“All serious research” does not support the claim of genocide, as psychiatrist Ann Færden claims in her post (14 May). In my book, I list 72 non-Turkish historians with relevant expertise: 32 say it was genocide, 20 say it was not, 17 are uncertain due to weak documentation, and so on. This list can of course be made longer, but it would be downright wrong to talk about a full consensus.
Armenians were not killed solely because of their ethnicity. They were partly deported and perished of hunger and disease, were partly massacred by local Turks and Kurds, partly by Ottoman soldiers.
It is important to go through Ottoman and Armenian sources again. Half a million survived and many worked in the bureaucracy. That is, completely different from the Nazis’ extermination of the Jews. Putting these events in the same category prevents dialogue with the Turks.
Ragnar Næss
Skoppum
The author of the post has written a book on the topic: “A Genocidal Age and its Aftermath. Notes on the Question of the Armenian Genocide.» Gomidas Institute. London (2015).
Source: Not full consensus on genocide (aftenposten.no)
