Interview with Peter Balakian 
 


Interview by Khatchig Mouradian
khatchigmouradian@hotmail.com



13th of November 2003

"Aztag Daily" contacted Peter Balakian while he was on tour in the United 
States, promoting "The Burning Tigris". The acclaimed author agreed to do an 
interview by phone. During our one-hour talk, we discussed issues related to 
"The Burning Tigris", the Armenian Genocide and the human rights movement it 
engendered in the USA , Turkish-Armenian dialogue, and much more...


Aztag- In "The Burning Tigris" you argue that the Armenian genocide 
triggered the first human rights movement in US history…

Peter Balakian- The effort to rescue the Armenians in the 1890s from Sultan 
Hamid's massacres, which took the lives of around 200000 Armenians before 
1896 was over, engendered the first human rights movement in the US. During 
the 1890s some 300,000 dollars were raised by Americans and in the genocide 
period (from 1915 to 1920) 110 million dollars were raised by what was first 
called the "American committee on Armenian atrocities", which became later 
"Near-East relief".110 million dollars in today's terms is about 2.5 billion 
dollars. It is important to note that both of these movements were 
orchestrated by major American intellectual and cultural elites.



Aztag-You are stressing the humanitarian factor. But during calamities of 
this enormity, humanitarian efforts are not enough, are they?

Peter Balakian- It's never enough…



Aztag- So intervention should have gone beyond that…

Peter Balakian- "The Burning Tigris" tells the history of the grid-lock 
between American cultural philanthropic and relief efforts and the wall in 
the state department in the white house preventing these relief efforts from 
becoming active intervention in a military or political way. That's part of 
the tragic story of the American response.



Aztag-In this respect, can't we draw parallels between what happened in the 
USA back then, and what is happening now?

Peter Balakian- I think the Armenian case inaugurated a modern paradigm for 
human right issues in the USA. Which is to say that there can be a great 
deal of passionate commitment at the grassroots level and among 
intellectuals but we have not figured out how to get beyond the barriers 
created by the White House. It is still the same problem we are wrestling 
with, that's why the Armenian case has so much to teach us.



Aztag-Samantha Power's award-winning book "A Problem from Hell" also 
addresses America's response to the Armenian genocide, as well as other 
genocides of the 20th century. What are the differences between your and 
Power's approach?

Peter Balakian- Samantha Power wrote a brilliant book about America's 
ineffective response to genocide throughout the 20th century. My book deals 
with how Americans tried hard to help save the Armenian people and the 
obstacles they faced from their government.



Aztag-How can such books help create social change?

Social change is complex; it is not a neat and clean process. It is the 
result of decades of proper education. If one studies the evolution of the 
African-American human rights movement one will see that it took decades and 
decades before blacks and whites could sit in the same restaurant and eat 
together.



Aztag-Let us talk about the sources you used. A couple of reviews noted that 
you have limited yourself to English-language sources.

Peter Balakian- I have used dozens of foreign office records in the UK. The 
French and German sources I used were translations. The same goes for 
Turkish sources. I have also used hundreds of US State Department sources.



Aztag-Is "The Burning Tigris" a continuation of "Black Dog of Fate" in terms 
of your quest to discover your roots?

Peter Balakian- It is a continuation of my pursuit of historical truth. I 
don't want to make a simple comparison, because "Black Dog of Fate" was a 
memoir. It was a literary exploration of my coming of age as an Armenian 
American. It had history in it and it brought history to the reader but it 
wasn't history in the methodological sense. "The Burning Tigris" is a 
history and its assumptions and conventions are different.



Aztag-What was your motive for writing this book?

Peter Balakian- As an Americanist, as I began to discover how rich the 
American history was, I decided to write a story from that perspective. I 
knew I would also write a history of the Armenian genocide. I also felt that 
our history has never portrayed in a trade book, so I wanted to do that.



Aztag-How and when did the idea of writing "The burning Tigris "come to you?

Peter Balakian- The idea for "The Burning Tigris" came to me while I was on 
Tour with "Black Dog of Fate". It came as a result of reading more about the 
Armenian genocide and massacres and finding out about Americans who were 
involved. I started working on the book in 1999, and continued for 4 years 
without a break.



Aztag-Last year, Egoyan's Ararat created widespread awareness about the 
Armenian genocide. Now, your book is doing the same. What do you feel about 
the politicization of the book? After all, "Black Dog of Fate" was a memoir, 
but with this book you have thrown yourself right in the middle of the war 
against denial.

Peter Balakian- My motivation was to write a deep, rich history of this 
major event in the 20th century. The rest comes with the terrain. Since 
there is denial, anybody who writes about this history enters a degree of 
political dimension. But I don't want to overemphasize the denial, because 
its only a tiny group of corrupt people who are perpetuating it, and nobody 
really listening to them, nobody believes. They are able to coerce and bully 
at certain levels and I think we are going to see that go away too.


Aztag- Taking into account the strategic importance of turkey in the region, 
and in a context where real politics, the "war against terror", and oil 
diplomacy, are having an increasingly heavier role, can we see that change 
in the near future?

Peter Balakian- Social and political change are unpredictable, they happen 
sometimes very quickly after years of preparing the ground for it. I think 
that there is no need to deny the Armenian genocide by anybody. Turks must 
come to terms with it. It will help them immensely, making them more 
progressive in the eyes of Europe and the West. I think the denial is 
untenable for Turkey, and as people become educated, the denial becomes more 
absurd. Sooner or later they have to acknowledge that this is a waste of 
their time and money.



Aztag- The human rights movement you discuss in your book is less explored 
by genocide scholars. Are there any parallels to this story in other 
countries?

Peter Balakian- Absolutely, One could write books about the pro-Armenian 
movement in Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, and Russia. My hope is 
that my book will spawn ideas for many books.



Aztag- Can you compare the awareness of Americans about the Armenian 
genocide back then and now?

Peter Balakian- It's a dramatic reversal. Its ironic! President Hoover, as 
he was looking back at those years, said that probably only the word 
"England" was more deeply embedded in the mind of the American schoolchild 
than the word Armenia. That's how popular Armenia was in American mind in 
the first decades of the 20th century. Then, that completely evaporated and 
the Armenian genocide fell into the amnesia hole.  Americans forgot about 
it.  Now, it is being revived, so I think it's a very exciting time in that 
respect. We are recovering lost cultural memory.



Aztag- What was the reason for that amnesia?

Peter Balakian- There were several factors. First the Turkish government's 
denial campaign aimed at wiping Armenia out of popular memory. Mustafa 
Kemal's new Turkish republic of 1922 wanted the West to drop Armenia from 
the radar screen. The United States, for example, caved into Kemal's wishes 
because America was interested in making friends with Turkey in the hope of 
obtaining the rights to the Mosul oil fields, which were under Turkish 
control in the early 1920s. Other American cultural factors made historical 
memory of the 1915 Armenian genocide more difficult to achieve until the 
late 1960s when the cultural climate changed. I address this in my book.



Aztag- What do you think about Turkish-Armenian dialogue, which is "en 
vogue" these days?

Peter Balakian- I think any true and meaningful dialogue can only happen if 
there is truth. We can't have debate without truth. Those who come to 
converse around a table must acknowledge the truth about the Armenian 
genocide and the moral nature of what genocide is, and then we can move 
forward.



Aztag- So, in this respect, the recognition of the Armenian genocide is a 
prerequisite for you?

Peter Balakian- Yes.



Aztag- Your book relates to Americans. That helps when you are presenting 
atrocities that took place in the Middle East a century ago, doesn't it?

Peter Balakian- Yes, Armenian Genocide often seems like Middle Eastern 
history that happened long ago in another place, now Americans and Europeans 
have the chance to see how deeply the Armenian catastrophe affected the 
west, and in the case of my book, the USA in particular.



Aztag- Do you have any plans to travel to the Middle East?

Peter Balakian- Lebanon and Syria are 2 of the most important places in the 
history of the Armenian Diaspora and I want to visit them in the near 
future.