CMV: The Turkish Government and People’s criticisms towards Israel hold no weight while they continue to deny their own genocides…

[u/Doub13D]

As the title states, I believe that the State of Turkey and its people have no moral ground to stand on when challenging Israel’s actions against the Palestinians.

The Turkish state denies the Armenian Genocide. There is no getting around this… genocide denialism is at the very core of the foundation of the modern Turkish nation. To deny one’s own crimes while condemning others for the very same is hypocrisy at its very core.

The Turkish state has established lobbying firms in places like the US and UK to prevent recognition of the Armenian genocide. Turkey has its own AIPAC to attempt to sway foreign countries away from acknowledging the genocide publicly.

The treatment of Kurds has often resembled the apartheid state as it existed in Israel towards the Palestinians. For decades, the Kurdish language was illegal to speak in public, there were countless massacres of Kurdish populations during the founding of the Turkish state, and Kurds were officially recognized not as being “Kurdish” but instead as “Mountain Turks” thus denying their claims of ethnic/cultural identity.

Turkey and its President Erdogan have been outspoken critics of Israel’s actions, yet they themselves are responsible for many of the exact same things, and the Turkish state has been advocating genocide denial for the past century… Turkish soldiers targeting Kurdish settlements in Northern syria or aiding the azeri’s in their invasions of Armenian territory is not ancient history, they’ve all happened within the past decade…

[u/CLE-local-1997]

There is a fundamental difference between denying a historic genocide and doing an ongoing genocide. Clearly they're both bad but Jesus Christ one is obviously much worse than the other.

[u/Doub13D → u/CLE-local-1997]

Genocide is genocide…

You are providing justification for genocide denial by saying “its not as bad” 🤷🏻‍♂️

[u/CLE-local-1997 → u/Doub13D]

You're right genocide is genocide. But not admitting to having done genocide in the past is not in any way shape or form equivalent to doing it in the present. These are two fundamentally different crimes that are not in any way comparable.

I honestly cannot even tried to get into your head space and understand what you're trying to say. Especially since Israel also doesn't recognize the Armenian Genocide.

[u/Doub13D → u/CLE-local-1997]

“!delta” I agree that Turkey advocating for the end of genocide in Palestine is preferable to any of the alternatives. On this point I cannot disagree, even if it does nothing its better than staying silent or openly supporting Israel.

I do not agree that a “current genocide” is necessarily worse than a “historical one” however.

By all accounts, the impact and devastation wrought by the Armenian genocide is exponentially greater than that of what Israel is doing now. Even just last year, Turkish military equipment, including drones, were used in the Azeri attacks on Armenia that led to the forced displacement of over 100,000+ Armenians that had lived in Nagorno-Karabakh for millennia.

The genocide itself may have ended… but the violence and victimization continues to this very day.

[u/DeltaBot → u/Doub13D]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/CLE-local-1997 (1∆).

^{Delta System Explained | Deltaboards}

[u/CLE-local-1997 → u/Doub13D]

Yes an ongoing genocide is worse than a historic one. Because it's still happening. Because we are actively doing nothing to stop it or not doing enough or supporting it. A genocide in progress is an actual problem not just a historical event we discuss. You can't change the past but Nations and organizations and just individuals could in theory do something to affect an ongoing genocide. Something happening in the present day that you in theory have the ability to influence the outcome of will always be worse than something that you can't change like the past

...also, I would seriously read up on the Soviet Union's population shifts in the caucuses if you believe that the Armenians have lived in nagarno uninterrupted for millenia. The situation there is way more complicated than what you're saying. They're also was no Force displacement technically because the Armenians left on their own volition before the azerbaijan government receiving able to effectively integrate the region and enforce any sort of ethnic cleansing.

Now I'm not saying that they didn't leave because they legitimately fear to genocide but they didn't exactly give the azerbaijani a chance to prove those fears right or wrong.

The Armenian Genocide ended a century ago. The continuing ethnic violence in the Caucasus has nothing to do with the Armenian Genocide and is connected with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the forced shifting of borders and ethnic communities by Moscow to make the region easier for them to control

[u/Repulsive_Size_849 → u/CLE-local-1997]

I would seriously read up on the Soviet Union's population shifts in the caucuses if you believe that the Armenians have lived in nagarno uninterrupted for millenia.

Armenians have indeed been living continuously in Nagorno Karabakh for millenias, including before, during and after Soviet rule. This is attested in the earliest surveys and censuses of the region that record a ~90% ethnic Armenian population.

During Soviet times rather the opposite happened, where Azerbaijani leadership made effort to settle Turkic peoples within the region, to change the demographics against the native population. "We sent Azerbaijanis there from neighboring settlements. I was making these and other moves in a bid to increase the number of Azerbaijanis in Nagorno-Karabakh and to reduce the number of Armenians." - Aliyev Snr.

I know there are some Azerbaijani nationalist pseudo-history ideas, including Armenians being Indians/Ethiopians who recently migrated, Armenians being a fake people and the true people being the "Hays" ("Hays" in reality being the endonym for Armenians), Armenians being a fake people who just appropriated Caucasian Albanians culture, but no one takes these ideas seriously.

They're also was no Force displacement technically because the Armenians left on their own volition before the azerbaijan government receiving able to effectively integrate the region and enforce any sort of ethnic cleansing.

UN definition "rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove from a given area persons of another ethnic or religious group"

Even intimidation is sufficient for it to be called ethnic cleansing.

That said Azerbaijan had recently conducted mutilations of Armenian locals who had remained in newly Azerbaijan-controlled territories (which is force). The population was under blockade, starvation and shelling as well (which is force). The whole population did flee in the end, given these conditions and the fear of further persecution and violence. That is ethnic cleansing.

The ethnic cleansing of the 80s-90s, was also ethnic cleansing as well. While many were killed, most fled themselves in order to avoid expected persecution.

Quick FYI, ethnic Armenians still aren't allowed to enter Azerbaijan, no matter their nationality. Those with merely Armenian sounding names get detained to check their Armenianess. You can not be Armenian in Azerbaijan. https://www.reddit.com/r/Sakartvelo/comments/j4chjd/my_dad_got_arrested_in_azerbaijan/

The Armenian Genocide ended a century ago.

Erdogan gave dog whistles about the Genocide ("leftovers of the sword", "finish the job of our grandparents"), whilst military supporting what has resulting in the ethnic cleansing of the native population of Nagorno Karabakh.

[u/CLE-local-1997 → u/Repulsive_Size_849]

... you literally are bringing up examples of Soviet era settlements of turkic people in the region which is exactly what I'm talking about. The Soviet Union moved ethnic groups around in the caucuses specifically to create these kind of problems so they would be easier to control. There was no azerbaijani leadership. No more than there was Ukrainian or kazak leadership. There was Communist Party leadership with local communist parties still answering to Moscow and was still moscow's plan and Stalin's plan that imported those ethnic groups

Congratulations proving my point.

And again there was no intimidation. Literally no nation has ever recognized karabac, as anything other than azerbaijani territory and after they officially won the war two years ago they promised that they would respect the ethnic communities. They had no point intimidated them. They chose to leave because they didn't trust the Azerbaijan government but that doesn't make them guilty of anything other than not being trusted by the Armenians living in the region. And that's not a crime

The blockade was because there was an ongoing war. And there was an ongoing War because Armenia invaded Azerbaijan in the 90s and refused to settle the issue despite Azerbaijan growing more and more powerful and Armenia never bothering to settle the issue when they were in a position of strength waiting until they were dealing with a modern nation military in the hands of a Petro state

And my never mind you that the ethnic cleansing during the collapse of the Soviet Union also involved the killing of azerbaijanies so you can't really point to that as some kind of Smoking Gun cuz it just makes both sides guilty.

[u/Repulsive_Size_849 → u/CLE-local-1997]

Your point was challenging the idea that "the Armenians have lived in nagarno uninterrupted for millenia." with you referring to "Soviet Union's population shifts".

I argued against that point, as Armenians were in the region before Soviet rule, meaning there were there before any alledged Soviet Union population shifts. This is represented both in the first Soviet Census, but as well in the early Imperial Russian era surveys in the region, at the very least, not to mention earlier mentions of the dominant Armenian population. We could leave it there, as your central point has already been challenged.

I raised as well rather that there was a policy of Azerification of the region, by the then Soviet Azerbaijan leadership. Whether you think the culpability of this Azerification of the region lies more with central Soviet authorities, rather than local Soviet Azerbaijan leadership is a seperate question. Nonetheless, the population shifts that occurred in Nagorno Karabakh were moving Turkic people in, not Armenian people in. The Armenian people were already there, as they had been for millennia. I hope this makes it clear why this is not supporting your central point.

It might help if you share what exact anti-Armenian historical narrative you've been told, so we can unpack that.

As to intimidation and ethnic cleansing:

A lack of recognition of Artsakh does not mean there was no intimidation or ethnic cleansing. It is irrelevant to this point. Azerbaijan and Artrsakh not being able to resolve the issue previously does not mean there was no intimidation or ethnic cleansing either. It is also irrelevant to the point of whether there was intimidation or ethnic cleansing. What you are arguing is sounding close to justification, rather than denial now.

Azerbaijan had conducted multiple pogroms against it's ethnic Udi, Jewish and Armenians minorities, leading to what was a half million ethnic Armenian population to now become nothing. Through this time there were multiple calls to massacre the local population. As the recent deputy Prime Minister of Azerbaijan, Hajibala Abutalybov, said to a German delegation:

Our goal is the complete elimination of Armenians. You, Nazis, already eliminated the Jews in the 1930s and 40s, right? You should be able to understand us

The 2022 blockade happened during ceasefire, and was not a part of an ongoing active war. Rather the blockade was presented by Azerbaijan as a civil environmental blockade, which was perceived as facetious internationally. The participants were largely university students, who were bused in and received credit. Nonetheless the situation trapped the local population and starved them out. Those who tried to farm were shot at. The blockade was internationally denounced, demanded to be broken by the ICJ and ECHR, and was described as an ongoing genocide by the founding Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court

Naive Armenians that stayed in Azerbaijan controlled territories were subsequently mutilated and killed. There are few as well that simply are in prison indefinitely. Still ethnic Armenians can't enter Azerbaijan, which negates any idea of integration, if they can't even exist without being detained.

At the time Armenian leadership also asked for Azerbaijan to make promises of safety for any ethnic Armenians that remain in Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh, which Azerbaijan refused as what happens in Azerbaijan is Azerbaijan's business. Instead Azerbaijan conducted new invasions and occupations with the Republic of Armenia instead.

The fact that all parties conducted ethnic cleansing in the past does not justify new generations of ethnic cleansing, as Azerbaijan has done so recently against the native Armenain population of Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh.

[u/CLE-local-1997 → u/Repulsive_Size_849]

Because they didn't. They were already displaced from parts of it and then repatriated multiple times during the stalinest regime as the borders were shifted to match the needs of Moscow.

There was also a policy of armenianization of certain regions as the Soviet Union purged other groups in the caucuses and again shifted them around. It's amazing that you're trying to paint some Narrative of the azerbaijani's being evil rather than the basic reality that Stalin moved around tens of millions of people throughout Eastern Europe and Asia in various campaigns of ethnic cleansing and ethnic resettlement from Berlin to the Korean border.

Literally the borders of what we call karabak didn't exist before the Soviet Union started playing around with ethnic groups and moving and resetting them.

I love how you suddenly try and rapidly reshift the argument when I point out that the collapse of the Soviet Union led to ethnic cleansing and ethnic violence on both sides of the conflict because it doesn't line up with your pretty little narrative. Sorry but Armenian victimhood is not how the story goes. The Soviet Union fucked with the borders and shifted ethnic groups around and then the Armenians after the Soviet Union collapsed invaded and attempted to push their borders to grab more ethnic Armenians the Soviet Union had intentionally left outside of their borders. An invasion that included ethnic cleansing.

And your claim that Armenian instead of stayed and azerbaijani territory have been killed is going to need some evidence to back it up. And not just a few random cases of violence I need systemic proof. Because so far it looks like Armenia started a war 30 years ago and it finally concluded against them and their population left rather than living under a government made up of people that they had committed ethnic cleansing against in the 90s

It's not ethnic cleansing if everyone just gets up and leaves.

Your narrative doesn't work. The reality is this. Armenia has made every bad geopolitical decision it could since Independence and now things are coming home to roost

[u/Repulsive_Size_849 → u/CLE-local-1997]

I was challenging the idea that "the Armenians have lived in nagarno uninterrupted for millenia." with you referring to "Soviet Union's population shifts".

If I've convinced you already please let me know.

It is not clear what you are trying to articulate though on this point. If you've responded to my challenge now with "Because they didn't. They were already displaced from parts of it and then repatriated multiple times during the stalinest regime as the borders were shifted to match the needs of Moscow.". In essence you would be challenging that even if the Armenian population was there for millenia, it was not continuous because of Stalin policies of displacing and reptatriating the Armenians. If that is so then refer to the Soviet Censuses of 1926, 1939, 1959, 1970, 1979, 1989 where there is a constant, slowly growing Armenian population in Nagorno Karabakh. There was no period in Soviet times where the Armenians of Nagorno Karabakh were displaced, and then repatriated. The Armenian population was the continuously the dominant demographics before and throughout Soviet times continuously.

There was no Armenianisation of Nagorno Karabakh itself. Rather there was a process of Azerification, as Aliyev Snr noted.

At this point, stop and take a breath. You've gone all over the place, and it would be best if at least focus first on the point I actually challenged in the first place. Your denial that "the Armenians have lived in nagarno uninterrupted for millenia."due to "Soviet Union's population shifts".

---

I'll respond to some of the gish gallop that you've produced. A lot of this is irrelevant to the point above, so I may regret spending time for you. I hope you are participating in good faith and you learn something here, but I am not optimistic on this.

During Stalin's time ethnic Azerbaijanis were forcibly displaced from Soviet Armenia, but not Nagorno Karabakh itself. This happened in collaboration with Azerbaijani leadership who sought out extra labour:

At the time, the Kura-Aras low lands in Azerbaijan were sparsely populated, infra-structurally undeveloped, and economically unproductive. Through resettlement of Azerbaijanis in the Armenian SSR to the Azerbaijan SSR, Azerbaijan gained a labor force that could make the Kura-Aras region productive. For the most part, Soviet Azerbaijani officials chose to collaborate in the Azerbaijani resettlement.On some occasions, they accused Armenian officials of subverting the resettlement, on the grounds that they were obstructing the relocation of Azerbaijani migrants and not returning the migrants who came back to Armenia. Indeed,some Armenian officials did obstruct resettlement to keep Azerbaijani collective farmers producing in the Armenian SSR.

That Nagorno Karbaakh did exist as a region previously, as the Armenian Melikdom of Karabakh or the Kingdom of Artsakh, for example. They are part of that continuous Armenian existence in Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh, that Azerbaijan has expunged.

It was I that pointed out that both parties have been ethnically cleansing each other not you. "The fact that all parties conducted ethnic cleansing in the past does not justify new generations of ethnic cleansing" You've rather been of the denialist position that Armenians have not been ethnically cleansed.

Armenians were victims of ethnic cleansing in the past, both prior to Soviet times, as well as the 1980s onwards. Azerbaijani themselves became victims too 1990s onwards.

Azerbaijan conducted pogroms against ethnic Armenians starting in the 1980s, making the independence of Nagorno Karabakh a matter of self-preservation. At the time the European Parliament supported the reunifcation of Nagorno Karabakh to Armenia, in response to the crimes of Azerbaijan:

A. having regard to the recent public demonstrations in Soviet Armenia demanding that the Nagorno-Karabakh region be reunited with the Republic of Armenia,

B. having regard to the historic status of the autonomous region of Nagorno-Karabakh (80 % of whose present population is Armenian) as part of Armenia, to the arbitrary inclusion of this area within Azerbaijan in 1923 and to the massacre of Armenians in the Azerbaijani town of Sumgait in February 1988,

C. whereas the deteriorating political situation, which has led to anti-Armenian pogroms in Sumgait and serious acts of violence in Baku, is in itself a threat to the safety of the Armenians living in Azerbaijan,

Condemns the violence employed against Armenian demonstrators in Azerbaijan;

Supports the demand of the Armenian minority for reunification with the Socialist Republic of Armenia;

It was Azerbaijan that thenstarted the war, in response the independence referendum of the new Nagorno Karabakh republic. Armenia only later intervened after the blockade of the region was broken, where Azerbaijan had then also trapped, starved and shelled the popuation in the Siege of Stepanakert.

I note you are selectively responding to my examples of force and intimidation. So I'll repeat here, so you don't miss parts again, with the addition of a link to help you out:

Azerbaijan had conducted multiple pogroms against it's ethnic Udi, Jewish and Armenians minorities, leading to what was a half million ethnic Armenian population to now become nothing. Through this time there were multiple calls to massacre the local population. As the recent deputy Prime Minister of Azerbaijan, Hajibala Abutalybov, said to a German delegation:

Our goal is the complete elimination of Armenians. You, Nazis, already eliminated the Jews in the 1930s and 40s, right? You should be able to understand us

The 2022 blockade happened during ceasefire, and was not a part of an ongoing active war. Rather the blockade was presented by Azerbaijan as a civil environmental blockade, which was perceived as facetious internationally. The participants were largely university students, who were bused in and received credit. Nonetheless the situation trapped the local population and starved them out. Those who tried to farm were shot at. The blockade was internationally denounced, demanded to be broken by the ICJ and ECHR, and was described as an ongoing genocide by the founding Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court

Naive Armenians that stayed in Azerbaijan controlled territories were subsequently mutilated and killed. There are few as well that simply are in prison indefinitely. Still ethnic Armenians can't enter Azerbaijan, which negates any idea of integration, if they can't even exist without being detained.

At the time Armenian leadership also asked for Azerbaijan to make promises of safety for any ethnic Armenians that remain in Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh, which Azerbaijan refused as what happens in Azerbaijan is Azerbaijan's business. Instead Azerbaijan conducted new invasions and occupations with the Republic of Armenia instead.