Empire/Turkey, Armenia and The Armenian Genocide (1915-1923): A Critical Analysis by Michael Cunningham A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of AGBU Armenian Virtual College In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Armenian History Academic Advisor: Tigran Yepremyan, PhD in History March 2023 © 2023
ABSTRACT 2 Համառոտագիր 3 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 6 INTRODUCTION 7 CHAPTER I: The Perpetration and the Implementation of the Armenian Genocide: The US Foreign Policy towards the Ottoman Empire before 1917 and the importance of studying this today 15 1.1 The Armenian Genocide: Four Genocide Terms and the Turkish denial 15 1.2 The evolution of the US Foreign Policy approaches before 1917 and the Ottoman Empire 20 1.3 The American Politics: The Reason For Neutrality 24 CHAPTER II: The US in the Great War and the First Republic of Armenia: The American Peace Project and Wilsonian Armenia (1917-1920) 27 2.1 The US joining the Great War: the position towards the Ottoman Turkey and Wilson’s 14 Points’ influence on the Armenian Republic 27 2.2 The US Relations with The First Republic of Armenia: views of each political party in the United States 32 2.3 The American Peace Project and The Mandate for Armenia 36 CHAPTER III: The aftermath of the WWI: the devastating consequences of the Armenian Genocide 49 3.1 Armenia Makes Pleas to The US Government 49 3.2 The American Relief Efforts 53 3.3 The continuation of The Armenian Genocide and The Rise of Kemalist Turkey: The US Position and The Isolationism 57 CONCLUSION 65 BIBLIOGRAPHY 74 APPENDICES 80
ABSTRACT This thesis is a critical analysis of the United States Foreign Policy vis-à-vis the Ottoman Empire/Turkey and Armenia in the context of the Armenian Genocide (1915-1923). This thesis has been written to change how we teach, what we teach, and why we teach. We need to investigate what happened so that we can learn more about ourselves, and our opening will introduce the reader to the background of this topic. The research will introduce the reader to two weeks of high school lessons about the US's foreign policy in the context of the Armenian Genocide and the fall of the First Republic of Armenia. The thesis looks at the underlying political situation in the United States and considers the Armenian Genocide issue through the prism of US foreign policy approaches. With Wilson as President of the U.S. who actually was in charge of his policy? Why did the United States remain neutral so long after they found out about the Armenian Genocide? Why the United States never declared war against the Ottoman Empire nor was asked to join the peace conference at Serves? Since the foreign policy of the United States drastically changed during this time and because the foundations of World War II came from these same events, this topic is one of the most important areas for students to understand if they want to understand the 20th century. One of the most important ways to overcome the Armenian Genocide Is Through the Classroom. As philosopher George Santayana would say, those who fail to learn the lessons of History are doomed to repeat them.
Միացյալ Նահանգների արտաքին քաղաքականությունն առ Օսմանյան կայսրություն/Թուրքիա, Հայաստան և Հայոց ցեղասպանություն (19151923). քննադատական վերլուծություն Մայքլ Քանինգհեմ Համառոտագիր Սույն մագիստրոսական թեզը Օսմանյան կայսրության/Թուրքիայի և Հայաստանի նկատմամբ Միացյալ Նահանգների արտաքին քաղաքականության քննադատական վերլուծությունն է Հայոց ցեղասպանության (1915-1923) համատեքստում։ Այս թեզը գրվել է փոխելու, թե ինչպես ենք մենք դասավանդում, ինչ ենք ուսուցանում և ինչու ենք ուսուցանում: Մենք պետք է ուսումնասիրենք տեղի ունեցածը, որպեսզի կարողանանք ավելին իմանալ մեր մասին, և մագիստրոսական ավարտաթեզը ընթերցողին կներկայացնի այս թեմայի նախապատմությունը և նվազ դիտարկված դիտանկյունները: Հետազոտությունը ընթերցողին կներկայացնի երկշաբաթյա ավագ դպրոցի դասընթացի ծրագիր՝ նվիրված ԱՄՆ արտաքին քաղաքականությանը Հայոց ցեղասպանության և Հայաստանի Առաջին Հանրապետության անկման համատեքստում: Թեզը դիտարկում է նաև Միացյալ Նահանգների արտաքին քաղաքականության հիմքում ընկած ներքաղաքական իրավիճակը: Ըստ այդմ, Հայոց ցեղասպանության հարցը դիտարկվում է ԱՄՆ արտաքին քաղաքական մոտեցումների լույսի ներքո, ինչպես նաև Վուդրո Վիլսոնի դերակատարությունը որպես ԱՄՆ նախագահ. ո՞վ էր իրականում ազդում նրա քաղաքականության վրա: Ինչո՞ւ Միացյալ Նահանգները չեզոք մնաց այդքան երկար այն բանից հետո, երբ հայտնի էր Հայոց ցեղասպանության իրագործման փաստը և շարունակվող գործընթացը: Ինչո՞ւ Միացյալ Նահանգները երբեք պատերազմ չհայտարարեց Օսմանյան կայսրությանը և ոչ էլ մասնակցեց Սևրի խաղաղության համաժողովին, երբ ավտիվորեն ներգրավված էր Առաջին աշխարհամարտում: Եվ քանզի Միացյալ Նահանգների արտաքին քաղաքականությունը կտրուկ փոխվել է այս ընթացքում, և քանզի Երկրորդ համաշխարհային պատերազմի հիմքերը ծագել են Առաջին համաշխարհային պատերազմի այս նույն իրադարձություններից, այս թեման ուսանողների համար ամենակարևոր ուսումնասիրության առարկաներից մեկն է, որը պետք է հասկանալ, եթե նրանք ցանկանում են հասկանալ 20-րդ դարը: Հայոց ցեղասպանության հաղթահարման ամենակարևոր ուղիներից մեկը դասասենյակն է: Ինչպես կասեր իմաստասեր Ջորջ Սանտայանան, նրանք, ովքեր չեն կարողանում սերտել պատմության դասերը, դատապարտված են կրկնելու դրանք:
Michael Cunningham Michael Cunningham was born in Washington D.C. My Armenian families include Bagratuni, Arzruni, Mamikonian, Katchen. Rupenid, Rshtuni, Pahlavuni, Arshakuni, Artashesian,Aršakuni, Rshtuni, Lekapenos, Kamsarakan, Siwnik, Souren Pahlav, relatives Therefore, it appears to be perfectly natural to study the movements of the Armenian people because this study is not only my own and that of my relatives, it is a story of the movement of people. This is a project like no other, and therefore its dedication is just like it. The beginnings of this research began back in 2005, at the 90th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. I had been assigned to teach some World History classes, and I was noticing how Armenia was at the crossroads of so many different parts of history. Persia, the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Romans, the Eastern Romans, the Seljuk Turks, the Ottoman Turks, the Russians, and later even the Americans all played an important role in the history of this country. But, to get a much deeper understanding of why I wanted to, in particular, incorporate the history of Armenia into my classes and into other classes all across the world, you would have to go back much further into both my life and the life of my family. In the fall of 1978, I was working at Lone Star Steel, an oil field tubular manufacturing company for drilling pipes and bomb casings located in East Texas. This steel mill was created in World War II to expand the area where steel mills were located. In case of a German attack on the US Steel industry, the US Government expanded the steel industry from the Great Lakes area to Texas and elsewhere. For much of that year (1978), we would work a week and then be laid off for a week. My wife and I were having what we thought would be our second child. On one Friday, I found out that I would be laid
off from my job for several months, and several hours later, I found out we were going to have triplets. That Monday, I got a job next to the hospital so I could see my wife every day. During the course of the next three months, I began a very exhaustive genealogical study of my family. We were looking for both family names and more information about triplets. Triplets occur naturally at the rate of 1 in 10,000 births. During those three months, I found out that my father’s side of the family had a very rich Armenian heritage. Our family lines go from Persia to Armenia; from China to Armenia; from the Turks to Armenia; and from Armenia to almost everywhere else in the world. It includes most of the noble houses of Armenia and most of the major cities of Armenia and Georgia. The average student in the United States today doesn't know much about what this thesis is about. They do not know or realize the difference between mediation, negotiation, and surrender. The Ottoman Empire did not surrender to the Allies on October 30, 1918. They asked for an armistice. An armistice is not a surrender, and the terms of the Treaty of Sevres would really be awfully harsh for an armistice. The real reason for these harsh terms being placed on the Ottoman Empire was that the Allies knew they could do exactly that. What complicated matters so much, in this case, was the Ottoman Empire's hard-core Genocidal Policy against Armenians, as well as the infighting of the Allies, who were more interested in self-interest than punishing the Ottomans. When the war ended in the Ottoman Empire, England and her colonies had over a million soldiers in the Empire. The English occupied Istanbul and, for almost an extra year and a half, occupied Turkey. As the English began to pull back their troops, a power vacuum developed, and the Nationalist Turkish troops under Maustfa Kamel began to take over parts of Turkey. These are the events of this thesis, but the heart of the thesis will be to change the minds of Americans on this subject and the hearts of the people of Turkey to accept it.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my families from Armenia, Father Tateos, Dr. Yervant Zorian, Mihran Aroian, Jacob Shaw, Bryssa Rodriguez, Madison Adelstein, and the Armenian General Benefit Union for your great and wonderful influences on this work. I would also like to thank all of the people at AGBU AVC for their help and support. The people at the World Affairs Council of Austin, especially Ben Ramirez and Mortada Mohamed, have been very supportive of this project for the past four years.
INTRODUCTION In the entire history of the United States, there has been only one president who was elected to four terms as president. His name is Franklin Delano Roosevelt. However, what many people may not know is that his cousin, Teddy Roosevelt, could have easily been elected to four terms himself if it had not been for one little thing. This one thing could have also changed the course of world history forever. It not only changed history inside the United States but completely changed American foreign policy. If the Ottoman Empire had changed its foreign policy in this way, it would have also changed what happened to the Armenian people. A quote from John Marshall Evans, a former US Ambassador to Armenia, explained it best when he said: “There was a time when every American schoolboy knew of Armenia, the entire proceeds of the YaleHarvard Game (1916) were donated to the relief of “the starving Armenians,” and President Woodrow Wilson’s arbitration to determine the border between Armenia and Ottoman Turkey was seen by McKinley, and they would have the excitement and Roosevelt would get the vote. The best thing was that as a Vice president, Roosevelt could be controlled. That was what they thought. The event in Buffalo, New York, in 1901 changed this, and through the hands of an assassin, Teddy Roosevelt became the youngest person to ever become president.” For most Americans, Teddy Roosevelt, by the election of 1904, was a man going places in a hurry. He was still a year away from a Nobel Peace Prize, but he had already accomplished almost a lifetime's worth of events in less than nine yeasrs. Roosevelt had served as the New York Police Commissioner, an Assistant Secretary of State, a Colonel in the Army, the Hero of the Battle of San Juan Hill, and the Governor of New York in the years since his return from a self-imposed exile as a cowboy in the West. When he was selected to run for Vice President, the Republican leaders selected him for his immense popularity and thought this would bring their ticket votes. They also knew that by obtaining the Vice Presidency, they would be able to be more progressive than the party's conservative leaders. He fought for fairness for the average person, while most party leaders cared more about the rights of rich businessmen. However, the best-laid plans of Republican Party leaders fell apart on Sept. 6, 1901, when President McKinley was shot. Roosevelt took over as President a little over a week later, and Roosevelt proved to be his own man. Now, as the election of 1904 approached, Roosevelt had just turned 46 years old, had been President of the United States for more than three years, and very much appeared to the public as a champion of their rights. By 1918, Wilson wanted to promote both national and international self-government through a deliberative League of Nations that could adapt to changes in a global society that was becoming more and more interdependent and beholding to no political party or country.1 1 Clifford K. Berryman, cartoon collection, Special Collections Research Center, The George Washington University. https://searcharchives.library.gwu.edu/repositories/2/resources/202 Accessed November 21, 2022.
Then on election night, Tuesday, November 8, 1904, President Teddy Roosevelt was elected as President for the first time. He had been elected Vice President in 1900. Then, on Sept. 6, 1901, the President was shot twice in Buffalo. He said this, and the Republicans took back the Senate. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge became the Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman. The Wilson Experiment (his 14 Points) was a piece of lame-duck legislation that would never pass in Congress.2 Even though this speech came in his second term in office, scholars have turned to Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points address of January 8, 1918, to explain his vision for a new international order after World War I. And for decades, one particular phrase has been closely linked to that vision: “selfdetermination.” The phrase, however, appears nowhere in Wilson's address. Also, it is often used as a shorthand for "national self-determination," which is a political idea that Wilson never believed in. Wilson was more interested in self-government, which is the idea that every citizen has the right to make decisions about how their society works. Ironically, prejudiced as he may have been, Wilson envisioned an egalitarian League, with adequate sovereign powers to advance justice within and among nations. This sense of justice would be the downfall of his grand foreign policy and of his League of Justice. Wilson poorly communicated (weakly explained) this very radical yet pragmatic ideal. Very few, if any countries would be willing to give up their sovereignty to work under the League of Nations. This was the main issue with the US Senate. This message spread around the world, and the U.S. never joined the League of Nations because he gave up on practical compromises too late and was too sick. Even though this happened by chance, it has changed the way Americans see their country's role in the world. 3 Here, any serious threat, protest, boycott, or naval blockade would have worked well. Second, it would have happened during the second phase of the Armenian genocide, which began on April 24, 1915, when several hundred Armenian intellectuals and members of the national elite were arrested (mostly in Constantinople, the capital of the Ottoman Empire), and then killed. Any distinct action here would have been appropriate, and nothing was done. After that, on April 24, Armenians all over the world began to remember the genocide of Armenians. The third time would have occurred during the third phase of the Morgan had been able to get the U.S. Congress and President to agree to a progressive national income tax and to create the Federal Reserve Bank. Morgan had been able to get the U.S. Congress and President lifelife for his country one more time. 4 Clearly, Wilson was not, and also as clear was the fact that Roosevelt could not go, either Wilson was afraid one of two things would happen-he would get killed in 2 THRONTVEIT, T. (2011), The Fable of the Fourteen Points: Woodrow Wilson and National Self-Determination. Diplomatic History, 35: 445-481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7709.2011.00959.x 3 THRONTVEIT, T. (2011), The Fable of the Fourteen Points: Woodrow Wilson and National Self-Determination. Diplomatic History, 35: 445-481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7709.2011.00959.x 4 Trickey, Erick. 2017. Why Teddy Roosevelt Tried to Bully His Way Onto the WWI Battlefield. N.p.: Smithsonian Magazine.
Fleepit Digital © 2021