Academic Freedom: Incident at California University on Atatürk Talk Reminder of Sordid Past
Ferruh Demirmen, Ph.D.
Incident at CSUN
The incident took shape on November 10, 2016 at California State University at Northridge (CSUN), a 41,000-student-strong liberal arts institution near Los Angeles, California. Invited by an art history professor at CSUN, Professor George Gawrych, a distinguished scholar on military history at Baylor University, Texas, was to give a presentation on his latest book on Atatürk. Titled The Young Atatürk: From Ottoman Soldier to Statesman of Turkey, the book is a 2014 recipient of Distinguished Book Award by the Society for Military History.
Gawrych had travelled from the East Coast where he is a currently a visiting professor at the United States Military Academy in West Point, NY.
The professor had barely finished few sentences when a noisy group of some 20 Armenian students disrupted his talk. They stood up, turned their back on Gawrych, and shouted “Turkey guilty of genocide” and “genocide denialist.” The professor walked up and down the aisle waiting for the protestors to calm down, but to no avail.
Amid sounds of chanting protesters, two police officers escorted the professor out of the conference room. The presentation was cancelled.
The event was a scandal. Gawrych’s freedom of expression was egregiously violated, of all places at a university where academic freedom is supposed to be cherished and held almost sacrosanct. Instead of removing the protestors from the conference hall, as would be the normal procedure in such situations, CSUN had caved in to the unruly behavior of the students by summarily cancelling the presentation.
The situation was exacerbated when Vice President for Student Affairs Dr. William Watkins, in a post-mortem note to Armenian students, sympathized with the protestors. “The university shares your commitment to the pursuit of truth. … never forgetting those who have suffered from the tolerance and actions of others,” commented Watkins.
The event led to outcries from concerned Turks and Turkish Americans, mainly from the U.S., but few also from Turkey and Europe. Addressing President Dr. Dianne Harrison, the Turkish side registered its objection to the turn of events, asserting that the university had pandered to Armenian students, and that Gawrych’s freedom of expression had been violated. Some of the attendees had travelled long distance to listen to Gawrych, and they were resentful.
The question was rhetorically raised whether CSUN, where some academic programs are funded by Armenian foundations, acquiesced to the disruptive behaviour of the Armenian students because of such connection.
Shortly thereafter, the President’s office issued a statement expressing regret, noting that Gawrych’s presentation was cancelled for security reasons. Emphasizing that the university is committed to scholarship and freedom of speech, the statement went on to say that henceforth the university would take steps to prevent the recurrence of such events, and that the university had reached out to Gawrych to invite him back to give his presentation.
Follow-up messages from the Turkish side expressed thanks to the President for the administration’s decision.
It was learned subsequently that Gawrych would not return this year. Next year? Maybe.
Ingrained bigotry
CSUN’s attitude aside, the event exposed the bigotry and closed-mindedness of Armenian youth in the Diaspora. Young Armenian minds, in families, schools and churches, are poisoned with anti-Turkish sentiments to the point they cannot tolerate any discourse contrary to their “genocide” teachings. The students are raised in an environment that breeds anti-Turkish bigotry, even hatred.
Ironically, Gawrych’s talk was not even about the alleged “genocide.”
The Armenian youth is in fact following in the footsteps of their elder scholars who refuse to debate their Armenian “genocide” narrative with their opponents on the Turkish side. It is the cabal of we-know-all scholars so sure about their omniscience and invincibility. Their doctrinaire posture, heavily reliant on playing the religion card, excludes any discourse and dialogue with their adversaries.
Happened before
Noteworthy is the fact that the type of incident that took place at CSUN is not new. There have been other occasions in the past where, because of protests or objections from the Armenian side, speakers from the Turkish side in the U.S. and Canada were prevented from giving presentations on the 1915 events in Ottoman Anatolia.
One such incident took place at the University of Southern California (USC) in 2006, when talks scheduled by two former Turkish ambassadors, Gündüz Aktan and Ömer Lütem, were cancelled by the university administration days before the scheduled date. The speakers were to talk on the Armenian “genocide” controversy. The ANCA Western Region chairman intervened and argued to the university administration that “Genocide denial is a deliberate misrepresentation of fact and a scientific fraud,” and threatened to take “further action” if the talks went on.
The university buckled to the Armenian pressure and cancelled the talks. It was a disgrace.
Scholars in the academia, e.g., Professors Justin McCarthy and Health Lowry in the U.S., and researcher Maxime Gauin in France, also have been the target of harassment and intimidation from the Armenian side.
Bernard Lewis, a world-respected authority on the Ottoman and Middle East history, was sued in a French court because he did not subscribe to the Armenian version of history. Three of the cases against the professor were dismissed by the court, and in the fourth case Lewis was ordered to pay one Frank penalty.
The most notorious incident of academic intimidation took place at the University of California at Los Angeles. UCLA history professor Stanford Shaw's house on the campus was bombed by Armenian extremists in 1977, and the professor, facing a life-threatening threat, was forced into early retirement. The university, which receives generous Armenian donations, was warned of a potential threat to the professor, but did nothing credible to stop it.
Shaw’s “crime” was that as a historian his position on Armenian “genocide” did not conform to the Armenian narrative. It is suspected that the extremists that did the bombing were Armenian students agitated by another UCLA history professor, Richard Hovannisian, an ardent proponent of Armenian “genocide.” http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/bullied-historians.htm
Hovannisian, now emeritus professor, has no problems pontificating his views in various conferences, even in Turkey. Censure does not apply to him.
In 2005 Hovannisian invited Taner Akçam, Fatma Müge Göçek and Elif Şafak to a special forum at UCLA (photo). The Turkish trio, ensconced safely in the “genocide” camp, were the only speakers at the forum. They gave their talks without any disruption and were warmly applauded by the 800-strong Armenian audience. At the end of the forum Hovannisian boldly announced that the next conference would be about “reparations and territorial demands” from Turkey.
Talk of objectivity and academic freedom!
One wonders, whether Hovannisian has any feelings of remorse about what had fallen on his ex-colleague Shaw – now deceased.
Concluding remarks
The allegation of Armenian “genocide,” and the larger-than-life stature of Atatürk, an exceptional visionary figure of modern times, are not the topic of this article. Suffice it to say, however, that the CSUN incident, like those that preceded it, illustrates how Turkish views, even remotely related to the alleged “genocide,” may be censured in academia.
These incidents are a shameful manifestation of a double standard - and hypocrisy.
To give the benefit of the doubt to the university administrators, a double standard may not be the real intent. But universities should be sensitive to charges that their commitment to academic freedom may be compromised by donations from Armenian sources. Academic freedom should not be for sale.
Given the mindset of many Armenian students, universities should prevent Armenian attempts to disrupt conferences not to their liking. Diversity of opinion should be respected, and the Turkish perspective on the 1915 events in Ottoman Anatolia should be given a fair hearing.
Institutions attempting to censure the freedom of expression should also realize that they are on tenuous ground on First Amendment rights, and may face civil suits.
The reversal of the CSUN administration on Prof. Gawrych’s conference was a victory for the Turkish side - probably the first of its kind in the U.S., as well in Europe. Belatedly, it is also a credit to the CSUN administration, that it recognized its mistake and speedily took remedial steps.
Turks and Turkish Americans should be watchful that no so such incidents will recur in the future. Decency and the First Amendment are on their side.
No comments:
Post a Comment