Killers in Cold Blood

by Ray Black

  In May 1998, Jean Kambanda, Prime Minister of Rwanda, made history when he became the first person to plead guilty to charges of genocide in court. The extreme politician declared that he thought the Tutsis were racially alien and he had wanted a purely Hutu country to govern over. He was arrested the previous year after three years on the run. He gave a full confession in return for protection. He also testified against his fellow conspirators.

  In March 2000, Paul Kagame (leader of the RPF) became Rwanda’s President. Today, Rwanda is still in the process of prosecuting thousands of people who carried out genocide against the Tutsis.

  Armenian Genocide

  On April 24, 1915, the Turkish Ottoman government ordered the arrest and execution of an estimated 250 high-ranking Armenian officials in Constantinople. Although history had been playing a part in the demise of the ethnic Armenian community for some time, the execution of these influential men set the stage for what was to become the world’s first genocide and the deaths of more than one million people between 1915 and 1917. Set against the backdrop of World War I, the horrific genocide, or Armenian Massacre, was clearly a carefully organised plan to eliminate and destroy a peaceful ethnic community who willingly believed and trusted in the government that was about to commit the most heinous atrocity against them.

  The Armenian people were subjected to deportation, abduction, torture, starvation and eventually massacre as the great bulk of the population was forcibly removed from Armenia and Anatolia towards Syria, where a large majority faced dying of thirst and starvation in the desert. Others were methodically massacred throughout the Ottoman Empire, while women and children were often abducted and subjected to extreme abuse and their combined wealth was expropriated. What happened to these people would become the template for the Jewish Holocaust during World War II.

  The government responsible for the atrocity was the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), more popularly known as the Young Turks. Mehmet Talaat (Minister of the Interior), Prime Minister Grand Vizier, Ismail Enver (Minister of War) and Minister Ahmed Jemel were the four instigators within the government, who ordered the ethnic cleansing. These men set up a Special Organisation, Teshkilati Mahsusa, which comprised of troops and convicts headed by Dr Behaeddin Shakir. Organisation took place on a grand scale and there was widespread belief in the creation of a new empire stretching from Anatolia through Central Asia, but whose population would be exclusively Turkic. It is estimated that around one and a half million Armenians died as a result of the atrocities. This figure doesn’t just include those who perished during World War I. After the initial massacre, the Turkish Nationalists overthrew the Young Turks in 1920 and, despite their differing views to the previous government, they too shared a common goal of ethnic exclusivity. Between 1920 and 1923 the Armenian population once again faced genocide.

  World War I wasn’t the first time that the Armenian population had faced this kind of atrocity though. For centuries, Armenians and Turks had lived peacefully side by side in the Ottoman Empire. But Armenians were not equal to their neighbours and endured a huge number of hardships including second-class citizenship. The rise of nationalism, however, increased self-awareness among ethnic groups, and the Ottoman Empire was in demise. Armenians became more isolated and called for independence. European leaders began to seek equal status for the Armenians, but the Sultan’s government treated the populous with increasing brutality and between 1894 and 1896 hundreds of thousands perished in the Hamidian Massacres ordered by the Sultan, Abdul Hamid II. A successful coup by the Young Turks in 1908 replaced the government with the support of the Armenians. However, the promises of reform never materialised and the pan-Turkic dreams of the likes of Talaat, Enver, Vizier and Jemel were soon to become a reality.

  Under the cover of war, the government was able to carry out its plans for the elimination of the Armenians virtually undetected. Leaving Armenians in Constantinople alone to start with, presumably due to the large foreign presence in the city, all other Armenians were ordered from their homes to be relocated ‘for their own good’. They were asked to turn in knives and hunting weapons for the war effort and towns and villages were given quotas to meet. If they lacked enough weapons, Armenians were forced to buy them from the Turks to meet their quotas and all able-bodied men were ‘drafted’ to war. But these men were either killed immediately or worked to death by those they had trusted. With just women and children left in the towns and villages, people were told to assemble with only what they could carry, whereupon they were then escorted on death marches to the Syrian Der Zor desert.

  Others were deported on trains and crammed ninety to a freight car that was only intended for transporting a small number of animals. They were shut behind bars, starving and terrified. Many people defecated themselves while the trains continued south and east. Many finished their train journey in the city of Konia before they were left to walk. These people were robbed, raped and murdered by killing squads who were waiting for them. In his book The Burning Tigris, Peter Balakian describes one German eyewitness who reported the train deportations as ‘…ironic that the Turks used the railway in ways that the Nazis would later…’. Then came the detention camps that were set up along the railway. Konia had its own concentration camp, while the camps overall were responsible for the deaths of thousands from starvation and disease. Troops would kill many men, while the women were raped. Many women arrived at the camps naked and the bodies of those along the railway line showed that shockingly brutal acts had been carried out on them before they were killed. All men and boys over the age of twelve were killed, while other women and children were sold into slavery – many of the children had also been raped. More than 9,000 Armenian children were deported by rail and their future was short-lived and bleak. Abuse was rife, including the use of cotton-chopping tools to rip off flesh or sever tendons. Of course, needless to say, many of the children were left orphaned.

  There were many eyewitnesses to the atrocities, although the government had taken precautions to impose restrictions on reporting and photography. The US diplomatic representatives and American missionaries were among the first to send news to the world at large. Many of the German eyewitnesses condoned the policy of the CUP and the fact Germany was an ally of the Turks. Russia, too, was aware, and bore witness to many of the events when the Russian army occupied parts of Anatolia. Syrian Arabs were also confronted with the brutality suffered by the Armenians and witnessed the deportations to the desert.

  One man did more than any other to highlight the plight of the Armenians. Henry Morgenthau was appointed as US ambassador to the Ottoman Empire by President Woodrow Wilson in 1913. In his telegram to the US Secretary of State in July 1915 he warned of a ‘campaign of race extermination . . . in progress under a pretext of reprisal against rebellion’. The ambassador worked with determination and courage to bring international attention to the plight of the Armenians. When he first took up his post in Constantinople, Morgenthau was appalled by the leadership of the CUP, particularly the likes of Talaat, Enver and Jemel, whom he described as running an irresponsible party that was ruled by ‘intrigue, intimidation and assassination’.

  At the beginning of the genocide, he had received detailed reports and telegrams outlining the atrocities that were taking place against the Armenian people. As the reports grew more frequent, Morgenthau became incensed at the major international human rights tragedy that was unfolding before him – many of the despatches were written by Armenians themselves who described in horrific detail the brutality they had witnessed. The reports all corroborated each story presented to the ambassador, of an ethnic minority who, at the time of their brutal treatment, were a prosperous, peaceful community based on thriving businesses and a commercial enterprise.

  The New York Times began reporting on the genocide with slamming headlines designed to bring the true horror to the attention of the American people. The response from the nation was immense, with relief posters urging people to help.
Sheet music was sold to enhance the cause and even US Sunday school children were urged to help save Armenia. Theodore Roosevelt was quoted as saying that the massacres were ‘the greatest crime of the war’. He was responsible for US intervention to save the Armenians, while President Wilson proposed a US mandate. In 1920, Wilson drew up boundaries for an independent Armenia, however, his treaty was quashed by a revolution in Turkey.

  The UK, France and Russia all condemned the Armenian genocide and advised the CUP that their leaders would be held personally responsible for the crime. As well as relief work in the USA, efforts were also made in the UK. However, despite the international outcry at the plight of the Armenians, no strong actions were taken against the fading Ottoman Empire and there was no pressure put on the postwar government to compensate the survivors and their families for the brutal treatment they had endured.

  At the close of World War I, the Turkish government held war crimes trials, but Talaat, Enver, Vizier and Jemel had all fled the country. They were found guilty of war crimes in absentia, and Talaat, Enver and Jemel were later executed by the Armenians. Turkey agreed to President Wilson’s proposals for the drawing up of boundaries for an independent state of Armenia. Wilsonian Armenia included six western Ottoman provinces as well as coastline on the Black Sea. A further region was granted on the Mediterranean under French mandate. However, Kemal forces pushed the refugees from these lands and a new treaty was signed which ensured that Armenians could not return leaving them penniless with no home or belongings.

  Today, Armenians all over the world commemorate the Armenian genocide on April 24 each year. There are many Armenian genocide monuments and memorials scattered throughout the world to mark the events that the Turkish government, even today, deny happened. The government has spent millions of dollars in their quest to destroy evidence and to try and change international views. Countries such as France, Argentina, Greece and Russia (where survivors settled) have officially recognised the genocide. In fact, twenty-one nations recognise the Armenian Massacre despite protestations from the Republic of Turkey.

  Genocide in Bangladesh

  In 1971, Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, faced an extremely well manipulated genocide. In an attempt to quash the forces seeking independence, the West Pakistani military unleashed a campaign for supremacy and mass annihilation of a mainly Hindu population. After 200 years of British rule, East and West Pakistan were fighting for independence on the Indian sub-continent but, despite the attempts of Mahatma Gandhi and other influential figures to prevent division along religious and ethnic lines, there was pressure to create two states. One would be Hindu-dominated in India, the other Muslim-dominated in Pakistan. It is estimated that in the cleverly executed actions that followed, up to three million people were slaughtered. Of these, it is estimated that eighty per cent were Hindu.

  The self-appointed President of Pakistan and Commander-in-Chief of the army, General Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan, and his top generals prepared a systematic military, economic and political operation in Bangladesh to murder the intellectual, cultural and political elite. The next stage was to eliminate hundreds and thousands of Hindus and drive the remainder out of the former East Pakistan and over the border into India. The underlying theme was to destroy economic foundations so that survivors would be subordinate to West Pakistan for at least a generation to follow. There was a well organised military presence in Bangladesh which grew steadily before the campaign was launched. Over time, the situation between East and West Pakistan had become more and more volatile. Corruption was rife and there had been rising opposition to the dominance of West Pakistan in the Bengali population. When catastrophic floods engulfed Bangladesh in August 1970, the regime was criticised for its meagre relief efforts. It gave Awami League leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman the opportunity needed to demand autonomy for the East and bring an end to military rule. In December that year, the League won a landslide victory across its Bengali territory in the national elections.

  But less than two months later, in February 1971, General Khan and his advisers decided to quash the Awami League and all its supporters. They quickly recognised that in order to meet their objectives, widespread genocide would be necessary. At the conference in West Pakistan on February 22, 1971, General Khan is reported to have said: ‘Kill three million of them … and the rest will eat out of our hands.’ On March 25, 1971, the campaign was launched and the University of Dacca was attacked. Hundreds of students were killed as death squads roamed the campus and the streets of Dacca. More than 7,000 people were randomly murdered in one night. It was to prove to be the tip of the iceberg.

  Within one week, half the population of Dacca had fled and more than 30,000 people had lost their lives. Those most at risk, apart from random killings, were teachers, scholars, professors, doctors, professionals and the Dacca elite. By April, more than thirty million people were lost and confused wandering across the former East Pakistan. More than ten million refugees found their way into India which would eventually lead to Indian military intervention as resources became overstretched and demand for aid was overwhelming.

  According to eyewitness reports, there was no doubt about the militia’s intended targets. These included the Bengali military, police, para-military Ansars and Mujahids, East Pakistan officials and Hindus. Only men were targeted at first with women and children allowed to go free. Awami League officials and supporters were next on the list followed by male university students, although militant women were also targeted. Many of the families of those targeted also fell foul of the brutality dished out by West Pakistan.

  Young men and boys, those more likely to be a threat, were also singled out and killed. It was thought that they might become freedom fighters and consequently thousands were arrested, tortured and killed. Although some escaped to India, many young men joined the Liberation Forces. The bodies of those killed were found close to army camps, in fields or even floating down rivers. Many women encouraged their men, especially those aged between fifteen and twenty-five to flee, as the population became more and more terrified of the West Pakistan militia. In some cases, those who were circumcised were spared as they were more likely to be Muslim. All those who were not, were instantly killed. It was well-recognised that although women were being tortured and killed in some cases, on the whole this was a particularly systematic slaughter of men. The process was decidedly gender-specific according to many eyewitness statements of the time.

  After the initial attack in the area surrounding Dacca, there were military experiments in mass extermination. These were unlikely to be witnessed by foreigners or journalists and the military concentrated their efforts on Hariharpara. Once a thriving village on the banks of the Buriganga River, Hariharpara had three essential elements that were ideal for experiments in mass murder. First, there was a large warehouse belonging to the National Oil Company which could act as a prison in which those arrested could be housed. Second, it offered a place where executions could be held and, third, it provided a method for disposing of bodies. The large, riverside prison banked down to the river where executions were carried out either on the river edge or in the shallow waters near the shore. Bodies were disposed of downstream.

  Killing took place here on a nightly basis, where those chosen to die were usually roped together and forced to wade into the river. Most prisoners waded out in groups of six or eight where, under the glare of a powerful lamp, they were easy targets for the shooters who were assigned to kill them. In early morning, a boatman was responsible for hauling the roped prisoners’ bodies into the midstream where their ropes were cut so that each body floated separately. It is widely documented that this type of execution style and disposal of bodies was also used in the genocide in Armenia (1915–1923) and the Rape of Nanking (1937–1938).

  When women did come under extreme attack, the preferred form of abuse was gang rape and murder. Although there was recognition that Bengali men were the main targets, Susan Brownmiller highlighted the p
light of women Bangladesh in her book Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape where she likened the treatment of these women to the Rape of Nanking. It is estimated that between 200,000 and 400,000 women were raped, eighty per cent of them being Muslims. However, Hindu, and women of other religions, were also targeted and subjected to immeasurable brutality.

  One story of a recently married young woman was particularly harrowing. Two West Pakistani soldiers entered the room built especially for the bridal couple at one dwelling while others held the young woman’s family back with a rifle. The two soldiers raped the young woman in front of her new husband. The woman was raped by six soldiers in total. She was found unconscious and bleeding by her father, while her husband was crouched on the floor, clutching his stomach and surrounded by his own vomit. As in other atrocities committed throughout history, children – girls as young as seven – and elderly women were also the victims of rape. Some were raped in their homes, while others were abducted and held captive for ritual abuse. It is reported in Brownmiller’s book that some women may have been raped up to eighty times in one night. Many died from their treatment and many more were murdered.

  The atrocities raged on for nine months during which time abduction, rape and forced prostitution was only one humiliation faced by these women. When the Liberation Forces defeated the West Pakistani militia, Prime Minister Rahman declared that all victims of rape were heroines of the country as a way to integrate women back into society. However, many were left without husbands as few freedom fighters stepped forward to claim brides and those that did expected huge rewards from the government.