Germany -- Foreign relations -- Turkey; Turkey -- Foreign relations -- Germany; World War, 1914-1918 -- Turkey
A few days afterward, when he returned my visit, he
asked:
“Where’s Kitchener’s army?
“We are willing to surrender Belgium now,” he went on. “Germany intends
to build an enormous fleet of submarines with great cruising radius. In
the next war, we shall therefore be able completely to blockade England.
So we do not need Belgium for its submarine bases. We shall give her
back to the Belgians, taking the Congo in exchange.”
I then made another plea in behalf of the persecuted Christians. Again
we discussed this subject at length.
“The Armenians,” said Wangenheim, “have shown themselves in this war to
be enemies of the Turks. It is quite apparent that the two peoples can
never live together in the same country. The Americans should move some
of them to the United States, and we Germans will send some to Poland
and in their place send Jewish Poles to the Armenian provinces--that is,
if they will promise to drop their Zionist schemes.”
Again, although I spoke with unusual earnestness, the Ambassador refused
to help the Armenians.
Still, on July 4th, Wangenheim did present a formal note of protest. He
did not talk to Talaat or Enver, the only men who had any authority, but
to the Grand Vizier, who was merely a shadow. The incident had precisely
the same character as his _proforma_ protest against sending the French
and British civilians down to Gallipoli, to serve as targets for the
Allied fleet. Its only purpose was to put Germans officially on record.
Probably the hypocrisy of this protest was more apparent to me than to
others, for, at the very moment when Wangenheim presented this so-called
protest, he was giving me the reasons why Germany could not take really
effective steps to end the massacres. Soon after this interview,
Wangenheim received his leave and went to Germany.
Callous as Wangenheim showed himself to be, he was not quite so
implacable toward the Armenians as the German naval attaché in
Constantinople, Humann. This person was generally regarded as a man of
great influence; his position in Constantinople corresponded to that of
Boy-Ed in the United States. A German diplomat once told me that Humann
was more of a Turk than Enver or Talaat. Despite this reputation I
attempted to enlist his influence. I appealed to him particularly
because he was a friend of Enver, and was generally looked upon as an
important connecting link between the German Embassy and the Turkish
military authorities. Humann was a personal emissary of the Kaiser, in
constant communication with Berlin and undoubtedly he reflected the
attitude of the ruling powers in Germany. He discussed the Armenian
problem with the utmost frankness and brutality.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account