Works Cited: "The Armenian Genocide and Foreign Policy"

In This Section:

Publications and Resources

by Michelle Tusan


Donald Bloxham, The Great Game of Genocide (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 1.

2 Although this obligation was most often cast as one to Christian minorities during this period, the British did not necessarily exclude other oppressed minorities. Aamir Mufti, Enlightenment in the Colony (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007).

3 Former British Prime Minister W. E. Gladstone staunchly advocated for persecuted minorities abroad. Some of his most strident supporters during the Bulgarian Atrocities agitation came from the North of England where religious nonconformity was strong. Richard Shannon, Gladstone and the Bulgarian Agitation 1876 (London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1963).

4 Davide Rodogno’s comparative study of France and Britain, Against Massacre(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011) understands 19th-century humanitarianism as shaped primarily by Great Powers politics. He rejects Gary Bass’ notions in Freedom’s Battle (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2008) that a popular mandate pushed humanitarianism forward. On the connection between humanitarian activism and geopolitics during this period, see Michelle Tusan, Smyrna’s Ashes(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2012).

5 “Mr. Gladstone on the Armenian Question,” London Times, Sept. 25, 1896. Margaret Anderson, “‘Down in Turkey, Far Away’: Human Rights, the Armenian Massacres, and Orientalism in Wilhelmine Germany,” Journal of Modern History 79, No. 1 (2007): 82.

6 W. E. Gladstone, “Bulgarian Horrors,” (London: John Murray, 1876), p. 17. The pamphlet sold 200,000 copies in the first month and was reprinted in newspapers and other media. More than 10,000 people showed up to hear Gladstone speak at Blackheath on the topic several days after the initial publication of the pamphlet. H. C. G. Matthew, Gladstone, 1809-1898 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 283-84.

7 Though the protection of minorities in general was important to liberal notions of the empire, Eastern Orthodox Christians were understood in particular by High Churchmen such as Gladstone as connected to an authentic early Christianity. This link inspired his efforts on their behalf. Matthew, Gladstone, 1809-1898, pp. 629, 635; J. F. Coakley, The Church of the East and the Church of England, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1992). On liberal imperial views of Jewish minorities, see Aamir Mufti, Enlightenment in the Colony, pp. 37-56. Religious and relief workers who supported intervention on behalf of Armenians cited in particular Armenia’s early adoption of Christianity as a national religion and highly developed ancient culture as reasons. Michelle Tusan, “The Business of Relief Work: A Victorian Quaker and Her Circle in Constantinople,”Victorian Studies, 51:4, pp. 633-661.

8 The end of the Russo-Turkish War and the signing of the Treaty of Berlin in July 1878 released a wave of sentiment in favor of humanitarian intervention on behalf of persecuted Christian minorities. Article 61 of the Berlin Treaty acknowledged Britain’s leadership about the question of minority protection, though offered little by means of enforcement. Despite its failure as a diplomatic tool, however, this international agreement formalized British responsibility for the treatment of Ottoman Christians. In the end, the attempt to protect minority interests by adjusting the territories of the western Ottoman Empire to offer more autonomy to Bulgarians and others had only limited success. Arman J. Kirakossian, British Diplomacy and the Armenian Question: From the 1830s to 1914 (Flemington, N.J.: Gomidas Institute, 2003), pp. 70-79.

9 E. J. Dillon, “Armenia: An Appeal,” Contemporary Review (January 1896), p. 19.

10 Vahakn Dadrian, The History of the Armenian Genocide, (New York: Berghahn Books, 2003), p. 182.

11 Uncatalogued British Armenian Committee Minutes, Rhodes House Library Archives, Oxford University.

12 Peter Balakian cites the number of 250 in Armenian Golgotha (New York: Knopf, 2009), p. xiii. Dadrian claims this number increased to 2,345 in the weeks that followed; The History of the Armenian Genocide, p. 221. For a full account of events of April 24, 1915, see Raymond Kevorkian, The American Genocide (London: I. B. Tauris, 2011), pp. 251-254.

13 J. Ellis Barker, Fortnightly Review, (December 1914); W. Williams, Fortnightly Review, (November 1915).

14 “Lord Bryce’s Report on Turkish Atrocities,” Current History magazine, The New York Times, November 1916.

15 Organized along regional lines with a map of “Affected Districts,” each of the report’s 20 sections contained multiple eyewitness and secondhand reports, dispatches, news articles and letters. The appendix refuted Ottoman claims that Armenian disloyalty to the Empire justified civilian massacre. James Bryce, Treatment of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire: 1915-1916 (1916), presented to both Houses of Parliament, October 1916, pp. 591- 653. The disloyalty argument was later outlined and refuted by American Ambassador Henry Morgenthau in his memoirs published in 1918: Ambassador Morgenthau’s Story, (Whitefish, Mont.: Kessinger Publishing, 2010, reprint of 1918 edition). Ronald Grigor Suny, Fatma Muge Gocek and Norman M. Naimark, A Question of Genocide (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 19-20.

16 Hansards Online, House of Commons Debate, 23 August 1916, Vol. 85 c2650http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1919/dec/17/turkish-rule-in-armenia#S5LV0038P0_19191217_HOL_75, accessed, April 3, 2012; Bryce,Treatment of Armenians, 594.

17 Raphael Lemkin would later use the Armenian massacres as a case study to understand what he would first label as the crime of genocide in Axis Rule in Occupied Europe (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment, 1944). The language of intent to eliminate particular populations through systematic and premeditated killing later was codified after the Holocaust in the U.N. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (December 1948).http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html, accessed April 5, 2012.

18 Morgenthau quoted in, Suny, “Writing Genocide,” Suny et al., A Question of Genocide, p. 17

19 Nicoletta Gullace, ‘The Blood of Our Sons’: Men, Women and the Renegotiation of British Citizenship during the Great War (London, 2004). H. A. L. Fisher, James Bryce, 2 Vols. (New York, 1927), 2: 132-136. John Horne and Alan Kramer, German Atrocities, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001), p. 237.

20 Ronald Grigor Suny has written the most recent study of Morganthau and understands the diplomat’s role as central to shaping the discourse of genocide. Though the ambassador was reportedly encouraged by President Woodrow Wilson to publish his findings immediately, his report on the massacres came out only in 1919 and did not have official status of Bryce’s Blue Book. See also Peter Balakian, The Burning Tigris (New York: Harper Perennial, 2004), and Akaby Nassibian, Britain and the Armenian Question, 1915-1923 (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984).

21 Hansards Online, House of Lords Debate, December 17, 1919, Vol. 38 cc 279-300.

22 Morgenthau quoted in, Suny, “Writing Genocide,” Suny et al., A Question of Genocide, p. 20.

23 Nassabian in Britain and the Armenian Question, 1915-1923 argues that British propaganda played an important role in influencing Wilson’s pro-Armenia stance. Bass traces Wilson’s admiration for Gladstone back to his teenage years, interpreting Gladstone as almost a father figure to Wilson, in Freedom’s Battle, p. 315.

24 “Joint declaration to Sublime Porte,” May 24, 1915. The concept itself has a longer history but it was the declaration that gave “crimes against humanity” meaning as an act related to genocide. Rooted in Enlightenment thinking and early humanitarian ideology, the notion of a crime committed against a broadly conceived humanity first emerged in relation to slavery. Jenny Martinez locates the term “crime against humanity” in a treatise by an American legal scholar, Henry Wheaton, regarding public sentiment in relation to slavery in 1842 in her Slave Trade and the Origins of International Human Rights Law (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 115-116.

25 Bryce, Treatment of Armenians, p. 653.

26 The most comprehensive study of the war crimes trials is Vahakn Dadrian and Taner Akçam, Judgment at Istanbul, (New York: Berghahn Books, 2011). See also Kevorkian, The Armenian Genocide, pp. 699- 798 (Part VI); Dadrian, “The Turkish Military Tribunals’ Prosecution of the Authors of the Armenian Genocide: Four Major Court-Martial Series,” Holocaust and Genocide Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, Spring 1997, pp. 28-59.

27 “Turks Talk of Reform: Punishment for Armenian Massacres,” London Times, (Nov. 30, 1918).

28 “More Armenian Massacres,” London Times, (Jan 4, 1919).

29 Dadrian, “The Turkish Military Tribunals’ Prosecution.”

30 Vartkes Yeghiayan, British Foreign Office Dossiers on Turkish War Criminals, (La Verne, Calif.: American Armenian International College, 1991), pp. vii-xxvi.

31 Dadrian and Akçam, Judgment at Istanbul, p. 265.

32 Admiral Somerset Gough Calthorpe, (Constantinople, Jan. 7, 1919). FO 371/4173. Ottoman officials during the trials also described the “heartrending crimes against the Armenians” as “crimes against humanity.” Dadrian, “Turkish Military Tribunals’ Prosecution,” p. 34.

33 Dadrian and Akçam, Judgment at Istanbul, p. 203; Dadrian, “Turkish Military Tribunals’ Prosecution,” p. 32.

34 Bass, Stay the Hand of Vengeance  (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002), pp. 127-128.

35 Sir Ernest Pollock to A. J. Balfour, Feb. 26, 1919. Hanworth Papers, Bodleian Special Collections, MS. Eng. Hist. c. 943.

36 Ferid quoted in Kevorkian, Armenian Genocide, p. 770.

37 Similarly, German war criminals were tried by a German court at Leipzig based on prosecution lists and evidence gathered by Allies. Claud Mullins, The Leipzig Trials(London: H. F. & G. Witherby, 1921), pp. 35-50.

38 “Turks’ British Captives: Exchange for War Criminals,” London Times, October 5, 1921; “Turkish War Criminals: Double Negotiations” London Times, October 17, 1921.

39 Samantha Power, Problem from Hell: America in the Age of Genocide (New York: Harper Perennial, 2002), pp. 163-169.

40 David Kennedy explores this shift in thinking about the use of the military intervention in humanitarian crisis in The Dark Sides of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004), xii-xiii; Thomas Weiss, Humanitarian Intervention (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007), p. 1.

The Honor Society of Phi Kappa Phi