Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Civilians in a World at War, 1914-1918 (review)

Civilians in a World at War, 1914-1918 (review) Book Reviews before the Genocide Convention went into effect would constitute a legally untenable, ex post facto proclamation. Through Article 11(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international law specifically prohibits ex post facto laws. Third, the Armenian supporters do not consider or simply dismiss as irrelevant how many Armenian actions leading up to the massacres in 1915 helped to goad what occurred. This, of course, is the so-called provocation thesis rejected by Suny and Bloxham, and certainly it does not excuse what today might still be called war crimes. Where does all this leave us? Although pro-Armenian scholars are wont to use the term "genocide" too readily and by now the word has also been used by some to characterize so many historical and contemporary events as to trivialize the very concept (see, for example, the insightful analysis by Jacques Semelin, Purify and Destroy: The Political Uses of Massacre and Genocide [New York: Columbia University Press, 2007]), Turkish public opinion itself is moving away from earlier sterile denials of any wrongdoing. In December 2008, for example, some two hundred Turkish intellectuals used the phrase Buyuk Felaket (Great Catastrophe) to describe what happened to the Armenians, reject http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of World History University of Hawai'I Press

Civilians in a World at War, 1914-1918 (review)

Journal of World History , Volume 23 (2) – Aug 9, 2012

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/civilians-in-a-world-at-war-1914-1918-review-VzURsq7oJS
Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1527-8050
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Book Reviews before the Genocide Convention went into effect would constitute a legally untenable, ex post facto proclamation. Through Article 11(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international law specifically prohibits ex post facto laws. Third, the Armenian supporters do not consider or simply dismiss as irrelevant how many Armenian actions leading up to the massacres in 1915 helped to goad what occurred. This, of course, is the so-called provocation thesis rejected by Suny and Bloxham, and certainly it does not excuse what today might still be called war crimes. Where does all this leave us? Although pro-Armenian scholars are wont to use the term "genocide" too readily and by now the word has also been used by some to characterize so many historical and contemporary events as to trivialize the very concept (see, for example, the insightful analysis by Jacques Semelin, Purify and Destroy: The Political Uses of Massacre and Genocide [New York: Columbia University Press, 2007]), Turkish public opinion itself is moving away from earlier sterile denials of any wrongdoing. In December 2008, for example, some two hundred Turkish intellectuals used the phrase Buyuk Felaket (Great Catastrophe) to describe what happened to the Armenians, reject

Journal

Journal of World HistoryUniversity of Hawai'I Press

Published: Aug 9, 2012

There are no references for this article.