The Three Assassins:

Criminals before the Court of History

Overall Context: Between the Past and the Present

The purpose of studying a historical phenomenon or a social situation is to contribute in understanding some current behavioral expressions, or as they have projections and extensions that help to analyze political patterns of some people or systems. In the absence of any connection between the historical event and the current reality, the study would be a junk and have neither interest nor value.
In this context, there is an urgent need to understand the behavioral structure of the new Ottomans, those who try to promote Turkish nationalism and try to create a Turkish consensus on the current leadership, especially after the results of the 2017 referendum in which Erdogan hardly won with (%51) that threatens the AKP (Adalet Ve Kalkinma Partisi (Turkish: Party for Justice and Progress)) to continue to rule in light of losing the most important Turkish governorates in favor of the Republican People’s Party, i. e. the opponent party. This political coercion led the ruling party to refocus on the Ethnic factor internally in order to broaden the electoral base. It also used this approach to serve Turkey’s expansionist projects of Erdogan by motivating Turkmen minorities in some Arab countries (Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Syria) in an attempt to put a hand on these countries for economic and strategic considerations.
In the light of this, the early twentieth century witnessed a surge in an ideological perception, that were essentially the structure of the Ottoman state which was affected by the new strategic environment in the light of successive military setbacks and the collapse of the dream for retaining the areas subdued by the Ottoman state. In parallel, demands for independence increased, which were raised by ethnic minorities that the Turkish rulers could not manage as a component of the national personality. As the minorities stayed marginalized on the sidelines of events, and kept waiting for the subjective and objective conditions to be matured for demanding independence from Astana.
Of course, historical honesty requires the recognition that a broad stream within the political class that ruled Turkey since 1908, Especially liberal-minded, which was seeking a free, multi-ethnic state that sees citizenship as a criterion that transcends ethnicity and dogmatic. However, the supporters of a monolialist structure of the Ottoman state were adopting a hard-liner position on the question of national identity. Perhaps the success of that racial trend in defeating the liberals after the murder of the great Sadr Mahmoud Shawkat on June 12th, 1913 that made it lead Turkey to waterfalls of blood under the leadership of the terrorist axis that was represented in the Tripartite of Talaat Pasha, Anwar Pasha and Jamal Pasha.
This Tripartite, i. e. called the “Three Pashas”, contributed, like what some Turks are doing nowadays, to enshrine Turkish nationalism through raising the slogan of “The Greater Turkey State” along with the marginalization of other nationalities that form the rest of the Turkish state mosaic. This led the minorities, including Armenian minority, to raise the demand for independence like the rest of the Balkan peoples who were under Ottoman control. Where the Bulgarian and Greek experiences inspired the Armenians, who were living under the dictatorial rule of Ottoman family.
As a result of this new racist approach of the Ottoman state, history would record painful scenes of genocide and massacres that were mainly against Armenians and other citizens of the Turkish state, including Christians, Arabs, Chaldeans, Syriacs, Assyrians and Greeks. The importance of examining crimes, which were Carried out by so-called “Tripartite dictatorship”, lies in they being some of the heresy that Turkish politicians resorted to; in order to justify their persecution for political opponents and ethnic minorities under the justifications of treason and serving external agendas. These are the same charges that the three assassins used to justify their confrontation to other ethnic minorities by claiming that they were working for the fiercest enemy of Ottoman state which was represented then in The Cesarean Russia. Which made the Turks describe the Armenians as “the fifth column.” for the Russians, as a justification for exterminating them and realizing the dream of the exclusive Turkish state. Which was the same racist faith that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler would adopt years thereafter.

The Three Pashas: who are liable for the "murder orders"

“I accomplished on the Armenian case in just three months what Abdul Hamid failed to do in thirty years” … (Talaat Pasha)
The character of the “triangle of blood” (Talaat Pasha, Anwar Pasha, Jamal Pasha) was distinguished with a fanatical behavioral structure that believes in Turkish exception and considers their ethnic superiority over the other races. Where they resorted, to prove this belief, to many historical facts that support their proposal to be convinced, i. e. establishing a Turkish-ethnic that shall be for them only. That led them to make Anatolia a state for the Turks, and took the path of assassinations against Armenians and the other races. As well as suppressing the non-Turkish media and seizing the real estate and assets that were owned by non-Turks.

This three-man ruling formed an integrated and unified mix which made them contribute in drawing the landmarks of the bloody history of the Ottomans. As Talaat Pasha was able to influence the behavioral structure of Turkish rulers that would follow him and reproduce his methods, and his vision that was based on the consolidation for the Turkish nationalism which disregards religion in order to crystallize violent racist feelings; he even summarized it in his famous saying: “Whatever you did against Christians, it would be fun.” 

On his side, the Ottoman Defense Minister Anwar Pasha found a justification for his desecration against Armenians by holding them responsible for his failure to recover the land which the Sultanate lost in favor of Russia, especially after they refused to fight on his side in December 1914. This indictment had an important impact on antagonism against Armenians. This was quickly transformed by a military decision to rotate Armenians serving in the armed forces from logistical missions into non-military ones.
Jamal Pasha was unprecedented in torturing Armenians during what was called the “death marches”. When the Armenians were being moved to Syria in order to get rid of them on their way to Syria. Thus, hundreds of thousands of children, women and elderly people perished in regions under Ottoman control, particularly in the Deir Ezzor region of the Levant. In addition to hundreds of thousands of Arabs who died as a result of political starvation, assassinations and executions that were among their victims the best Arab intellectuals, writers and scholars.

Bloody end to bloody rulers:

Whereas, the end of the assassin is always a tragic, the fate of Talat Pasha and Jamal Pasha was the same as that of their victims. The first one was assassinated by a young Armenian in the German city of Berlin, while the second was assassinated in what was known as “Operation of Nemesis” which was organized by a number of Armenians to retaliate against the Turkish leaders who were responsible for the Armenian genocide. On the other hand, Anwar Pasha came to an end by the Bolsheviks, his yesterday’s allies in the city of Bukhara, after many attempts to establish a frontline that included Muslims to confront Britain and revive the dream of the Ottoman Empire.
So, this was the tragic end of the three Pashas, as they were sentenced to death by Turkish courts, yet the verdict was carried out by the foreign enemies, and to fold a black page on the bloody history of the Ottoman Turks.