Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Analysis of Turkey's Apology
As discussed in the previous post, Turkey did make some sort of an apology for its actions during we what call the Armenian Genocide. The apology, however, was not made by the government or any significant Turkish people; instead it was made by 200 average Turks as an online petition to show the Armenians that they regret what happened. Within a few days of being live on the Internet, thousands of people had “signed” the petition. Nevertheless, the effect of the apology was rather negative. Since the apology came from regular Turkish citizens rather than the government, it did not represent the country’s apology as a whole – it just showed a few people in the country who were sorry for what Turkey did in the past. Secondly, the thousands of people who signed their names amounted to only a small percentage of the Turkish population (around 7 million), which certainly did not portray the entire nation. In addition, the apology was not very strong since the writers referred to the genocide as “The Great Catastrophe.” Failing to acknowledge one’s wrongs it the first step in creating a genuine apology, and by avoiding the word “genocide,” Armenians can’t really view the apology as completely sincere and regretful. What most Armenians want, therefore, is a more formal apology with the word “genocide” in it given by the current president as it would represent the whole Turkish population. This way, Armenians would have an easier time accepting the fact the Turks are sorry for their past actions, and they would have an easier time moving back toward a harmonious state with Turks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Clearly, as illuminated above, the apology given by the Turks was largely inadequate. It almost is an insult that they cannot even take ownership for what they did. Furthermore, a formal apology from the government is crucial, simply because they were the ones who made the ultimate decision to attack.
ReplyDeleteI like how you analyzed the three main elements of the apology that made it insufficient. The apology definitely comes from the wrong source; rather than from the people, it should come from a more authoritarian and representative figure. Also, I like how you pointed out that the euphemism used in place of the word "genocide" makes the apology insincere, avoiding complete acknowledgment of the incident.
ReplyDeleteI agree the apology was nowhere near enough to forgive what they did to those poor people. the governmental apology would definitely be the most sufficient way to go about making an apology
ReplyDeleteThe apology that was given was certainly lacking however, I believe that the online petition is rather meaningful. If thousands of Turks signed this petition in only a few days, there is definitely a good amount of support for an apology. If this support was somehow put towards a formal apology I think it would definitely be pretty strong message to the Armenians, especially because it would be something started with the support of the Turkish people instead of just an official apology from the government based purely on political reasons. I'm also not so sure how much responsibility the current government of Turkey has in regards to the Armenian genocide. The government has changed radically since the end of WWI.
ReplyDelete