilation of the Armenian people".[119] Mentioning the collection of Foreign Office documents that he edited, Germany and Armenia, Lepsius stated that hundreds more similar testimonies existed to those heard by the court; he estimated that overall 1 million Armenians were killed.[121]

German general Otto Liman von Sanders acknowledged "the order of the Young Turk government for the deportations of the Armenians", but also offered excuses and justifications for the deportation, claiming it occurred due to military necessity and the advice of the "highest military authorities"; he did not acknowledge that these high-ranking military officers were mostly Germans.[122] Unlike other witnesses Liman von Sanders said he did not know if Talat was personally responsible for the genocide.[120][123]

Grigoris Balakian

Cable sent by Talat Pasha on 29 August 1915: "The Armenian question in the Eastern Provinces has been resolved. There’s no need to sully the nation and the government with further atrocities."

Next to testify was the Armenian priest Grigoris Balakian, one of those deported on 24 April, who had come from Manchester, England. He described how most of the members of his convoy were beaten to death in Ankara. "The official name was 'deportation,' but in reality it was a systematic policy of annihilation", he stated,[124] explaining:

Getting near to Yozgad about four hours from the town, we saw, in a valley hundreds of heads with long hair, heads of women and girls. The chief of the gendarmes in our escort was named Shukri. I said to him, "I thought that only the men were killed." No, he said, "if we killed only the men, but not the women and girls, in fifty years, there would again be several million Armenians. We must therefore eliminate the women and children in order to settle it once and for all, at home and abroad."[82]

Shukri explained that, unlike in the Hamidian massacres, this time the Ottomans took steps that "no witness would ever reach any court". He said that he could speak freely to Balakian "because, after all, you will end up in the desert and will die there of starvation and will have no chance to bring this truth to light".[124] He said that he had personally ordered that 40,000 Armenians be clubbed to death. After a while, Gordon interrupted, asking Balakian about telegrams from Talat. Balakian said that he had seen such a telegram sent to Asaf Bey, vice-governor of Osmaniye in Cilicia, which read: "Please telegraph us promptly how many of the Armenians are already dead and how many still alive. Minister of the Interior, Talât".[125] Asaf told Balakian that it meant, "What are you waiting for? Begin the massacres [immediately]!"[126] Balakian said that Germans working for the Baghdad railway saved his life. He stated that Armenians held Talat responsible for the massacres: "this is not only the general opinion, but also the truth".[127]

Witnesses and evidence not heard

The defense wanted to read into evidence several of the Talat Pasha telegrams collected by Armenian journalist Aram Andonian to prove Talat's culpability for the genocide.[127][128] Andonian came to Berlin prepared to testify and brought several of the original telegrams, which have since been lost.[129] The former German consul in Aleppo, Walter Rössler [de], was requested by the defense but prevented from testifying by his superiors in the Foreign Office after he told them that he would testify that he believed Talat had "wanted and systematically carried out the annihilation of the Armenians".[130][131] The Foreign Office worried that Rössler would expose German knowledge of, and complicity in, the genocide.[55] At the request of the defense lawyers, Rössler examined Andonian's telegrams and concluded that they were most likely authentic.[132] Andonian did not testify and his telegrams were not entered into evidence because the prosecutor objected on the grounds that there was no doubt that Tehlirian held Talat responsible. Eventually the defense withdrew its request to present more evidence on Talat's guilt;[133] by this time, the jurors had already become focused on Talat's guilt rather than Tehlirian's.[134][135]

Talat's telegrams, not entered as evidence in the trial, were nevertheless discussed in press coverage including by The New York Times.[36] Other witnesses who had been called but were not heard included Bronsart von Schellendorff, soldiers Ernst Paraquin [de] and Franz Carl Endres [de], medic Armin T. Wegner, and Max Erwin von Scheubner-Richter, who witnessed the genocide as vice-consul in Erzurum.[136]

Mental state

Five expert witnesses testified about Tehlirian's mental state and whether it absolved him from criminal responsibility for his actions according to German law;[86] all agreed that he suffered from regular bouts of "epilepsy" due to what he experienced in 1915.[137] According to Ihrig, "it seems clear that none of the five had anything but a very vague understanding of Tehlirian's condition" and "their explanations went rather in the direction of what today we would recognize as post-traumatic stress disorder".[135] Dr. Robert Stoermer testified first, stating that in his opinion, Tehlirian's crime was a deliberate, premeditated killing and did not stem from his mental state.[137][135] According to Hugo Liepmann, Tehlirian had become a "psychopath" because of what he witnessed in 1915, and therefore was not fully responsible for his actions.[138] Neurologist and professor Richard Cassirer testified that "emotional turbulence was the root cause of his condition", and that "affect epilepsy" completely changed his personality.[139][140] Edmund Forster [de] said that traumatic experiences during the war did not cause new pathologies, merely revealed those that already existed, but agreed that Tehlirian was not responsible for his action.[140] The last expert, Bruno Haake, also diagnosed "affect epilepsy" and completely ruled out the possibility that Tehlirian was able to formulate the action of his own free will.[141]

Closing arguments

All the witnesses were heard on the first day. At 9:15 on the second day, Lemberg addressed the jury, stating that they needed to answer the following questions: "[First, is] the defendant, Soghomon Tehlirian, guilty of having killed, with premeditation, another human being, Talât Pasha, on 15 March 1921, in Charlottenburg? ... Secondly, did the defendant carry out this killing with reflection? ... Thirdly, are there any mitigating circumstances?"[142]

Gollnick gave only a brief closing argument; his speech took up six pages in the trial transcript compared to thirty-five for the defense.[142] He argued that Tehlirian was guilty of premeditated murder (as opposed to manslaughter, which carried a lesser sentence) and demanded the death penalty. Political hatred and vindictiveness, Gollnick argued, fully explained the crime. Tehlirian plotted the killing long in advance, traveling from the Ottoman Empire to Berlin, renting a room across the street from his intended victim, carefully observing Talat, and finally killing him.[143] He emphasized Liman von Sanders' evidence, arguing that he was more reliable that Lepsius, and distorting what the German general actually said.[144] Appealing to the stab-in-the-back myth about German defeat in the war, Gollnick argued that the "dislocation" of Armenians was carried out because they "conspired with the Entente and were determined, as soon as the war situation allowed, to stab the Turks in the back and to achieve their independence".[145] Arguing that there was no evidence of Talat's responsibility in the massacres, he questioned the reliability of the documents presented at the trial and the objectivity of the tribunal that had sentenced Talat to death.[143] At the end of his speech, he emphasized Talat Pasha's patriotism and honor.[146]

Of the defense attorneys, Gordon spoke first, accusing Gollnick of being "a defense attorney for Talât Pasha".[146] He argued in favor of the evidence linking Talat to the commission of the genocide, particularly telegrams. Such a large-scale extermination of 1 million Armenians, he maintained, could not have taken place without the coordination of the central government.[146][147] Furthermore, the defense noted that "deliberation" (Überlegung) in German case law refers to the time at which the decision to kill is made, excluding other preparations. A planned act cannot be murder if at the moment of its execution there was no deliberation.[147]

Tehlirian's lawyers compared his actions to the assassination of Austrian official Albrecht Gessler by Swiss folk hero William Tell.

Werthauer said that "Talât Pasha might personally have been an upright man", but he served in a "militarist cabinet".[148][149] A "militarist", he defined as one who "stands in opposition to justice" and "a man of violence: for him the law applies only as far as it can be brought into 'harmony' with 'military necessities'".[150] Werthauer declared that the Allied occupation of the Rhineland and the Bolsheviks were also "militarist" governments.[148][151] He made a dramatic contrast between these "militarists", and Tehlirian, a noble figure whom he compared to William Tell: "Of all the juries in the world, which one would have condemned Tell if he had shot his arrow at [the tyrant Albrecht] Gessler? Is there a more humanitarian act than that which has been described in this courtroom?"[148] Along with arguing that Tehlirian's act was compulsively committed, the defense maintained that it was also just:[152]

The Armenian nation, from thousands of years ago down to its youngest child, stands behind Tehlirian.
Tehlirian carries with him in his thoughts the flag of justice, the flag of humanity, and the flag of vengeance to uphold the honor of his sisters and relatives. With all these thoughts in mind he confronts the one person who violated his family’s honor, destroyed the well-being and happiness of millions of people, and physically annihilated a whole nation.[153]

Both the prosecution and the defense stressed the difference between German and Turkish behavior during the genocide. Werthauer argued that Talat had been living in Berlin without the knowledge of the German government.[110] Niemeyer said that exoneration "would put an end to the misconception the world has of us" that Germany was responsible for the genocide.[154]

Verdict

Soghomon Tehlirian's release from prison

After the closing arguments were delivered, the judge asked Tehlirian if he had anything to add; he stated, "I am convinced that whatever they have said suffices. I have nothing to add."[94]

The jury deliberated for an hour before answering the question of whether Tehlirian was guilty of deliberately killing Talat with one word: "No".[60][136] A unanimous verdict, it left no possibility of appeal by the prosecution.[155] The audience burst into applause.[156][136] The cost of the proceedings, 306,484 marks[84] was borne by the state treasury.[52] Gollnick stated that "Since two medical expert witnesses confirmed the prerequisites of section 51 of the Imperial Criminal Code, we assume that the verdict of not guilty is determined based on this stipulation."[60] However, Ihrig states that "the jury did not necessarily find Tehlirian innocent because of 'temporary insanity'"; he notes that the defense focused more on the political rather than medical aspects of Tehlirian's act.[136]

Following his acquittal and deportation from Germany,[157] Tehlirian went to Manchester with Balakian, and thence to the United States under the false name "Saro Melikian", where he was honored by the editorial board of Hairenik. He continued to be ill and needed medical treatment for his stress disorder.[158] Transcripts of the trial, which were purchased by many Armenians around the world, were sold to recoup the cost of Tehlirian's defense and raise money for the Nemesis operation.[159]

Press coverage

Coverage of the trial in The New York Times

The assassination and trial received widespread international press coverage[160][161] and brought attention and recognition to the facts of the genocide.[72][162] Contemporaries understood the trial to be more about the Armenian Genocide than Tehlirian's personal guilt.[163] News coverage reflected the tension between public sympathy for Armenian victims of genocide and value of law and order. The New York Times noted that the jury faced a dilemma; by acquitting, they would condemn the Armenian atrocities, but also sanction extralegal killing: "This dilemma cannot be escaped: all assassins should be punished; this assassin should not be punished. And there you are!"[164] Overall, reactions to the acquittal were favorable.[161]

Germany

"A Tribute for Talat Pasha" by Bronsart von Schellendorff in Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, claiming that Armenians were the aggressors in 1915.[165]

The assassination made the headlines of many German newspapers on the same day, with most coverage sympathetic to the victim.[41] The next day, most newspapers in Germany reported on the assassination and many printed obituaries. A typical example of coverage was Vossische Zeitung, which acknowledged Talat's role in attempting to "exterminat[e] all reachable members of the [Armenian] tribe", but advanced a number of justifications for the genocide.[166] Other newspapers suggested that Talat was the wrong target for Armenian revenge.[167] The Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung launched an anti-Armenian campaign claiming that backstabbing and murder such as Tehlirian had carried out was "the true Armenian manner".[168][169][170] One of the only newspapers initially sympathetic to the assassin was the Communist Freiheit.[171]

Coverage of the trial was widespread for a month thereafter, and the "Armenian William Tell" continued to be brought up in political debate until the Nazi seizure of power in 1933.[172] Ihrig emphasizes that the trial "established genocide as fact for the German newspapers all across the [political] spectrum".[173] Most newspapers extensively quoted Lepsius' and Tehlirian's testimonies.[174] German reactions to the acquittal were mixed, being generally favorable among those who were sympathetic to Armenians or universal human rights.[175][90] Journalist Emil Ludwig, writing in the pacifist magazine Die Weltbühne wrote, "Only when a society of nations has organized itself as the protector of international order will no Armenian killer remain unpunished, because no Turkish Pasha has the right to send a nation into the desert".[175][76] A few months after the trial, Wegner published the full transcript. In the preface, he praised Tehlirian's "heroic readiness to sacrifice himself for his people", contrasting this with the lack of courage needed to order a genocide from one's desk.[87][176]

On the nationalist side of opinion, which tended to be anti-Armenian, many newspapers switched from denying the genocide to justifying it, following Humann's Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, which published many anti-Armenian articles[177] and called the ruling a "judicial scandal".[170] Arguments justifying mass extermination, widely accepted by nationalist newspapers,[178] rested on the supposed racial characteristics of Armenians, and were easily connected to theories of racial antisemitism.[179] In 1926, Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg claimed that only the "Jewish press" welcomed Tehlirian's acquittal.[180] He also claimed that "the Armenians led the espionage against the Turks, similar to the Jews against Germany", thus justifying Talat's actions against them.[181]

Ottoman Empire

Following Talat's assassination, Ankara newspapers praised him as a great revolutionary and reformer; Turkish nationalists told the German consul that he remained "their hope and idol".[73] Yeni Gün [tr] stated that "Our great patriot has died for his country.… We salute his fresh tomb and bow low to kiss his eyes. Talat was a political giant. Talat was a genius. History will prove his immense stature and will make of him a martyr and an apostle.… Talat will remain the greatest man that Turkey has produced".[111] In Constantinople, the reaction to his death was mixed. Some paid homage to "the personality who [from 1908 to 1918] played the most important role in Turkey" (Vakit [tr]),[182] but the liberal daily Alemdar [tr] commented that Talat was paid back in his own coin, and "his death is the atonement for his deeds".[168] Hakimiyet-i Milliye claimed that Tehlirian confessed he was sent by the British.[183] Many articles emphasized Talat's journey from humble beginnings to the heights of power and defended his anti-Armenian policies.[182] Talat's memoirs were serialized in the Istanbul newspaper Yeni Şark in 1921.[184] In his newspaper published in Constantinople, Armenian socialist Dikran Zaven [hy] expressed hope that "Turks aware of the true interests of their country will not count this former minister among their good statesmen".[185] In 1922, Talat's conviction was rescinded by the Kemalist government.[186] On 13 April 1924, the Kemalist government passed a law granting the families of Talat and Şakir—the two most central perpetrators of the Armenian Genocide—a pension. Later Talat's family also received other compensation derived from confiscated Armenian properties.[187]

State funeral in Turkey

Talat was buried in 1943 at the Monument of Liberty, Istanbul as a national hero.[188]

At the request of the office of the Prime Minister of Turkey, Şükrü Saracoğlu,[189] Talat's remains were disinterred and transported to Turkey, where he received a state funeral on 25 February 1943, attended by German ambassador Franz von Papen, Ahmet Emin Yalman, and Saracoğlu.[190][18][191] With this gesture, Adolf Hitler hoped to secure Turkish support for the Axis in World War II.[18] Hüseyin Cahit Yalçın gave the funeral oration as Talat was buried at the Monument of Liberty, Istanbul, originally dedicated to those who lost their lives preventing the 1909 Ottoman countercoup.[188]

This reburial, Kieser argues, resulted in Talat being "fully rehabilitated and installed as an outstanding and positive figure in public Turkish history".[191] The return of Talat's body occurred shortly after the 1942 wealth tax intended to financially ruin non-Muslim citizens of Turkey.[192] Turkish writer Orhan Seyfi [tr] condemned the acquittal of Tehlirian but argued that Germany made up for this by transporting his body to Turkey in 1943.[190] Writing in Ulus, journalist Yunus Nadi emphasized continuity and the debt that the republic owed to Talat's efforts, as well as the legitimacy of the fight against non-Turkish elements.[188][193] In 1946, Yalçın published Talat's memoirs, describing him in the preface as "a strong patriot, prepared to sacrifice everything, even his own life, for the salvation and well-being of the fatherland".[194] In the past, commemorative ceremonies were held to honor Talat at the Monument of Liberty, but this practice had been discontinued as of 2013.[195]

Reception

Turkey

Counter-protestors against the 2006 pro-Talat march in Berlin: "No honor for Turkish genocide perpetrators in Germany".

In Turkey, Tehlirian is considered a terrorist.[52] The shirt that Talat was wearing when he was assassinated is displayed at the Istanbul Military Museum in Istanbul.[195] In the 1950s, Turkish agents tracked down Tehlirian in Casablanca and threatened his life, so he had to move to the United States.[196][45] Talat's memoirs were frequently reprinted approvingly.[197][198] Many mosques, schools, housing developments and streets in Turkey and other countries are named after Talat as of 2020.[18][195] Historian Tessa Hofmann states that "To this day Talaat is revered as a patriotic martyr in his homeland and in the Turkish diaspora."[18]

Since 2005, there have been attempts by Turks in Berlin to have a memorial constructed at the site of the assassination.[71] In March 2006, Turkish nationalist groups organized two rallies in Berlin intended to commemorate "the murder of Talat Pasha" and protest "the lie of genocide". Berlin Police tried to ban the march, but a court overturned the ban on the condition that the demonstrators not call the genocide a "lie". Organizers described Talat as a statesman "who created the conditions for our war of liberation". German politicians criticized the march, and turnout was low.[199][200]

Turkish historian Taner Akçam argues that the 2007 assassination of Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink by a Turkish ultranationalist was committed in order to avenge the assassination of Talat Pasha. He notes similarities between the killings, both committed in broad daylight with the assassin not making a determined effort to escape.[201]

Armenia

Soghomon Tehlirian bust in Gyumri, Armenia

Tehlirian instantly became a hero for the Armenian cause.[65] Statues and busts of Tehlirian have been erected in Armenia's capital Yerevan (2003)[202] and other places in Armenia including Gyumri[203] and Maralik (2015).[204] In Marseille, France, where a large Armenian community resides, a square was named after Tehlirian in 2017.[205] It is commonly but incorrectly believed that Tehlirian survived the genocide by hiding under his mother's corpse.[52]

Popular culture

External video
video icon Nicht ich bin der Mörder!

There have been several works of culture and art that reference the assassination.[206] Turkish-German writer Zafer Şenocak discusses the assassination in his novel Perilous Kinship (1998); one of the characters is making a film about the assassination.[207] The novel Mördermord ("The murder of a murderer"; 2002) by Hans-Ulrich Lüdemann [de] and Günther Fuchs also concerns the event, as does the 2005 play History Tilt by Hans-Werner Kroesinger [de], which has been performed multiple times in Berlin. Two documentaries and a feature film deal with the assassination.[206] Lepsius' testimony in the trial was prominently covered in the 1991 French film Mayrig.[208] The civil society initiative Nicht ich bin der Mörder! ("I am not the murderer!") staged readings of the trial transcript in Berlin between 2010 and 2016, and a resumption is planned for the centenary in 2021.[206]

International law

Polish-Jewish law student Raphael Lemkin, known for coining the word genocide in 1944,[209][210] read about the trial in the newspaper. Lemkin asked his professor, Julius Makarewicz, why Talat could not be tried for his crimes in Germany. He strongly disagreed with Makarewicz that Westphalian sovereignty meant that state leaders could kill their own citizens en masse and it was wrong to intervene.[160] In a 1949 interview for CBS News, Lemkin explained that he "became interested in genocide because it happened to the Armenians; and after[wards] the Armenians got a very rough deal" as the perpetrators of the genocide were not punished: "The trial of Talaat Pasha in 1921 in Berlin is very instructive. A man, whose mother was killed in the genocide, killed Talaat Pasha... as a lawyer, I thought that a crime should not be punished by the victims, but should be punished by a court."[211]

Tehlirian's trial was cited by those who defended Sholem Schwarzbard's assassination of Ukrainian anti-Jewish pogromist Symon Petliura in 1926; he was subsequently acquitted by a French court.[51][212] According to historian Carolyn Dean, Tehlirian's and Schwarzbard's trials were "the first major trials in Western Europe featuring victims of interethnic violence and state-sponsored mass atrocities seeking justice".[213] In Eichmann in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt contrasted both cases from the later Eichmann trial, in which Israeli agents kidnapped Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann and brought him to Israel to stand trial. She noted that both avengers sought a day in court to publicize the unpunished crimes committed against their peoples.[214][195] Tehlirian's act was also cited by Swiss lawyer Eugen Curti [de], defending the Jew David Frankfurter, who assassinated Swiss Nazi Wilhelm Gustloff in February 1936. Curti compared the persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany to the Armenian Genocide. Under pressure from Germany, Frankfurter was nevertheless convicted.[215]

Future Nuremberg trial prosecutor Robert Kempner, who attended the trial, believed that it was the first occasion in legal history in which it was recognized "that gross violations of human rights, and especially genocide that is committed by a government can be contested by foreign states, and that [such foreign intervention] does not constitute impermissible meddling".[216] Marian Mesrobian MacCurdy compares Talat Pasha's killing to the 1942 assassination of Reinhard Heydrich—a main architect of the Final Solution—by Czech resistance operatives trained by the Allies. In both cases, she states, the assassins "act[ed] with moral authority to deliver justice to a genocidal killer".[217] Lemkin also believed that Tehlirian "upheld the moral order of mankind".[51] Historian Hans-Lukas Kieser states "assassination perpetuated the sick relationship of a victim in quest of revenge with a perpetrator entrenched in defiant denial".[175]

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Dean 2019, p. 41.
  2. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 232.
  3. ^ a b c Ihrig 2016, p. 235.
  4. ^ Akçam 2018, p. 158.
  5. ^ Kieser 2018, p. xi.
  6. ^ Dadrian & Akçam 2011, p. 23.
  7. ^ Kieser 2018, pp. 234–235.
  8. ^ Göçek 2015, p. 151.
  9. ^ Üngör 2012, p. 54.
  10. ^ Dadrian & Akçam 2011, p. 18.
  11. ^ Üngör 2012, p. 53.
  12. ^ Kieser 2018, p. 374.
  13. ^ Suny 2015, pp. 325–326.
  14. ^ Göçek 2015, p. 1.
  15. ^ Akçam 2008, p. 111.
  16. ^ Suny 2015, p. 269.
  17. ^ a b c d e Hofmann 2020, p. 75.
  18. ^ a b c d e Hofmann 2020, p. 76.
  19. ^ Kieser 2018, p. 320.
  20. ^ Ozavci 2019, pp. 194, 215.
  21. ^ Suny 2015, pp. 298–299.
  22. ^ Kieser 2018, pp. 20–21.
  23. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 132–133.
  24. ^ Suny 2015, p. 303.
  25. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 189.
  26. ^ Kieser 2018, p. 21.
  27. ^ Suny 2015, p. 298.
  28. ^ Kieser 2010.
  29. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 194–195.
  30. ^ Dadrian & Akçam 2011, p. 24.
  31. ^ Yenen 2020, p. 74.
  32. ^ a b c Kieser 2018, p. 382.
  33. ^ Hosfeld 2005, pp. 11–12.
  34. ^ Hosfeld 2005, pp. 12–13.
  35. ^ Hofmann 2020, pp. 74–75.
  36. ^ a b c d e f g h Hosfeld, Rolf; Petrossian, Gurgen (August 2020). "Tehlirjan, Soghomon". Lexikon der Politischen Strafprozesse [de] (in German). Retrieved 24 March 2021.
  37. ^ a b Hosfeld 2005, p. 16.
  38. ^ Hosfeld 2005, p. 12.
  39. ^ a b Kieser 2018, p. 385.
  40. ^ Hosfeld 2005, p. 15.
  41. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 227.
  42. ^ Kieser 2018, pp. 386–387.
  43. ^ Göçek 2015, pp. 251–252, 257.
  44. ^ MacCurdy 2015, p. 172.
  45. ^ a b c Hofmann 2020, p. 77.
  46. ^ Göçek 2015, p. 266.
  47. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 167, 194.
  48. ^ a b c Kieser 2018, p. 404.
  49. ^ a b MacCurdy 2015, pp. 172–173.
  50. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 175, 201–202.
  51. ^ a b c Jacobs 2019, p. 33.
  52. ^ a b c d e Jacobs 2019, p. 36.
  53. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 173–174, 186.
  54. ^ a b c d e Hofmann 2020, p. 82.
  55. ^ a b c Dean 2019, p. 40.
  56. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 174, 272.
  57. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 177, 186.
  58. ^ a b MacCurdy 2015, pp. 187–188.
  59. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 189–190.
  60. ^ a b c Hofmann 2020, p. 81.
  61. ^ a b c Ihrig 2016, p. 226.
  62. ^ Kieser 2018, p. 403.
  63. ^ a b Bogosian 2015, p. 12.
  64. ^ a b Hosfeld 2005, p. 7.
  65. ^ a b c d Suny 2015, p. 344.
  66. ^ Bogosian 2015, p. 13.
  67. ^ Hosfeld 2005, p. 8.
  68. ^ Hosfeld 2005, pp. 8–9.
  69. ^ a b c d Hosfeld 2005, p. 9.
  70. ^ Göçek 2015, p. 334.
  71. ^ a b c Hofmann 2020, p. 88.
  72. ^ a b Suny 2015, p. 346.
  73. ^ a b c d e Hosfeld 2005, p. 10.
  74. ^ a b c Kieser 2018, p. 405.
  75. ^ Kieser 2018, p. 407.
  76. ^ a b c Ihrig 2016, p. 268.
  77. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 269.
  78. ^ Dadrian & Akçam 2011, p. 155.
  79. ^ a b Petrossian 2020, p. 94.
  80. ^ a b Petrossian 2020, pp. 94, 96.
  81. ^ a b c Hofmann 2020, p. 78.
  82. ^ a b c d e MacCurdy 2015, p. 266.
  83. ^ MacCurdy 2015, p. 271.
  84. ^ a b c d e f g Petrossian 2020, p. 95.
  85. ^ a b Hofmann 2020, p. 79.
  86. ^ a b Hofmann 2020, p. 80.
  87. ^ a b Garibian 2018, p. 221.
  88. ^ Hosfeld 2005, pp. 18–19.
  89. ^ Hosfeld 2005, p. 20.
  90. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 264.
  91. ^ a b MacCurdy 2015, p. 267.
  92. ^ Hosfeld 2005, p. 18.
  93. ^ a b Hosfeld 2005, p. 17.
  94. ^ a b Dean 2019, p. 45.
  95. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 257, 262.
  96. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 278, 290.
  97. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 254.
  98. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 283.
  99. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 272.
  100. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 235–236.
  101. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 236.
  102. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 236–237.
  103. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 237–238.
  104. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 238–239.
  105. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 263.
  106. ^ a b c Hosfeld 2013, p. 12.
  107. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 235, 239.
  108. ^ a b c d Ihrig 2016, p. 239.
  109. ^ Dean 2019, pp. 41–42.
  110. ^ a b Dean 2019, p. 42.
  111. ^ a b Bogosian 2015, p. 202.
  112. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 240–241.
  113. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 241.
  114. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 241–242.
  115. ^ a b c Dean 2019, p. 43.
  116. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 242.
  117. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 242–243.
  118. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 243.
  119. ^ a b c d e Ihrig 2016, p. 244.
  120. ^ a b c Petrossian 2020, p. 96.
  121. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 244–245.
  122. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 246–247.
  123. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 247.
  124. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 248.
  125. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 248–249.
  126. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 249.
  127. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 250.
  128. ^ Mouradian 2015, pp. 256–257.
  129. ^ Akçam 2018, pp. 43–45.
  130. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 262–263.
  131. ^ Hosfeld 2013, pp. 10–11.
  132. ^ Akçam 2018, pp. 44, 231–232.
  133. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 250–251.
  134. ^ Dean 2019, p. 37.
  135. ^ a b c Ihrig 2016, p. 251.
  136. ^ a b c d Ihrig 2016, p. 262.
  137. ^ a b Garibian 2018, p. 226.
  138. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 251–252.
  139. ^ MacCurdy 2015, p. 191.
  140. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 252.
  141. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 252–253.
  142. ^ a b Ihrig 2016, p. 253.
  143. ^ a b Petrossian 2020, p. 97.
  144. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 255.
  145. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 255–256.
  146. ^ a b c Ihrig 2016, p. 257.
  147. ^ a b Petrossian 2020, p. 98.
  148. ^ a b c Dean 2019, p. 44.
  149. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 259.
  150. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 259–260.
  151. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 260.
  152. ^ Dean 2019, p. 47.
  153. ^ Manukyan, Suren (16 March 2019). "A Beautiful Crime: Soghomon Tehlirian and the Birth of the Concept of Genocide". EVN Report. Retrieved 16 March 2021.
  154. ^ Dean 2019, p. 46.
  155. ^ Hosfeld 2005, p. 27.
  156. ^ MacCurdy 2015, p. 278.
  157. ^ Hofmann 2020, p. 67.
  158. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 301–302.
  159. ^ MacCurdy 2015, p. 291.
  160. ^ a b Irvin-Erickson 2016, p. 36.
  161. ^ a b Hofmann 2016, p. 94.
  162. ^ Dean 2019, p. 34.
  163. ^ Dean 2019, p. 35.
  164. ^ Dean 2019, p. 36.
  165. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 277–279.
  166. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 228.
  167. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 228–229.
  168. ^ a b Hosfeld 2005, p. 11.
  169. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 229–231.
  170. ^ a b Hofmann 2016, p. 95.
  171. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 231.
  172. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 271–272.
  173. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 293.
  174. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 265.
  175. ^ a b c Kieser 2018, p. 408.
  176. ^ Gruner 2012, p. 11.
  177. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 272–273, 293.
  178. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 356.
  179. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 293–294.
  180. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 296.
  181. ^ Hofmann 2020, p. 86.
  182. ^ a b Kieser 2018, p. 406.
  183. ^ Sarıhan, Zeki (15 March 2020). "Talat Paşa'nın katli: Türkiye basınında nasıl karşılandı?". Independent Türkçe (in Turkish). Retrieved 28 March 2021.
  184. ^ Adak 2007, p. 166.
  185. ^ Kieser 2018, pp. 407, 426.
  186. ^ Petrossian 2020, pp. 99–100.
  187. ^ Dadrian & Akçam 2011, p. 105.
  188. ^ a b c Kieser 2018, p. 419.
  189. ^ Olson 1986, p. 55.
  190. ^ a b Olson 1986, p. 46.
  191. ^ a b Kieser 2018, p. 420.
  192. ^ Adak 2007, p. 165.
  193. ^ Olson 1986, p. 49.
  194. ^ Kieser 2018, p. 421.
  195. ^ a b c d Garibian 2018, p. 234.
  196. ^ MacCurdy 2015, pp. 275–280.
  197. ^ Göçek 2015, p. 257.
  198. ^ Kieser 2018, p. 422.
  199. ^ Fleck 2014, pp. 268–270.
  200. ^ von Bieberstein 2017, p. 259.
  201. ^ Akcam, Taner (9 February 2012). "Akcam: Talat Pasha Has Been Avenged". The Armenian Weekly. Retrieved 5 April 2021.
  202. ^ "Soghomon Tehlirian Monument in Yerevan". Asbarez. August 6, 2003.
  203. ^ "Giumri 14: Haghtanaki Boulevard: Andranik, Dzitoghtsian House, Merkurov Museum". armenianheritage.org. Armenian Monuments Awareness Project.
  204. ^ "Another statue is erected in the memory of Soghomon Tehlirian in Maralik". 1lurer.am. Public TV of Armenia. 23 April 2015.
  205. ^ "Soghomon Tehlirian Square inaugurated in Marseille, France". Armenpress. 22 April 2017.
  206. ^ a b c Hofmann 2020, p. 87.
  207. ^ Mayr 2015, pp. 359, 363–364.
  208. ^ Ihrig 2016, pp. 243–244.
  209. ^ Ihrig 2016, p. 371.
  210. ^ Garibian 2018, p. 232.
  211. ^ Hosfeld 2013, p. 13.
  212. ^ Engel 2016, p. 176.
  213. ^ Dean 2019, p. 28.
  214. ^ Dean 2019, p. 33.
  215. ^ Gruner 2012, p. 19.
  216. ^ Hosfeld 2005, pp. 20, 28.
  217. ^ MacCurdy 2015, p. 137.

Sources

Books

Chapters

  • Adak, Hülya (2007). "Identifying the "Internal Tumors" of World War I: Talat Paşa's hatıraları [Talat Paşa's Memoirs], or the Travels of a Unionist Apologia into History". Raueme Des Selbst: Selbstzeugnisforschung Transkulturell. Böhlau Verlag. pp. 151–169. ISBN 978-3-412-23406-5.
  • Hofmann, Tessa (2016). "From Silence to Re-remembrance: The Response of German Media to Massacres and Genocide against the Ottoman Armenians". Mass Media and the Genocide of the Armenians: One Hundred Years of Uncertain Representation. Palgrave Macmillan UK. pp. 85–109. ISBN 978-1-137-56402-3.
  • Hosfeld, Rolf (2013). "Ein Völkermordprozess wider Willen" [An Unintended Genocide Trial]. Johannes Lepsius–Eine deutsche Ausnahme: Der Völkermord an den Armeniern, Humanitarismus und Menschenrechte [Johannes Lepsius—A German Exception: The Armenian Genocide, Humanitarianism, and Human Rights]. Wallstein Verlag [de]. pp. 248–257. ISBN 978-3-8353-2491-6. Page numbers based on an online edition, paginated 1–14.CS1 maint: postscript (link)
  • Kieser, Hans-Lukas (2010). "Germany and the Armenian Genocide of 1915–17". In Friedman, Jonathan C. (ed.). The Routledge History of the Holocaust. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-136-87060-6.
  • Ozavci, Ozan (2019). "Honour and Shame: The Diaries of a Unionist and the "Armenian Question"". The End of the Ottomans: The Genocide of 1915 and the Politics of Turkish Nationalism. Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 193–220. ISBN 978-1-78673-604-8.
  • Üngör, Uğur Ümit (2012). "The Armenian Genocide, 1915". Holocaust and Other Genocides (PDF). NIOD Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies / Amsterdam University Press. pp. 45–72. ISBN 978-90-4851-528-8.
  • von Bieberstein, Alice (2017). "Memorial Miracle: Inspiring Vergangenheitsbewältigung Between Berlin and Istanbul". Replicating Atonement: Foreign Models in the Commemoration of Atrocities. Springer International Publishing. pp. 237–265. ISBN 978-3-319-65027-2.
  • Yenen, Alp (2020). "The Exile Activities of the Unionists in Berlin (1918–1922)". Türkisch-Deutsche Beziehungen.: Perspektiven aus Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG. ISBN 978-3-11-220875-5.

Journal articles

External links


This page was last updated at 2021-04-23 18:38 UTC. Update now. View original page.

All our content comes from Wikipedia and under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.


Top

If mathematical, chemical, physical and other formulas are not displayed correctly on this page, please useFirefox or Safari