Terminologi genosida Armenia
Terminologi genosida Armenia berbeda dalam bahasa Inggris, Turki, dan Armenia dan telah menyebabkan kontroversi politik seputar masalah penyangkalan genosida Armenia dan pengakuan genosida Armenia. Meskipun mayoritas sejarawan menulis dalam bahasa Inggris menggunakan kata "genosida", istilah lain ada.
Bahasa Armenia
[sunting | sunting sumber]Yeghern dan Medz Yeghern
[sunting | sunting sumber]Medz Yeghern (Մեծ եղեռն, Mets yegherrn terj. har. 'Kejahatan Besar') adalah istilah Armenia untuk genosida, khususnya genosida Armenia. Penggunaan istilah tersebut telah menjadi subyek kontroversi politik karena dianggap lebih ambigu daripada kata genosida.[1][2][3] Istilah Հայոց ցեղասպանություն (Hayots tseghaspanutyun), secara harfiah "genosida Armenia", juga digunakan dalam konteks resmi, misalnya, Հայոց ցեղասպանության թանգարան (Museum Genosida Armenia) di Armenia.
Bahasa Inggris
[sunting | sunting sumber].png)
Pengamat kontemporer menggunakan terminologi yang tidak ambigu untuk menggambarkan genosida, termasuk "pembunuhan suatu bangsa", "pemusnahan ras" dan sebagainya.
Kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan
[sunting | sunting sumber]Dalam deklarasi mereka pada Mei 1915, kekuatan Entente menyebut deportasi yang sedang berlangsung terhadap orang-orang Armenia sebagai "kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan". Kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan kemudian menjadi kategori dalam hukum internasional setelah pengadilan Nuremberg.[4][5]
Genosida
[sunting | sunting sumber]Kata bahasa Inggris genosida diciptakan oleh pengacara Yahudi Polandia Raphael Lemkin pada tahun 1943. Ketertarikan Lemkin pada kejahatan perang berasal dari pengadilan Soghomon Tehlirian tahun 1921 atas pembunuhan Talaat Pasha; dia mengakui nasib orang-orang Armenia sebagai salah satu kasus utama genosida di abad kedua puluh.[6][7] Meskipun sebagian besar sarjana hukum internasional setuju bahwa Konvensi Genosida 1948, yang menetapkan larangan genosida dalam hukum pidana internasional, tidak berlaku surut,[8][9] peristiwa genosida Armenia memenuhi definisi hukum genosida.[10][11] David Gutman menyatakan bahwa "sedikit jika ada cendekiawan, bagaimanapun, menolak penggunaan 'genosida'" untuk kasus Armenia semata-mata karena mereka menganggapnya anakronistik.[12] Namun, dimungkinkan untuk menulis tentang genosida Armenia tanpa meremehkan atau menyangkalnya, menggunakan berbagai istilah selain genosida.[13]
Selain memiliki makna hukum, kata genosida juga "mengandung penilaian nilai yang melekat, yang mengutamakan moralitas korban daripada pelaku".[14]
Bahasa Prancis
[sunting | sunting sumber]Prancis adalah bahasa asing yang umum di kalangan orang-orang terpelajar di Kekaisaran Ottoman pasca-Tanzimat.[15] Nama-nama dalam bahasa Prancis adalah Génocide arménien dan génocide des Arméniens.
Bahasa Jerman
[sunting | sunting sumber]Völkermord, kata Jerman untuk genosida, mendahului kata bahasa Inggris dan digunakan oleh orang Jerman sezaman untuk menggambarkan genosida.[16]
Bahasa Turki
[sunting | sunting sumber]Pemerintah Turki menggunakan ungkapan seperti "apa yang disebut genosida Armenia" (bahasa Turki: sözde Ermeni soykırımı), "Masalah Armenia" (bahasa Turki: Ermeni sorunu), sering menyebut tuduhan genosida sebagai "tuduhan Armenia"[17] atau "Kebohongan Armenia".[18] Sejarawan Turki Doğan Gürpınar menulis bahwa sözde soykırım adalah "idiom aneh untuk merujuk pada tahun 1915 tetapi langsung menolaknya", ditemukan pada awal 1980-an untuk melanjutkan penyangkalan genosida Armenia.[19] Namun, pada tahun 2006, Perdana Menteri Recep Tayyip Erdoğan memerintahkan pejabat pemerintah untuk mengatakan "peristiwa tahun 1915" daripada "yang disebut genosida Armenia".[20] Erdoğan, serta beberapa intelektual Turki[siapa?], telah membedakan antara orang-orang Armenia yang "baik" (mereka yang tinggal di Turki dan Armenia) yang tidak membahas genosida dan orang-orang "buruk" (terutama diaspora Armenia) yang menuntut pengakuan.[21][22]
Banyak intelektual Turki enggan menggunakan istilah genosida karena, menurut Akçam, "dengan mengkualifikasikannya sebagai genosida, Anda menjadi anggota kolektif yang terkait dengan kejahatan, bukan kejahatan apa pun, tetapi kejahatan tertinggi".[23] Menurut Halil Karaveli, "kata [genosida] memicu reaksi emosional yang kuat di antara orang Turki dari semua lapisan masyarakat dan dari setiap kecenderungan ideologis".[24]
Referensi
[sunting | sunting sumber]- ^ Mouradian, Khatchig (23 September 2006). "Explaining the Unexplainable: The Terminology Employed by the Armenian Media when Referring to 1915". The Armenian Weekly. Diarsipkan dari versi asli tanggal 2018-02-06. Diakses tanggal 2022-09-03.
- ^ Matiossian, Vartan (15 May 2013). "The 'Exact Translation': How 'Medz Yeghern' Means Genocide". The Armenian Weekly.
- ^ Boghos Zekiyan, Levon (2014). "Expulsion (tehcir) and genocide (soykırım): from ostensible irreconcilability to complementarity : thoughts on Metz Yeghern, the Great Armenian Catastrophe" (dalam bahasa Inggris).[pranala nonaktif permanen]
- ^ Segesser, Daniel Marc (2008). "Dissolve or punish? The international debate amongst jurists and publicists on the consequences of the Armenian genocide for the Ottoman Empire, 1915–23". Journal of Genocide Research. 10 (1): 95–110. doi:10.1080/14623520701850369.
- ^ Chorbajian, Levon (2016). "'They Brought It on Themselves and It Never Happened': Denial to 1939". The Armenian Genocide Legacy (dalam bahasa Inggris). Palgrave Macmillan UK. hlm. 167–182. ISBN 978-1-137-56163-3.
- ^ Ihrig 2016, hlm. 9, 370–371.
- ^ de Waal 2015, hlm. 132–133.
- ^ de Waal 2015, hlm. 257–258.
- ^ Baker 2015, hlm. 211.
- ^ Robertson 2016, hlm. 73. "Put another way – if these same events occurred today, there can be no doubt that prosecutions before the ICC of Talaat and other CUP officials for genocide, for persecution and for other crimes against humanity would succeed. Turkey would be held responsible for genocide and for persecution by the ICJ and would be required to make reparation."
- ^ Lattanzi 2018, hlm. 27–28, 96–97. "Apart from the question of the evocation of a strange standard of evidence—unequivocal! (in any case, it is indeed unequivocal!)—,specific clear decisions were taken by the Turkish rulers to eliminate the Ottoman Armenian community. At any rate, even if documentation on such decisions were not available—what is not the case—, following the criteria set up by international criminal tribunals and ICJ concerning the intent of destroying a substantial part of a community protected by the Genocide Convention, this specific subjective element can be inferred from other elements... All these elements are in fact present in the Metz Yeghern case: the nature of the wrongful acts committed; their massive, systematic and simultaneous occurrence in the concerned territory; the specificity of “deportations”, intentionally aimed to avoiding the return of Armenians in their century-old homeland; the appropriation of the Armenians’ properties and the destruction of Armenian cultural and religious buildings etc., from which it clearly results that a return was excluded."
- ^ Gutman 2015, hlm. 169.
- ^ Maksudyan 2009, hlm. 644–645.
- ^ Göçek, Fatma Müge (2015). Denial of Violence: Ottoman Past, Turkish Present and Collective Violence Against the Armenians, 1789–2009 (dalam bahasa Inggris). Oxford University Press. hlm. 18–19. ISBN 978-0-19-933420-9.
- ^ Strauss, Johann (2010). "A Constitution for a Multilingual Empire: Translations of the Kanun-ı Esasi and Other Official Texts into Minority Languages". Dalam Herzog, Christoph; Malek Sharif. The First Ottoman Experiment in Democracy. Würzburg: Orient-Institut Istanbul. hlm. 21–51. (info page on book at Martin Luther University) // CITED: p. 26 (PDF p. 28): "French had become a sort of semi-official language in the Ottoman Empire in the wake of the Tanzimat reforms.[...]It is true that French was not an ethnic language of the Ottoman Empire. But it was the only Western language which would become increasingly widespread among educated persons in all linguistic communities."
- ^ Ihrig 2016, hlm. 9, 55.
- ^ Simone, Pierluigi (30 May 2018). "Is the Denial of the "Armenian Genocide" an Obstacle to Turkey's Accession to the EU?". The Armenian Massacres of 1915–1916 a Hundred Years Later: Open Questions and Tentative Answers in International Law (dalam bahasa Inggris). Springer International Publishing. hlm. 275–297 [277]. ISBN 978-3-319-78169-3.
- ^ "Prof. Taner Akçam receives 'Heroes of Justice and Truth' award during Armenian Genocide Centennial commemoration". Clark Now (dalam bahasa Inggris). 28 May 2015. Diakses tanggal 20 November 2020.
The Turkish government persists in its long-standing refusal to call the killings genocide, denying the claims as “Armenian lies.”
- ^ Gürpınar 2016, hlm. 217–218.
- ^ de Waal 2015, hlm. 181.
- ^ Galip 2020, hlm. 117. "In subsequent years, his [Erdoğan's] denialist discourse has become harsher, as he has adopted a more aggressive and threatening tone aiming to divide the ‘good’ Armenians (who he also refers to as “our Armenians”) who do not talk about the genocide from the ‘bad’ Armenians (referring to diaspora Armenians) who are accused of bringing up the accusations of genocide against Turks."
- ^ Mamigonian, Marc (10 May 2010). "Mamigonian: 'Divide et Impera': The Turkish-Armenian Protocols". The Armenian Weekly. Diakses tanggal 19 December 2020.
- ^ Cheterian 2015, hlm. 142. "The first, and recurrent, problem Akçam faced concerned the use of the term ‘genocide’ in his work, and it took some time before he was able to bring himself to describe the events of 1915 in this way. He was far from alone in his hesitancy to do so..."
- ^ Karaveli, Halil (2018). Why Turkey is Authoritarian: From Atatürk to Erdoğan (dalam bahasa Inggris). Pluto Press. hlm. 27. ISBN 978-0-7453-3756-2.
Sumber
[sunting | sunting sumber]- Baker, Mark R. (2015). "The Armenian Genocide and its denial: a review of recent scholarship". New Perspectives on Turkey. 53: 197–212. doi:10.1017/npt.2015.23.
- Cheterian, Vicken (2015). Open Wounds: Armenians, Turks and a Century of Genocide (dalam bahasa Inggris). Hurst. ISBN 978-1-84904-458-5.
- de Waal, Thomas (2015). Great Catastrophe: Armenians and Turks in the Shadow of Genocide (dalam bahasa Inggris). Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-935069-8.
- Galip, Özlem Belçim (2020). New Social Movements and the Armenian Question in Turkey: Civil Society vs. the State. Springer International Publishing. ISBN 978-3-030-59400-8.
- Gürpınar, Doğan (2016). "The manufacturing of denial: the making of the Turkish 'official thesis' on the Armenian Genocide between 1974 and 1990". Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies. 18 (3): 217–240. doi:10.1080/19448953.2016.1176397.
- Gutman, David (2015). "Ottoman Historiography and the End of the Genocide Taboo: Writing the Armenian Genocide into Late Ottoman History". Journal of the Ottoman and Turkish Studies Association. 2 (1): 167. doi:10.2979/jottturstuass.2.1.167.
- Ihrig, Stefan (2016). Justifying Genocide: Germany and the Armenians from Bismarck to Hitler. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-50479-0.
- Lattanzi, Flavia (2018). "The Armenian Massacres as the Murder of a Nation?". The Armenian Massacres of 1915–1916 a Hundred Years Later: Open Questions and Tentative Answers in International Law (dalam bahasa Inggris). Springer International Publishing. hlm. 27–104. ISBN 978-3-319-78169-3.
- Robertson, Geoffrey (2016). "Armenia and the G-word: The Law and the Politics". The Armenian Genocide Legacy (dalam bahasa Inggris). Palgrave Macmillan UK. hlm. 69–83. ISBN 978-1-137-56163-3.
- Maksudyan, Nazan (2009). "Walls of Silence: Translating the Armenian Genocide into Turkish and Self-Censorship". Critique. 37 (4): 635–649. doi:10.1080/03017600903205781.
Bacaan lebih lanjut
[sunting | sunting sumber]- Matiossian, Vartan (2021). The Politics of Naming the Armenian Genocide: Language, History and 'Medz Yeghern' (dalam bahasa Inggris). Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-0-7556-4108-6.
- Sezer, Devrim (2020). "Anxieties of Naming". S: I.M.O.N. Shoah: Intervention. Methods. Documentation. (dalam bahasa Inggris). 7 (2): 4–20. doi:10.23777/SN.0220/ART_DSEZ01. ISSN 2408-9192.