|
Back to...
Historical
Chapters
|
"The Armenian Social-Democratic Hentchakist Party" by Hagop
Turabian
This article
entitled "The Armenian Social-Democratic Hentchakist Party" by
Hagop Turabian, for the journal 'Ararat' (London), appeared in
three parts;
Vol. 3 No. 34, April 1916,
No. 35, May 1916,
and
No. 37, July 1916,
and presents the historical and concise account of the foundation
and activities of the Social Democrat Hunchakian Party.
Additionally we consider that several issues in the following
article are at the present time still a factor of domestic and
foreign policy for both the Armenian people and the fledgling
Armenian nation.

The Armenian
Social-Democratic Hentchakist Party
Hagop Turabian
Part I
The first Armenian political party,
and at the same time the first Socialist party in Turkey and in
Persia, to be evolved, has been that of the Social-Democratic
Hentchakists. The history of this party is not only intimately
intertwined with the modern history of our nation, and with the
Armenian revolutionary movements, of which it was the first-fruits
and ever one of the chief promoters, but also with the great
political events that have within recent years, subverted Turkey,
the Caucasus and Persia, in so far that the party has been
fighting against all three fronts. Its action, national as well as
socialistic, has extended so widely and has been of so varied a
character that I shall be obliged to drop all subsidiary phases of
its activity and confine myself to its main lines of procedure.
To be able to formulate a just idea of tile causes that brought
about the foundation of the Armenian S.- D. Hentchakist Party, it
is necessary that one should call to mind the great historical
events that happened in tile Balkans in tile nineteenth century
and the lamentable and desperate situation of the Armenian
population in the bloody empire of the Crescent.
Let us throw a rapid glance over that situation.
The intellectual, talented, progressive, peace-loving and
Christian nations of European as well as Asiatic Turkey were, by
fatal misfortune, compelled to live among the ignorant, parasitic,
barbarous and fanatical Mongolians, who carried on their existence
by pillaging, murdering and robbing their industrious and
prosperous neighbours. The Turks may have been successful as
conquerors, but as rulers they have never shown the slightest
aptitude. Wherever they have become absolute masters, there
progress and civilisation have always come to a halt, and
injustice and intolerance have flourished. Instead of endeavouring
to reconcile the heterogeneous elements that they subjected to
serfdom by their gory yataghans and their trenchant scimitars,
they persecuted and tyrannised over them so outrageously, that
even the most pacific and the most loyal of them were ultimately,
and through sheer desperation, driven to resistance and revolt. On
this the fanatical Moslems and savage Bashibazouks, fired with
frenzied hatred inherent in Islamism, with their lust for
unprotected women and the prospects of loot and plunder, pounced
upon their victims and devastated the hapless land with a
whirlwind of destructive fire and a deluge of innocent blood.
And there was a time when the Christian subjects of the Ottoman
Sultans, just as the European serfs of the Middle Ages, humbly
considered themselves, their brides and their daughters, their
goods and chattels, to be, by divine ordination, the absolute
property of their lairds and masters. And so, with Oriental
fatalism, they seemed, always meekly to submit to the immoral
lusts, the crushing taxations and the arbitrary confiscations of
the Turkish Pasha, the Kurdish Bey and the Circassian Chieftain
with their greedy hosts of satellites. But, thanks to European
schools and colleges, which, in spite of all Turkish obstacles,
had been established in various parts of the Turkish empire, this
blissful millennium of Ottoman misrule gradually came under the
more critical contemplation of the silent sufferers. The new
generations, enlightened by the liberal teachings of their
European tutors, and imbued with modern ideas regarding the
inalienable rights of human beings and the sanctity of their
hearths and homes, began to protest and even to resist the
tyrannies of their oppressors, often dying bravely in defence of
the honour of their wives and daughters. The astonished Turk,
accustomed to tearful submission, called these people ungrateful
rebels and redoubled his persecutions. Driven into desperate
resistance and self-defence, the subject nations were gradually
awakened by their nascent ideas of patriotism and nationalism.
Fired with new ambitions of freedom and independence, they finally
resorted to open insurrection - hopeless and forlorn at first, but
exultingly triumphant at the end.
Thus, in the course of a century, the incorrigible Turk has been
forced to acknowledge, in succession, tile absolute independence
of Greece, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, and of Bulgaria. The
Bulgarian massacres in the eighties of the last century were once
more agitating the horror-stricken civilised nations of Europe.
Russia, urged by the Slavic world, and especially by her Near
Eastern interests, declared war on Turkey with the assent of
Europe. The Treaty San Stefano, which put an end to hostilities,
not only freed Bulgaria from the abominable Turkish yoke, but also
contained certain, articles to the advantage of the small nations
which were still inhabiting portions of the Turkish empire.
The XVIth Article of the above Treaty, which, in the Congress of
Berlin, was transformed into the LXIst Article, was intended to
guarantee the life, the liberty and the property of Turkish
Armenians. But no sooner the Russian armies retreated from
Armenia, then the methodic massacres, pillage and every
description of atrocities were let loose over the country under
the high protecting surveillance of the Hamidian Government. The
savage Kurdish hordes were, with impunity, ravaging once again in
every part of Greater Armenia. In vain the religious
representatives of the nation with certain Armenian intellectuals
went to implore the succour of Russia, "the defenders of the
Christians in Turkey." In vain they turned their eyes towards
"civilised" Europe and knocked at the doors of her statesmen with
the LXIst Article of the Berlin treaty in their hands. "Christian"
Russia and "civilised" Europe were not in a mood to trouble
themselves for a "scrap of paper," and were tolerating with
wonderful impassivity the strangulation of an entire people, which
was both Christian and civilised.
Kamar Katiba, Raffi and other renowned Armenian poets and authors,
as well as such indefatigable patriots as Khrimean, Minas Tchcraz,
Portukalian, with their poetries, their speeches and articles,
were doing their best to inflame the sparkle of patriotism in the
hearts of Armenians who, unfortunately, had not yet stripped off
their cloak of servitude. And it was under the propaganda of these
patriots that a few "self-defence" bands were formed in various
parts of Greater and Lesser Armenia; but it was not possible for
them, owing to the lack of a clear programme, a guiding hand and
harmonious action, to render any valuable service to the cause of
suffering Armenia, even though they were able to show, from time
to time, such personal heroism as to merit the high esteem of
every Armenian patriot.
It was at such a chaotic period in our national affairs that a
group of Armenian students, imbued with new and high ideals, set
to work to publish at Geneva in Switzerland in 1887 the first
number of The Hentchak, which was destined to become, later, the
Central organ of the powerful Hentchakist organisation. The
founders of The Hentchak (this word in Armenian means simply "The
Bell") were ringing the bell of alarm to awaken the slumbering
Armenians all over the world. They were endeavouring to teach our
compatriots to place all their hopes on their own abilities and
might, and not to rely too greatly on the succour either of
"Christian" Russia or of "civilised" Europe, whose pre-occupations
were confined largely to the egoistic interests of their own
Capitalist Classes.
Avetis Nazarbekian, Miss Marie Vardanian (Maro) - who afterwards
became Mrs. Nazarbek - Roupen Khanazatian and two other comrades,
the founders of The Hentchak1,
were presenting to the Armenian people not only a complete
political programme, but at the same time one that was based on
the foundations of political economy, which was distinctly of a
socialistic turn. They were, indeed, tracing the paths of
political and economical liberty for those who were ready to
unfurl the red banner of Revolution.
The views, thus disseminated, drew groups which became more and
more numerous, not only in Turkey but also in Europe and America,
and these rallied to the doctrines of the new revolutionary
Journal. It was due to the union of these groups, forming the
nucleus, which led to the constitution, in 1890, of a Party, which
assumed the name of The Hentchakist Revolutionary Party, from the
name of its organ The Hentchak.
The new Party laid itself out to pursue the political and economic
emancipation of the entire Armenian working people; and with this
in view it placed in the forefront of its propaganda two objects,
viz., (1) the INDEPENDENCE OF ARMENIA as the Immediate object, and
(2) the inculcation of the spirit of SOCIALISM as the Final
Object.
The founders and the theorists of the Hentchakist Party were all
Marxists, who were consequently convinced that the emancipation of
the working and producing classes, which form the great majority
of mankind, can only be complete when the workers and producers
themselves become the owners of all the forces and means of
production. The emancipation of the producing classes must,
therefore, mean the emancipation of every man and woman, that is
to say, the complete social and economic freedom of humanity from
the yoke of the capitalist class, which, though it forms the
minority, yet oppresses the majority.
By adopting Socialism as a final object, the Hentchakist Party
were, therefore, aiming at the liberation of all Armenians
suffering under three yokes at the same time - in Turkey, in
Persia, and in Russia; and this led to scissions in the Party,
through tile attitude of the anti-Socialist elements, whose aim
was to leave Socialism out of the Party programme. They were also
urging tile adoption of a friendly attitude towards Russia, while
the Party was fighting in the Caucasus on socialistic grounds, on
the plea that the Armenians of Russia were already enjoying
political freedom to a certain degree. It was under all these
circumstances that the formidable strike of Bacou, in l904, was
organised and conducted by the Hentchakist Party in co-operation
with the Russian Social-Democratic and Labour Party.
Those who deserted the Party founded an off-shoot under the name
of Reformed Hentchakists, whose actions were devoid of any
importance. Then, to avoid all confusion, the Fifth General
Congress held in Paris in 1905 decided that the Party should be
called The Hentchakist Soc.-Dem. Party, an appellation which was
again changed to The Social-Democratic Hentchakist Party - as it
is called to-day - by a resolution of the Sixth General Congress
held in Constantinople in 1909.
But the theorists of the Party were not Utopians or fanatical
doctrinaires who would isolate themselves within the meshes of
Socialistic phraseology. They were conscious that the Armenian
people were everywhere living under absolute monarchico-political
regimes, the administrative, economical and fiscal systems of
which were conducting them to ruin and destruction; they were also
living at an epoch when, on the one hand, the system of capitalist
production was beginning to make itself sensibly felt, while, on
the other hand, primitive forms of production were tending to
disappear for ever.
Moreover, the last vestiges of a feudal organisation were
preventing the due development and the progress of the producing
and proletariat classes. Under such conditions, for an Armenian
Socialist, the establishment of Socialistic institutions in
Armenia could not be otherwise than a Final Object, and,
therefore, to this end, an Immediate Object was presenting itself
for his actions and as supplying the contributing influences.
In the next issue of Ararat I will speak of this Immediate Object
and of the means adopted to attain it by The Hentchakist
Revolutionary Party, which has played so prominent a part in our
struggle for liberty and independence.

Part II
The Immediate Object of the
Hentchakist Revolutionary Party consisted in: revolutionising and
destroying the regime of absolutism; enfranchising the Armenian
people, lifting them out of their state of servitude, and allowing
them political possibilities for taking part in all political
matters; suppressing all obstacles that were working against their
economical development and cultural progress; creating such
political conditions as would enable the working class to act
freely in the direction of their own bent and their personal
needs; improving the hard conditions of labour; securing class
consciousness; enabling the people to organise themselves as a
separate political body and thus facilitating their social
efforts, which would contribute to their progression towards the
Final Object.
With these objects in view, the Hentchakist Revolutionary Party
decided to fight for the abolition of Turkey's autocratic regime,
and to create new institutions with a democratic Constitution
whose fundamental features would be the following :-
(i) A general Assembly, having full
powers, elected by direct and general popular suffrage.
(ii) Provincial and Communal autonomy.
(iii) Equality before the law of all citizens, without distinction
of nationality, religion or sex.
(iv) Complete freedom of press, conscience and meetings.
(v) The institution of Habeas Corpus as a safeguard of liberty.
(vi) The separation of church and State.
(vii) The general arming of the entire manhood into a popular
militia, in time of peace.
(viii) The establishment of a secular and obligatory system of
public instruction, etc.
And to ameliorate the economical
situation of Armenians, it was essential for the Hentchakist
Revolutionary Party, besides securing the above-mentioned
political rights, also to bring to fruition the following
reforms:-
(a) The abolition of the existing
system of Contributions and the establishment of a progressive
system.
(b) The total abrogation of indirect contributions.
(c) The liberation of peasants from debts of all descriptions.
(d) The enactment of special laws for the protection of labour
against speculations, etc.
For the realisation of their immediate
Object the Party elected to act solely in Turkey, because:-
(1) Turkish Armenians represented the
majority of the Armenian nation; while in Turkish Armenia was
comprised, the largest portion of our national land;
(2) the cause of Turkish Armenians, through the Treaty of Berlin
and other international agreements, had already entered within the
positive circuit, of International Rights, and had been officially
recognised by the Great Powers;
(3) the autocratic and barbarous Turkish Government was subjecting
the Armenian people in Turkey to intolerable political, economic
and social oppression;
(4) that abominable system was in every way rendering impossible
the politico-economical and social progression of the Armenian
people, and constituted, at the same time, a continuous menace to
their national and human existence;
(5) the downfall of the Turkish Empire was inevitable, as it was
impossible that an Empire which was politically, economically and
financially in a most deplorable, disorderly and decaying state
could exist much longer, when the European Powers themselves were
doing their utmost, by their frequent interferences and attacks,
to bring about the fatal hour of its dissolution.
With all these considerations before
them, the Hentchakist Revolutionary Party deemed it a historical
necessity that, in the first place, all revolutionary activity
should be confined to the defence of the Turkish-Armenian cause,
and to its solution in accordance with their own Immediate Object.
Secondly, that the sphere of its revolutionary activity should, on
that account, be restricted to Turkish Armenia. And, thirdly, that
the destiny of Turkish Armenia and Turkish Armenians should, once
for all, be detached from the destiny of the Turkish Empire -
meaning, in fact, Armenian National Independence, which was to
form an essential and the foremost condition of the Party's
Immediate Object.
With a politico-economical Programme of such a nature, the newly
formed Revolutionary Party was setting itself the task of
delivering our compatriots living under the yoke of the Turks, who
were absolute masters of their outraged rights. Young, ardent,
active, talented leaders, conscious of their sacred duty towards
their martyred Fatherland, full of love for their brethren in
slavery, proud of the glorious past and broken-hearted over the
present of suffering Armenia, set themselves to work and brought
about an almost-miraculous change. Turkish Armenians, who had been
described by some European writers as lacking in virile power,
energy and force, and fit only to be butchered like defenceless
sheep, after being organized and disciplined under the red flag of
the Hentchakist Party, began to take heart, to assert their
self-consciousness, and stripped off their cloaks of menial
servitude. The Rayahs of yesterday, instead of bowing their heads
as of yore, began to raise them and to protest vigorously against
the outrageous injustices of their oppressors. Instead of
submitting without murmur, they began to refuse to fulfil the
interminable demands of corrupt Turkish officials and to condemn
their wilful caprices.
The Hentchakist Revolutionary Party had not been long in existence
before it became a formidable organisation, and spread its
ramifications and its authority over a wide expanse of Turkish
Armenia. It was the means of creating a splendid series of armed
insurrections which continued to embarrass the Turkish authorities
and to concentrate on them the attention of the whole of Europe.
These were known as the Demonstrations at Constantinople (1890 and
1895), the Insurrections at Sassoun (1894), at Zeitoun (1895), at
Van (1896), and the Revolutionary Movements in Leaser Armenia - at
Marsovan, Amasaia, Yozgad, Kaisserieh, etc. (1892-1896). I omit
details of these activities as they are fairly well known and,
besides, I am indebted to the hospitality of Ararat in enabling me
to place these articles before its readers, and it would be an
abuse of my privilege to unduly extend them.
Through the above noted insurrections it is true that the precious
blood of the Armenian people was abundantly shed, but the object
of those risings has been attained. After the conflagration at
Sassoun a new Armenian nation was born, a young combatant nation
imbued with the resolute determination to put an end to the
Turkish carnival of rape, murder, pillage and violation, and to
the Turkification policy of the Sultan Hamid, which was
systematically and mercilessly applied in Armenia under the
tolerant gaze of the Signatory Powers of the Berlin Treaty. It is
true that after the Sassoun insurrection these Powers hastened to
occupy themselves seriously with the Armenian Question, and
elaborated the famous Reform Programme of May 11th, 1895. This was
presented to the Sultan Hamid for immediate acceptance and
signature, but the incorrigible Turk would have none of it. Mere
words he never listened to - what he did understand was brute
force, before which alone he would kneel in submission. But how
was this to be brought about - were not the Great Powers
themselves rent by divergent views which made the application of
coercive measures impossible? The Sublime Porte was not slow to
profit from such a state of affairs and began its policy of
Oriental tergiversation, even having the audacity at times to
question the right of the Great Powers to interfere in the
internal affairs of Turkey2.
It was to protest against the non-acceptance of the Armenian
Reform Programme that the Hentchakiat Party organised the second
Demonstration at Constantinople (18/30th Sept., 1895). "It has at
least scored a first success," wrote The Times in its editorial of
October 3rd, 1895, commenting on the Hentchakist Demonstration,
and gave at the same time the following advice to Abdul Hamid: -
"He must know well that it is only by complying with the advice of
the Powers that he can hope to avoid a repetition of scenes
painful and even perilous to himself and not without danger to his
Empire."
The Sultan gives way, bows before the force of revolution, and
signs the Reform Programme presented to him by England, France and
Russia (the Triple Alliance having declared its disinterestedness
in the Armenian Reform Question).
It would not be without interest to quote the following
appreciative remarks from The Times of October 4th, 1895, on the
events that had Just happened :-
"In commenting briefly on the Stamboul
riots yesterday we ventured to predict that the sound of gunshot
within close proximity of the Imperial Palace would have more
influence on a Sovereign of Abdul Hamid's peculiar temperament
than all the representations of friendly diplomacy. The
event has, within twenty-four hours, fulfilled our-prophecy.....
One may without too much optimism assume that His Majesty himself
has been brought, by the events of the last few days to a more
intelligent and liberal frame of mind…"3
It was in such eloquent words that the
greatest organ of England, nay, of the world, rendered homage to
the Hentchakist Party, whose action in Constantinople had had more
influence on Abdul Hamid than all the representations of friendly
diplomacy. Besides, this victory of the Hentchakists was the
means, not only of stimulating the enthusiasm of Armenians all
over the world, who seemed to be carried breast-high on the waves
of expectation, but it also affected our European champions, who
began to predict that at last the dawn of a bright future was near
at hand on the murky horizon of martyred Armenia.
"There are grounds for hoping that we may be approaching a
settlement at last," was announced by The Times in its editorial
of October 16th, 1895. But, alas! these good tidings were not
realised. The Reform programme of May, 1895, remained a dead
letter as the 61st Article of the Treaty of Berlin has remained to
this day. The three Powers, which were the authors of the
Programme, were not in accord as to the use of force on Sultan
Hamid for the execution of that Programme in the Armenian vilayets.
The European Concert thus once more proclaimed its failure, and
affirmed thereby the veracity of Hentchakist principles - that
Armenians should place all their hopes on themselves, and not rely
to any great extent on European diplomacy for the salvation of
Armenia.4
"The Great Assassin," deriving encouragement thereupon from
treacherous neighbouring Empires, directed the General Massacres
of Armenians, satisfied in his own mind that such a bloody orgy
would be the only means for putting an end to the Armenian
Question, which seemed to him as a suspended meteor in the sky, an
ever-present portent menacing dire catastrophes to Turkey.
In the history of the world there will not be found such dark
pages, whereon are registered so many tragic memorials as the
general massacres of Armenians in 1895-96. Those were indeed,
gloomy years of slaughter and mourning for the Armenian nation.
Diplomat-ridden Europe shut her eyes and hardened her heart to her
solemn obligations, her main desire being to preserve the
integrity of that decomposing carcase in order that she may
accomplish its partition under more favourable circumstances. Our
friends in Europe, after a few vain protests, maintained silence;
even The Times (Sept. 16th, 1895), which, but a few days before
the massacres, was uttering the following words of solemn warning
to the Sultan, was among them:-
"It ought to be plain to a ruler so
astute as the Sultan that this country is in earnest, and that if
driven to take active steps, it will be practically the mandatory
of Europe. In these circumstances it is absolutely puerile to seek
encouragement in resistance from fine distinctions between the
attitudes of different Powers."
The Red Sultan, the nefarious tyrant,
had decreed that the love of Liberty and the revolutionary spirit
among Armenians was to be drowned in an ocean of blood, but he was
cruelly mistaken in the trend of the times. The Armenian Question
had, indeed, received a crushing blow, but it was not dead, nor
could it die, because its causes were still in existence and the
Armenian people, despite all the dreadful, calamities that had
overtaken them, had not lost their vitality. From the depths of
their extensive ruin were proudly raising their heads valiant
Zeytoun and courageous Van, with the Flag of Revolution lifted
high in their hands, inspiring new hopes, new fervour and a new
spirit for stricken Armenia.
It was the Hentchakist Party that organised the famous and now
historical insurrection of Zeytoun (Nov. 1st, 1895), which routed
the Turkish armies composed of 110,000 men. The future victor of
Greece, Edhem Pasha, who had promised the Sultan to reduce Zeytoun
to ashes within forty-eight hours, was compelled to avow his
defeat, and Sultan Hamid demanded the intervention of the Great
Powers. Zeytoun accepted the mediation of the latter, and a Treaty
composed of 16 Articles was signed. The Hentchakist leaders were
sent to Europe with the honours of war. Zeytoun obtained certain
privileges and a Christian Governor.
In the following appreciation by Mr. James Bryce, which honours
the name of that city, the Armenian people and the Party which
organised and conducted that insurrection, may be summed up the
heroic place in history which Zeytoun has carved out for herself
:-
"A few years ago the Armenians showed
in Zeytoun such a heroic resistance that if it could be known
thoroughly in Europe, the name of Zeytoun would be as famous as
some of the cities of Ancient Greece."5

Part III
The general massacres of 1895-96
clearly demonstrated to the Hentchakist Party and to all
far-seeing Armenians that Russia would not tolerate the creation
of an autonomous Armenia6,
France in Near Eastern questions was always marching in the
foot-steps of her great Ally, while England, isolated as she was,
had no other course but to bow before the will of Russia. Those
famous words of the late Lord Salisbury - the British fleet was
not in a position to cross the Taunts Mountains - are still, we
believe, fresh in the minds of our readers. That declaration was
the death, signal for hundreds of thousands of Armenians. Though
it may sound strange today to some ears, it is, nevertheless, a
historical fact that, at that critical period, German diplomacy
was more favourable for the settlement of the Armenian Question
than the diplomacy of the Empires working in our cause, with what
political dreams is best known to them7.
The present war has however, proved that with an autonomous
Armenia, Russia would have had a "friendly and powerful Bulgaria"
on her frontier.
As the intelligent reader will see, it was through the Oriental
policy of the Powers, and not through the Socialistic programme or
the demonstrations of the Hentchakist Party (as insincere critics
of the Armenian Revolution pretend) that the Armenian Question did
not obtain its solution, while the Armenian nation was obliged to
fight single-handed in the clutches of its executioners.
The Hentchakist Party, taking into consideration the new attitude
of the Powers, decided that every species of isolated action
should be abandoned, while serious preparations were being made
for a general insurrection in all parts of Turkish Armenia, when a
favourable moment - such as a declaration of war by a Power
against Turkey, or the rising of Macedonians, Albanians, etc.,
should present itself.
Unfortunately for the Armenians, that wise decision was not acted
on by the other parties as well, and the Hentchakist Party,
through internal troubles, failed to make much progress. This
reaction had a deleterious effect not only among the disappointed
Armenians, but also in the Party itself. It is no humiliation for
a political Party to confess its faults, while at the same time
taking a just pride in the noble acts it has performed. The year
1896 proved to be fatal not only for the Armenian nation, but also
for the Hentchakist Party, which had summoned a General Congress
to be held in London for the purpose of outlining its new tactics.
A certain number of the delegates were hostile to Socialism and to
the Russian-Armenian members of the Central Committee, considering
them incapable of directing with ability the proposed insurrection
in Turkish Armenia, while others sided with the Central Committee,
and so the rupture within the Party became inevitable. Six years
later, in 1902, a reconciliation was officially signed between the
schismatics and the Hentchakist Party, only to be broken again in
1903; and this time the rupture was even more disastrous than the
previous one, as it conduced to assassinations in the Caucasus,
Switzerland, England, Egypt and in the United States… The moment
does not appear opportune, nor is it profitable to dwell longer on
these misfortunes which were, indeed, the darkest pages in the
history of the Armenian Revolution and of the Hentchakist Party, a
Party which had been formed for a noble purpose and had
accomplished most heroic deeds.
*
* *
In the Caucasus the Hentchakist Party
has also played a prominent part, though it has never been so
powerful there as the Dashnakists, because the entire attention of
the Party had been absorbed in Turkish Armenia till 1896, and
moreover its Socialistic programme was not palatable to the
wealthy Armenians and bourgeon intellectuals in Russia, who were
inclined to work in the Caucasus on nationalistic lines, which
gave rise to enmities between Armenians and Georgians, between
Armenians and Tartars; and the late Prince Galitzin amply profited
by this state of affairs, and even encouraged it to the extent of
its culminating in the Armeno-Tartar shocks of 1905-1906. The
Hentchakist Party has not only shown its active participation in
these as well as in all the revolutionary troubles of Russia, in
agreement with the Russian Soc.-Dem. Labour Party, but has also
combated the russification policy of Galitzin, going even to the
extent of brute force, and so influencing to a great extent the;
decision of the Russian Government to restore to the Armenian
notion its ecclesiastical properties in the Caucasus which had
been confiscated by order of the Czar on the advice of the Viceroy
Galitzin. This is not, however, the right moment to speak more
freely about these painful matters which belong, we trust, to the
historic past.
In 1908, after the "Revolution" of the Young Turk, the Hentchakist
Party was officially approved by the Government of Constantinople.
The Party had abandoned its Separatist thesis from its programme,
but sustained with greater energy the principle of nationalities,
and combated furiously the Turkification policy of the Young
Turks. On the other hand its programme was heavily charged with
the demands of International Socialism, excessive even to some
European Socialists, for a country where the struggle of the
Nationalities puts into the shade the very feeble existence of
class struggle. Nevertheless, the only member of the Hentchakist
Party in the first Ottoman Parliament, Mourad, one of the heroes
of Sassoun, rendered appreciable service to the newly-born labour
organisations of the Armenians as well as of other nations in the
Turkish Empire.
The Hentchakist Party was sincerely disposed to second the actions
of the Young Turks towards the consolidation of the Constitutional
regime in Turkey; but experience proved that in reality nothing
had been changed in Turkish policy. The despotic tyranny of Abdul
Hamid was replaced by the tyrannical oligarchy, of the Young Turk
leaders. The massacres at Adana, on the morrow of the "New
Regime," were the beat proof of it. Notwithstanding all these
obstacles, the Party combated on legal grounds against the
reactionary and assassin Government of Constantinople.
The Turco-Balkan War of 1912-1913 demonstrated the nullity of
"Constitutional" efforts; and destroyed, besides, once for all the
dogma of "territorial integrity" of the Turkish Empire, and
proclaimed the rottenness of a "fictitious State." Then the
Hentchakist Party, abandoning its legal grounds, took up its
attitude of champion of Armenian exigencies and demanded the
Autonomy of Armenia, a demand which was widely proclaimed and
excellently defined in its memorable Appeal addressed to the Great
Powers and to the people of Europe8.
From that day the Young Turk Government redoubled its persecutions
against Hentchakists, suppressing their newspapers in
Constantinople, interdicting the access of Hentchak into Turkey,
and in 1914, profiting by the declaration of the European War,
arresting, imprisoning, torturing and even publicly hanging
several of the distinguished members of the Party with the
devilish intention of exterminating the most prominent and the
most active of the Armenian Revolutionary Parties and the
irreconcilable enemies of Sultanism, Pan-Islamism, and
Young-or-Old Turkism.
*
* *
In Persia, the action of the
Hentchakist Party has been limited, as the Persian-Armenians have
no national or insurrectional ambitions. They possessed positions
of privilege there, and were enjoying even greater political
freedom than the Russian-Armenians. The Party, however, by its
alliance with the Persian Soc.-Dem. Party; and through the
admirable conferences of Prof. Eghikian (former General
Representative of the Central Committee, who had several audiences
with the Regent of Persia) rendered appreciable services to
Persian-Armenians, appeasing the chauvinistic spirit of certain
maniacs and thus avoiding unnecessary friction with the Persians.
At the reactionary period of the reign of Shah Mohammed Ali, the
Hentchakist Party fulfilled its duty as a Revolutionary Party as
best it could.
*
* *
During the present war, when the
Entente Powers posed as the champions of small nations, the
Hentchakist Party, forgetting its grievances against the Russian
Government for persecuting them as Socialists and for outlining a
Russification policy, under the leaderships of Artemus and
afterwards of Sunik and Tashir formed an important corps of
Hentchakist Volunteers (a group of these appeared in Ararat of
last April), who are fighting bravely today on the historic
battlefields and the lofty mountains of Armenia, spreading terror
in the ranks of Turkish soldiers. It is an Homeric spectacle and
worthy of all praise to see a nation martyrised for six centuries
and bereft of all hope from Europe under the most tragic of
circumstances, preparing to sacrifice itself for the cause of
civilisation, which is the cause also of the Allies by force of
circumstances. It is sublime indeed!
*
* *
The European War has facilitated the
execution of the criminal designs of file Young Turk oligarchy -
the extermination of Armenians to solve the Armenian Question.
The Armenian nation and its political parties have paid heavily
for their love of the Entente Powers. The Hentchakist Party, by
its Appeal of June 7th, l915, solicited the intervention of the
civilised world, but neither the great nor the small neutral
nations have made even the faintest, movement to stay the red
hands of the assassins. Tills has proved once again that Armenians
can expect merely sympathetic words from "Christian" and
"civilized" Europe, and nothing else. Suffering Armenia is
mourning today her beloved sons and daughters, who have been
mercilessly butchered, violated, crucified by anthropomorphous
monsters…
But from these sufferings, from the depths of her ruins will rise
the Sacred Legions to avenge her. They are already doing it,
whether under the Hentchakist or the Dashnakist flag. From the
issue of this horrible war, therefore, and on the magnitude of our
national efforts will depend not only the kind of Europe that will
emerge, but also the status of the Armenian nation-Avant-guard of
civilisation and the Standard-bearer of Socialism in the Near
East.
The Armenian political parties are doing their sacred duty to the
uttermost - by shedding their precious blood for the liberation of
Armenia, as they have done consistently for more than a quarter of
a century, with the Hentchakist Party in the forefront. Now a
sacred trust lies on Armenian neutrals who, by their acts alone,
should prove that they too are the worthy sons of noble and worthy
progenitors.
Hagop Turabian
Paris, 1916

Notes
1. There were in
actuality seven official founders; Avetis Nazarbekian, Mariam
Vardanian/Nazarbekian (Maro), Gevorg Gharadjian, Ruben Khan-Azat, Christopher Ohanian,
Gabriel Kafian and Manuel Manuelian, (SDHP -
Australian Leadership)
2. The Earl of Kimberley, telegraphing to Sir.
P. Currie, the British Ambassador, says:-
Foreign Office, March 28th, 1895.
Rustem Pasha asked me upon what grounds we based our right to
interfere in the internal affairs of Turkey. I expressed some
astonishment at this enquiry, as I said I thought he must be aware
that, as regards the Armenians, we had the most plain and
undoubted right, based upon the Treaty of Berlin and the Cyprus
Convention of 1878; and not only had we, in common with other
Powers, a right to interfere, but those Treaties laid upon us
most serious obligations that we could not neglect.
Blue Book, Turkey, No. 1 (1896), pg.12.
The italics are ours. (H.T.)
3. The italics are ours (H.T.)
4. The italics are ours (SDHP - Australian
Leadership)
5. Speech of Mr. James Bryce, British
Ambassador at Wahington, at Wandom Hall, Boston, Mass., in
December, 1904.
6. Sir. F. Lascelles to the Earl of Kimberley
dated,
St. Petersburg,
June 13th, 1895
"…Russia would, his Excellency (Prince Lobanoff) said, gladly see
reforms applied to all the subjects of the Sultan, but she could
not consent to the creation of a territory in proximity to her
frontier where the Armenians should posses exceptional privileges
- to the creation, in fact, in Asia Minor of another Bulgaria."
Blue Book, Turkey, No.1 (1896), pg.83.
7. Sir E. Malet to the Earl of Kimberley,
dated,
Berlin, May 18th, 1895.
"…His Majesty (the Sultan) had applied to the Emperor for his good
offices to moderate the action of the three Powers, and Baron Von
Marshall said that a prompt answer had been sent to the effect
that the Sultan had much better give way to their demands, and
that Germany could not intervene."
Blue Book, Turkey, No, 1 (1896), pg.66.
8. "Appel Aux Grandes Puissances et Aux
Peuples Europeens," par le Comite' Central Hentchakiste, Paris, le
30 Janvier 1913. Imprimerie du "Hentchak."
|
|