Psychology Behind Denial (Op-Ed)

In psychology, denial is a type of defense mechanism developed by Sigmund Freud which is used to describe situations in which people are unable to face the truth. On a recent trip to Armenia, French President Nicolas Sarkozy stated that “The Armenian Genocide is a historical reality. Collective denial is even worse than individual denial”. Although Sarkozy’s comment may have been aimed to be political, he may have unintentionally sent a sociological message.

Everyone has been in denial about something one time or another in their lives. According to Freud, denial is a person’s way of defending his or herself from “external realities” that threaten the ego. The ego is made up of logical and rational thinking which allows humans to evaluate the risks and benefits of a situation; “tolerate some pain for future profit”. Moreover, for about 96 years now Turkey has denied the  occurrence of the Armenian Genocide. It is important to note and understand the motivations behind their thinking and mind formulations in order to make sense of their psychology behind the denial.

Ask Turkey to speak of the happenings between the years of 1915-1920 and they will blatantly deny that the genocide ever occurred due to the fact that both Muslims and non-Muslims suffered during those invasions. In a pamphlet on “Armenian Propaganda” published by a Turkish group, it states: “As a result of these conditions, as many as 20% of the deportees, some 100,000 Armenians, may have died between 1915 and 1918, but this was no greater a percentage than that of the Turks and other Muslims who died as a result of the same conditions in the same places at the same time”. Blatant denial presented on behalf of Turkey merely insults the survivors of the genocide and their relatives. In an article written by psychologist and historian, Israel W. Charney, he addresses Turkey’s continuous acts of denial: “...continuing manifestations of the kinds of dehumanization and disentitlement that we know are the basic psychological substrates that make genocide possible to begin with”. 

Furthermore, Charney- an executive director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide , embarked on a quest to find out the psychology behind denial. He came to an understanding that those denying the genocide- in particular the Turks, may not be out on a “we hate Armenians” rampage and are quite possibly denying the Armenian Genocide due to personal gain and economic advantage. After doing research by conducting studies on scholars who also deny the genocide, Charney came up with five main categories used to analyze the psychology behind the denial.

1. Innoncence and Self Righteousness 

The respondents claim that they don’t believe that human beings are evil enough to live up to the descriptions of the genocide. They also believe that even though many lives may have been lost, it is time to forgive and forget.

1. Scientificism in the Service of Confusion

     The position take within this category is mainly innocent in the fact that there is not enough to know what the exact facts of the history were.

1. Practically, Pragmatism and Realpolitik

     Dealing with “ancient history is impractical, it will not bring peace to the world in which we live today. One must be realistic and live through realpolitik.”

1. Idea Linkage Distortion and Time-Sequence Confusion
       A simple dishonest linkage of varying ideas which are used to excuse the denial of the facts. “Present needs, whether justified or not, are taken as a reasonable basis for censoring or changing the record of past history.”
2. Indirection, Definitionalism, and Maddening

These are responses that do their best to avoid the issue by not  responding or by going off on tangents about trivial issues that avoid essential idea of whether or not the genocide took place.

In addition to Charney’s findings and explanations behind denial, another added notion may be repressed guilt. Repressed guilt is guilt or burden that we hide and in turn deny by projecting it onto others. The psychology behind repressed guilt works as follows: We live in a competitive world and we’re not guilty of creating what has happened, it’s everybody else out there. Countless amounts of times we have heard Turkey blame the killings of Armenians as a part World War I and not an act that they belligerently committed themselves. So perhaps an added reason to their denial of the genocide may have to do with repressed guilt and their fail to completely accept the genocide as their doing.

"Artists for Peace"

“Artists for Peace” was founded by Flora Martirosian in 2008 in an attempt to increase awareness to better understand the injustices and discrimination that surrounds our world today. Her main goal was to bring together artists from all walks of life in an attempt to educate the world about genocide. 

“Through the universal language of music and art, artists can help influence global change as well as educate and prevent further crimes against humanity...

We must do everything we can so that, in this day and age and beyond, we make sure we educate our youth to be more understanding and harmonious”

The event is going to take place at the Gibson Amphitheatre at Universal City Walk on November 1 with the likes of: Chaka Khan, Eric Benet, Pras, Malina Moyr along with Flora Martirosian, Arto Tuncboyaciyan, and Alexia Vassiliou. This year, the “Peace Concert” will honor Stevie Wonder for his continuous efforts serving as the United Nations Messenger of Peace: “It is with great respect and pleasure that we are able to give the United Nations Messenger of Peace, the legendary Stevie Wonder the AFP Angel Award for his ongoing work to help others through change.” (Martirosian)

The proceeds from the concert will benefit specific foundations and charities supported by the artists themselves such as: Childrean with Leukemia in Armenia, The Chaka Khan Foundation, We Are You Foundation and the Genocide Memorial Museum. Tickets start at just $40 and can be bought through Ticketmaster.

It is wonderful to see artists putting their differences aside and uniting together to promote a wonderful cause. Hopefully by creating awareness of past genocides, it will help prevent future genocides from occurring.
  

Here are a Couple Op-eds I Found Interesting...

Op-ed example #1

Op-ed example #2

Zaruhi Petrosyan: Victim of Domestic Violence

Domestic violence is never an answer to solve any problem. Unfortunately many couples around the world endure domestic violence and most don’t know how to get out of it. A recent case in Armenia was no different. 

Zaruhi Petrosyan was a 20 year old wife and mother who’s life was cut short because she was beaten to death by her husband and mother-in-law. The reasons behind the  beatings were due to the fact that her husband and mother-in-law wanted to extort money from Zaruhi and her family. Anytime they would ask for money and their demands were not met, Zaruhi would be severely beaten. Zaruhi’s sister, Hasmik remembered the hardship her sister had to encounter:

“My sister was constantly beaten to the point that many times, with her nose and mouth full of blood, she would faint and fall on the floor”

Seeing what their loved one was going through, the Petrosyan family reached out to law enforcement a numerous amount of times emphasizing to them the severity of the situation. However,  the law enforcement in Armenia did absolutely nothing. According to Hasmik, the neighbors provided endless amounts of eyewitness statements and evidence of the abuse, but they were told that the evidence weren’t important and that it didn’t matter. The most disturbing part of it all was that during the time of the abuse, Petrosyan was pregnant. Instead of the government stepping in helping the situation they became blind to it. If dealing with domestic violence isn’t important, then what is? After much speculation, her husband, Sarkisov, was soon arrested but of course denied committing any crimes stating that he did not do anything and that “she fell and died”.

Though there are many stories similar to that of Zaruhi Petrosyan, none of have become public and received as much attention as that of Petrosyan’s. According to the Amnesty International Report, there are over a quarter of women in Armenia who have been victimized by domestic violence and authorities have time and time again failed to “investigate and punish violence against women”. The main reason for this, one that I think is unjustifiable and a bit coward-like, is because there is this onset taboo in the Armenian community when it comes to the issue of domestic violence. The man in the relationship is often looked at as superior to the women, and thus any power ensued on the woman is seen as tolerable. Hence the reason as to why authorities in Armenia see domestic violence issues as none too worthy of investigating. This mentality took at turn with Zaruhi Petrosyan’s story going viral and grabbing the attention of the diaspora who raised their voice against domestic violence. 

Hundreds of men and women gathered in Little Armenia to march to end violence against women. Many angered Armenians both in the homeland and the diaspora demanded that the “government pass comprehensive domestic violence legislation and work to prevent and punish familial violence.” On October 14, Yanis Sarkisov, who was accused of beating his 20- year old wife to death was sentenced to 10 years in prison with the “maximum penalty under the Armenian penal code’s Article 112: Intentional serious or heavy damage to health”. 

The government in Armenia has come a long way and it is finally good to see that they are taking initiative to investigate and sentence those guilty of committing domestic violence. To know that Zaruhi Petrosyan’s death was not in vein sets some sort of closure in helping ensure that those involved in unhealthy relationships will be able to gather strength to leave and seek help.

Roots of Turkish Genocide Denial

The term ‘genocide’ was created by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-Jewish scholar in 1944. The word was derived from two different roots: the greek word ‘genos’ which means race and the Latin word ‘cidium’ which means killings. Lemkin first used the word ‘genocide’ to explain and justify the events that took place in 1915. Genocide is an inhumane form of killing who’s main goal in the end is to completely wipe out a targeted group or nation. Many genocides have taken place over the years and they all have had a great amount of impact on history. One may wonder, if a country sees that another is suffering from genocide and inhumane acts, why would they want to repeat the barbarity that effected so many people. The answer is simple, selfishness. Those who kill in masses or those who kill in general, kill for their benefit only. They only take into account how they feel, instead of opening their eyes to the world and seeing what really is going on. Nonetheless, genocides have happened and they still continue to take place. Moreover, the issue of the Armenian Genocide is one that has been addressed and analyzed numerous amounts of times. There have been analyses made as to why the genocide is being denied in the states and what can be done for the genocide to be recognized. However, the issue as to why the Turks repeatedly deny the genocide  hasn’t been really put into question. It is important to understand the roots of the Turkish State Policy of the genocide denial and what the modern forms of genocide denial  entail. 

Unlike Holocaust denial, which is not the product of any state (and certainly not an official policy of the Federal Republic of Germany); Armenian Genocide denial originates from the Turkish state. The initial position of the post World War I government in Turkey was to condemn the massacres and favored holding trial for those involved. There were clear indications that the Turks were ready to punish perpetrators in order to secure their sovereignty. However, this sentiment quickly gave way to protecting suspects and avoiding prosecution once the Treaty of Sévres , a peace treaty between the Ottoman Empire and the Allies, and partitioning of territories became a likely reality. When it was no longer in the interest of postwar Turkey to punish the perpetrators of genocide, a policy shift to denial was implemented. By 1920 most of the victors no longer included punishing Turkish war criminals in their postwar objectives. The inability to prosecute led to a large portion of relevant documents being lost or destroyed and never gave an opportunity for eyewitness testimony, on the record, in a court of law. While it is incomprehensible to understand why Allied authorities did not pressure Turkey to turn over the myriad documents showing the genocidal intent of the Young Turk regime, the lasting effect their destruction has caused can be seen in Turkey’s current denialist policies.  

 Since this time period, the Turkish government has used different revisionist tactics to steer away attention from the genocide. These include claiming that Armenians and Turks had lived together for centuries in peace and harmony, and what happened during World War I, while regrettable, was a necessary national security precaution in response to Armenians taking up arms against the Ottoman Empire. After all, it was World War I and the killings that occurred were done on both sides. Any accusation of massacre is perceived to be not just an insult to Turkey, but to Islam as whole because no Turk could ever have been conceivably responsible for a crime as heinous as genocide.This sentiment is highlighted by a message by the League of Nations secretariat saying:

“A long intolerable whine from the Turkish Minister, the burden of which is that no Turk ever hurt a living creature, but that everyone bullies Turks and the Assembly was 

monstrously unfair.”

Turkey’s lead negotiator for the Treaty of Lausanne laid out the first declaration of what would become the official Turkish position on the killings: “[T]he Turkish government and nation were forced to take punitive measures and to respond fully, but always and without exception only after their patience was exhausted, the responsibility for the disasters that befell the Armenian community within the Turkish Empire belongs entirely to the Armenian community itself…For as long as the Christian elements did not abuse the generosity of the country in which they lived for centuries in comfort and plenty, the Turks never denied them their rights.”

The main reason for enduring contentiousness which surrounds the Armenian Genocide is the efforts made on behalf of the Turkish government to avoid responsibility for the events that are in question.However, this policy of avoiding responsibility has transformed into an active policy of genocide denial. This denialism is represented in academia through sponsored “university chairs” and is present in various areas of parliamentary aspects such as: the high-priced lobbying firms who are paid to convince legislators to avoid using the “G-word”, it is present in the public through Turkish consulates around the world who monitor and “counter Armenian claims”, and it is omnipresent in Turkish itself, where “insulting the Turkish nation” is a crime that is followed with a prison sentence. Moreover, Turkish dissident scholar Taner Akçam states that: “Denial of the Armenian genocide has developed over the decades to become a complex and far-reaching machine that rivals the Nazi Germany propaganda ministry…This machine runs on academic dishonesty, fabricated information, political pressure, intimidation and threats, all funded or supported, directly or indirectly, by the Turkish state. It has become a huge industry.” 

Within the academic society, “scholars” such as Bernard Lewis, Justin McCarthy and Health Lowry (who all receive funding from the Turkish government), work to show the events of 1915-23 to be “an Armenian version of history” which is not genocide.  This is done by trying to minimize the numbers of Armenians killed, blaming famine and disease for the deaths, and putting fault on Armenians for instigating civil war by siding with Russian troops.  While the overwhelming majority of legitimate scholars in the field recognize the events of World War I to be genocide, individuals like Lewis, McCarthy and Lowry seek to raise doubt with the guise of academic objectivity.   

In politics, Turkish denialism is represented by multi-million dollar paid lobbying firms where former Congressmen are hired to use their connections to block legislative recognition of the Armenian Genocide.  People like former House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt and former Louisiana representative Robert Livingston are on the direct payroll of the Turkish government.  “In 2003, Gephardt cosponsored a resolution that put the “Armenian genocide” in company with the Holocaust and mass deaths in Cambodia and Rwanda. In 2000, the Missouri lawmaker backed a similar measure, [saying] he was ‘committed to obtaining official U.S. government recognition of the Armenian genocide.’  Now Gephardt is a foreign agent lobbying on behalf of Turkey, and he’s got a different view of the world. He’s working to stymie the latest version of an Armenian genocide resolution.” Bob Livingston went so far as to record an online video plea to Congressmen not to support House Resolution 106 in 2007. By stating that Turkey is a secular democracy in the Middle East who is a needed ally in the war on terror, these lobbyists continue to play off of American national security concerns to put aside affirmation by the United States.   

Until now, lobbying efforts have had a keen effect, helping to prevent the full House of Representatives from voting on Armenian Genocide recognition resolutions in 2007 and 2010.  Furthermore, President Obama, who was outspoken about the genocide as an Illinois Senator, has steered away from describing the events as “genocide” in his annual statements, instead referring to the massacres as “Meds Yeghern” the Armenian term for “great calamity”.  

“Turkish groups have also recently attempted to take denialism into United States 

courtrooms.  In January the United States Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal on a case filed by a Turkish group which sought to force inclusion of Armenian Genocide denial materials in the Massachusetts education curriculum. In March of this year US District Court Judge Donovan Frank said that the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies was protected by academic freedom when it told  students that the Turkish Coalition of America’s (TCA) web site was unreliable and rejected the TCA’s  claims of defamation. These lawsuits, although unsuccessful, show the evolution of the Turkish government’s strategy on dealing with the genocide issue.”  

 Perhaps the most dangerous facet of Turkey’s attempts at historical revisionism is the 

suppression of free speech within the Republic of Turkey itself.  Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code states: 

1. Public denigration of Turkishness, the Republic or the Grand National Assembly 

of Turkey shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three 

years. 

2. Public denigration of the Government of the Republic of Turkey, the judicial institutions of the State, the military or security structures shall be punishable by 

imprisonment of between six months and two years. 

3. In cases where denigration of Turkishness is committed by a Turkish citizen in 

another country the punishment shall be increased by one third. 

4. Expressions of thought intended to criticize shall not constitute a crime. 

Amnesty International has called Article 301, “a direct threat to freedom of expression, as enshrined in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and in Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR)” this statute has been used to prosecute human rights activists, journalists and civil society members who have spoke out in public about the Armenian Genocide.  

Notable examples of those who have been prosecuted under Article 301 include, Nobel Prize winning author Orhan Pamuk, Turkish dissident Ragip Zarakolu, and Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink.  Dink, who was the founding editor of the bilingual Turkish-Armenian newspaper Agos, was an outspoken figure who called on dialogue and understanding to overcome the evils of the Armenian Genocide. He has served as a viable voice on behalf of the Armenians and was one who advocated peace and justice.He considered himself to be a proud Armenian and a proud Turkish citizen; however he was prosecuted three times under Article 301 for “insulting Turkishness”. These prosecutions made Dink into a public enemy in the eyes of nationalist Turks.  As a result, Dink was assassinated in front of his office in January of 2007 by a 17-year old gunman.

Article 301 not only restrain free intellectual expression in Turkey, it prevents any discourse related to Turkey’s pre-1923 history. In a letter to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, seven former presidents of International Association of Genocide Scholars said, “Because Turkey has denied the Armenian Genocide for the past nine decades, and currently under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code, public affirmation of the genocide is a crime, it would seem impossible for Turkey to be part of a process that would assess whether or not Turkey committed a genocide against the Armenians in 1915.”

Whether or not Turkey will ever accept the Armenian Genocide is a question that may or  may not be answered. For as much as we know, denial of the Armenian Genocide on behalf of the Turks will continue, and until Turkey doesn’t recognize the atrocities of 1915 as “genocide” neither will United States.

                                                                         BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. KEITH DAVID WATENPAUGH, THE ORIGIN OF ARMENIAN GENOCIDE DENIAL 

AND LEAGUE OF NATIONS’ HUMANITARIANISM 1920-1922.  Armenian Review Vol. 52 

Number 1-2. p. 45 (2010).  

2. FRENCH SOCIALIST PARTY TO SUBMIT BILL ON PENALIZING DENIAL OF 

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE IN FRENCH SENATE. http://news.am/eng/news/53356.html 

3.   TANER AKCAM, A SHAMEFUL ACT: THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE AND THE 

QUESTION OF TURKISH RESPONSIBILITY. p. 366 (2006). 

4.  KEN SILVERSTEIN, DICK GEPHARDT LABOR AND LOBBYING. Harper’s Magazine. 

http://harpers.org/archive/2009/03/hbc-90004531 

5. BOB LIVINGSTON: HR 106: ARMENIAN GENOCIDE?” 

http://capitolhub.com/video/6591/bob-livingston-hr-106-armenian-genocide 

6. SENATOR OBAMA DISCUSSES THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwR83GZjwdo&feature=related 

7.  STATEMENT OF PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA ON ARMENIAN REMEMBRANCE 

DAY. http://www.armenianweekly.com/2010/04/24/statement-of-president-barack-obama-on- 

armenian-remembrance-day-2/ 

8.  TURKISH SUIT AGAINST U. OF MINNESOTA DISMISSED, Asbarez Daily Newspaper. 

http://asbarez.com/94521/turkish-suit-against-u-of-minnesota-dismissed/ 

9. Turkey: Article 301 is a threat to freedom of expression and must be repealed now! 

http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGEUR440352005 

10. LETTER TO TURKISH PRIME MINISTER RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN. Written by seven former presidents of IAGS (Helen Fein, Roger W. Smith, Frank Chalk, Joyce Apsel, Robert Melson, Israel W. Charny, and Gregory Stanton). (2009).

"Lost and Found in Armenia"

It has been a while since there was anything cultural that shed a  positive light on Armenia. Don’t worry, your prayers will soon be answered. For the first time there will be an all Armenian financed motion picture that will star the likes of Jamie Kennedy and Angela Sarafyan. The movie is titled “ Lost and Found in Armenia” and is set to premiere in United States around Christmas. Moreover, the film features bilingual dialogue and is directed by Gor Kirakosian and produced by Maral Djerejian (Sideways). 

The plot revolves around the son of a U.S. Senator who goes missing while on vacation in Turkey. After a facing a few challenges along the way, he finds himself in a small village in Armenia where he meets a young woman who joins him in his escapades. 

It is finally good to see some attention revolving around Armenia and Armenian issues that doesn't necessarily involve the Armenian Genocide. There are many talented Armenians in the entertainment field and it's wonderful to see how far we've come not only as a race, but as a nation:

“There are many talented actors in Armenia, there are many experts but they lack the experience of working with modern cinema. The problem will be solved if people engage in film production in Armenia,” said Djerejian, adding that "a single film could greatly promote general knowledge about Armenia worldwide".

Enjoy!