Jadaliyya (J): What made you write this book?
Bedross Der Matossian (BDM): I have always been interested in
the history of the late Ottoman period, in particular the era of
Abdülhamid II (1876-1909) and the Second Constitutional Period
(1908-1918). Most of the scholarship about the period in the past has
been written from the perspective of the dominant ruling elite/political
center. It is only in the past decade that we see new studies that
provide a broader picture of the period by incorporating non-dominant
groups. It is with this intention in mind that I decided to concentrate
on examining one of the most important turning points in the beginning
of the modern Middle East from the perspective of the non-dominant
groups.
Much has been written on the causes and initial implementation of the
Young Turk Revolution of 1908. There is, however, a dearth of material
that appropriately addresses its complexity and its impact on the
worldview of the different non-dominant groups in the post-revolutionary
period. Existing scholarship on the impact of the Young Turk Revolution
on the Ottoman society is divided into two groups. One views the
Revolution as a factor that led to the debilitation of interethnic
relations leading to the rise of ethnic nationalism among the
non-dominant groups, while the other romanticizes the period as the
beginning of “civic nationalism” under the rubric of Ottomanism which
was interrupted by World War I. I argue in the book that both approaches
fail to adequately problematize the Revolution and demonstrate its
complexities.
J: What particular topics, issues, and literatures does the book address?
BDM: The book highlights the ambiguities and contradictions of
the Young Turk Revolution's goals and the reluctance of both the
leaders of the Revolution and the majority of the empire's ethnic groups
to come to a compromise regarding the new political framework of the
empire. In order to demonstrate this, the book concentrates on three
ethnic groups: Arabs, Armenians, and Jews. These three diversified
groups represented vast geographic areas, as well as a wide range of
interest groups, religions, classes, political parties, and factions. By
utilizing primary sources in Arabic, Armenian, French, German, Hebrew,
Ladino, and Ottoman Turkish, the book analyzes the revolution from the
perspective of non-dominant groups. This approach is vital in
order to comprehend the complexities of the post-revolutionary period.
The book examines the ways in which the Revolution and constitutionalism
raised these groups' expectations amid the post-revolutionary turmoil
and how they internalized the Revolution, negotiating their space and
identity within the rapidly changing political landscape of the period.
The book argues that the Young Turks' reluctance to sincerely
accommodate the political aspirations of ethnic groups put an end to the
ideals of the Revolution, which, despite their ambiguity, were adhered
to by the different ethnic groups. The principles of the Revolution
remained unrealized due to the lack of a sincere negotiation process
between the ruling elite and the non-dominant groups concerning the
empire's political systems, the emergence of ethnic politics in tandem
with the consolidation of national identities, and international
pressure on the Ottoman state, all of which became serious challenges to
the amalgamation of modernity and tradition and hampered healthy
political development. In addition, the book argues that the Committee
of Union and Progress (CUP), the ruling Young Turk party, did not
wholeheartedly believe in constitutionalism. For them, constitutionalism
was only a means to an end: to maintain the integrity of a centralized
Ottoman Empire. In fact, they were determined to preserve the empire
even if that meant violating the spirit of constitutionalism itself, as
they later demonstrated in their coup d’état of 23 January 1913. After
the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), the CUP hijacked first the legal system and
then the executive branch to protect its vital interests. It forced the
declining Empire into World War I, which culminated in its defeat, the
Armenian Genocide, the collapse of the Empire, and the advent of
colonialism into the Middle East.
J: How does this book connect to and/or depart from your previous research?
BDM: The book departs from my previous research that
concentrated on the socio-economic and political history of the
Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. In the past I have written numerous
articles that dealt with different aspects of understanding Armenian
history in the late Ottoman Empire and modern Middle East: from Armenian
commercial networks in the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century to
the destruction of the Armenian economic infrastructure during the
Armenian Genocide and from the history of Armenians in the provinces of
Trabzon and Kayseri to the history of Armenians under the British
Mandate of Palestine. In addition, I also published a few articles
dealing with inter-communal relations in the late Ottoman period. In Shattered Dreams of Revolution,
I aimed at examining a major transformation in the history of the
modern Middle East through a comparative, multilingual, and
cross-cultural analysis. I think that the best way to understand the
history of ethnic groups in the Empire is to compare and contrast them
to each other in order to appreciate their commonalities and differences
and to obtain a more cohesive understanding of the period. So the book
at the same time sheds light on Ottoman Armenian, Arab, Jewish, and
Turkish history from a multi-disciplinary perspective.
J: Who do you hope will read this book, and what sort of impact would you like it to have?
BDM: I hope that the book will attract students and
scholars from a variety of disciplines. Most obviously, it targets those
who are interested in understanding the intricacies of the late Ottoman
Empire and modern Middle East. The book elucidates the complexities of
revolutions through a comparative, inter- and intra-communal,
cross-cultural analysis and initiates further dialogue among scholars in
studies in a variety of disciplines. It adds to the substantial
scholarship on this subject undertaken during the past few years. The
book will be of great interest to scholars in the field of Ottoman and
Turkish Studies, Arab Studies, Armenian Studies, and Sephardic and
Jewish Studies. It also would be of interest to the disciplines of
history, political science, sociology, and anthropology.
The impact I would like the book to have is to emphasize the
necessity of understanding the history of the region through recognizing
the role and historical agency of non-dominant groups, which have been
marginalized in the past decades. Through a cross-cultural analysis
utilizing a variety of languages and sources, I attempt to write the
history of the late Ottoman period not from the perspective of the
Ottoman political center (that is, the Ottoman Archives), but from the
perspective of both the geographic and political periphery. By
encompassing the different provinces of the Empire, we can better
understand how the revolution impacted these areas and altered the
dynamics of power within these regions.
J: What other projects are you working on now?
BDM: Currently, I am working on a project entitled Revolution and Violence: The Adana Massacres of 1909. Considered one of the major acts of violence during the turn of the century, these massacres still remain a
source of historiographical contention. The research will culminate in a
book that examines the massacres through a comparative perspective on
communal violence and in the context of revolution, violence, the public
sphere, and the political and socio-economic transformations taking
place in the region in the nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. I
am also co-editing a book with Suleiman Mourad and Naomi Koltun-Fromm entitled Routledge Handbook on Jerusalem, to be published in 2017.
J: Do you think that this project is relevant to the understanding of the Arab Uprisings?
BDM: Of course, understanding the past revolutions of the MENA
region is crucial to a thorough understanding of the current turmoil.
The hopes that swept the region in the wake of the Young Turk Revolution
in the beginning of the twentieth century were resurrected a
century later in the wake of the Arab Spring. The vibrant discourse
about justice, legality, constitutionalism, freedom, equality, and
fraternity that is currently shaping post-revolutionary societies in the
Arab world can be traced back to the 1908 Revolution.
Despite having the same lexicon, however, there are some major
differences in the discourses of these two historical periods. Whereas
revolutionary movements against authoritarian regimes are now taking
place within postcolonial nation-states, the Revolution of 1908 took
place in an imperial framework. Similar festivities and euphoric
feelings celebrating the hope of revolution and the downfall of
absolutist regimes took place in MENA. However, as euphoric feelings
faded, once again the real litmus test of the new, supposedly
“democratic” political orders began. In most of these regions the
revolution failed to live up to its expectations. The post-revolutionary
period in MENA is characterized by bloody civil wars, unstable
governments, and the regrowth of authoritarian regimes. All of these
reinforce the historical record that revolutions are complex and
unpredictable phenomena that carry in them unexpected scenarios—from
civil wars and genocides, to the regrowth of dictatorial regimes, and
only in unique cases, peaceful transition to democratic political
systems.
"Jadaliyya" (www.jadaliyya.com), May 20, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment