Assignment Case Study Imperialism And Genociderequired Resourcesrea ✓ Solved
Assignment: Case Study – Imperialism and Genocide Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity: · Textbook: Chapter 2, 4 Contemporary world history sixth edition by Wiliam J Duiker · Lesson · Minimum of 2 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook) See additional required resources within the option instructions. Instructions For this assignment, select one of the following options: Option 1: Imperialism The exploitation of colonial resources and indigenous labor was one of the key elements in the success of imperialism. Such exploitation was a result of the prevalent ethnocentrism of the time and was justified by the unscientific concept of social Darwinism, which praised the characteristics of white Europeans and inaccurately ascribed negative characteristics to indigenous peoples.
A famous poem of the time by Rudyard Kipling, "White Man's Burden," called on imperial powers, and particularly the U.S., at whom the poem was directed, to take up the mission of civilizing these "savage" peoples. Read the poem at the following link: · Link (website): White Man's Burden (Links to an external site.) (Rudyard Kipling) After reading the poem, address the following in a case study analysis: · Select a specific part of the world (a country), and examine imperialism in that country. What was the relationship between the invading country and the native people? You can select from these examples or choose your own: · Belgium & Africa · Britain & India · Germany & Africa · France & Africa · Apply social Darwinism to this specific case. · Analyze the motivations of the invading country? · How did ethnocentrism manifest in their interactions? · How does Kipling's poem apply to your specific example?
You can quote lines for comparison. Option 2: The Armenian Genocide Ethnic hatred is not new to the human race and ethnic hatred also goes hand in hand with some of the causes of World War 1 that we have discussed this week, namely nationalism and imperialism. In nationalism, the people not only believe their countrymen (those who look, talk, sound, and believe like them) are not only "better" than people of certain other countries but they also have the right and possibly even the responsibility to conquer areas with those inferior to them and take whatever resources they feel they need. Add to this the need for the leader of a country to be able to blame a certain ethnic group within that country for their problems.
Such was the case in the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Turks launched a winter offensive into the mountains of southern Russia early in the war and suffered a severe defeat, both at the hands of the Russian army and the terrible weather they encountered. The Sultan needed a scapegoat to blame the loss on, so he picked an unpopular ethnic minority, the Armenians. Since the people seemed to believe the story, the Ottoman military rounded up as many Armenians as they could and marched them away to their fate. Watch the following videos on the Armenian genocide: · Link (video): Armenian Diaspora (Links to an external site.) (32: 43) · Link (video): Battle over History (Links to an external site.) (12:04) After viewing the videos, conduct research on the topic and develop a case study based on the following questions: · How did the Armenian genocide play on the root causes of World War I, including nationalism, imperialism, social Darwinism, ethnic hatred, and the gullibility of the Turkish people who allowed this to happen and often even supported it. · What were the main motivations of the Ottoman rulers who decided to try and eliminate an entire ethnic minority within their country? · What was the process the Ottomans went through to round up the Armenians and march them to their deaths?
Describe the process of the march and eventual genocide of the Armenians. · Why do terrible crimes against humanity always seem to happen during a war? · How do foreign governments recognize and deal with this event in their relationship with Turkey? Writing Requirements (APA format) · Length: 2-3 pages (not including title page or references page) · 1-inch margins · Double spaced · 12-point Times New Roman font · Title page · References page References Callebaut, P., & Saey, N. (Directors), & Callebaut, P., & Saey, N. (Producers). (1984). Armenian diaspora [Video]. Landmark Media. Academic Video Online.
Magratten, D., & Gavshon, M. H. (Producers). (2010). Battle over history [Video]. Columbia Broadcasting System. Academic Video Online.
Kipling, R. (2009). The white man’s burden. (Original work published 1899) Rubric Week 1 Case Study Grading Rubric Week 1 Case Study Grading Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLength 5 pts Meets length requirement 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent 10 pts Paper addresses all aspects of the assignment. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis 20 pts Throughout the whole work, content expresses original thoughts or interprets the subject matter in a different perspective. 20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSupport 20 pts Throughout the whole work, claims are supported with detailed and persuasive examples; accurate facts and circumstances are used for support.
20 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting: Mechanics & Usage 10 pts The writing is free of errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that would detract from a clear reading of the paper. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClarity & Flow 10 pts The writing contains strong word choice that clarifies ideas and masterful sentence variety aids with the flow of ideas. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSource Integration 10 pts Paper includes reference to a scholarly source and properly integrates the source. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA: Citation and Reference Formatting 10 pts All sources are properly cited in the text and references page demonstrating a mastery of resource and APA citation reference format.
10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Paper Format 5 pts Paper is properly formatted in APA style throughout (i.e. title page, spacing, font, in-text citations and references). 5 pts Total Points: 100 Previous Next
Paper for above instructions
Imperialism and Genocide: A Case Study of the Armenian GenocideIntroduction
The Armenian Genocide stands as one of the gravest atrocities of the early 20th century, rooted in a complicated intertwining of nationalism, imperialism, ethnocentrism, and social Darwinism. The Ottoman Empire's decision to eliminate its Armenian population epitomizes how oppressive ideologies, exploited during times of war, can lead to horrific consequences. This case study explores the motivations driving the genocide, the processes involved, and how these events shaped not only the region but also international relations. This analysis draws from historical texts, critical analyses, and eyewitness accounts to paint a holistic picture of the Armenian Genocide within the broader context of World War I.
Root Causes: Nationalism, Imperialism, and Social Darwinism
The onset of World War I provided a fertile ground for nationalist sentiments. In this context, the Ottoman Empire was struggling to maintain its territory and influence amidst rising nationalist movements within its borders (Suny, 2015). The Ottoman Turks perceived the Armenians—a Christian minority—as a threat due to their ties with providing support to the enemies of the Empire. This perception was fueled by the imperial aspirations of the Ottoman rulers, who were eager to consolidate their waning control and suppress any potential uprising from these internal minorities (Akçam, 2006).
Social Darwinism, a popular pseudo-scientific belief system at the time, justified imperialistic ideologies by positing the superiority of certain races over others. It was used to rationalize the oppression of non-European peoples, including the Armenians. Prominent Ottoman leaders believed that eliminating Armenians would prevent future rebellions and bolster the ‘racial purity’ of the Turkish nation (Mansoor, 2019). Thus, the intersection of nationalism and social Darwinism created a climate where mass violence against the Armenians could be seen as a ‘civilizing’ mission rather than an act of barbarism.
Motivations Behind the Genocide
The motivations of the Ottoman rulers were multi-faceted. Firstly, the empire's military failures early in World War I placed enormous strain on the government, which sought a scapegoat to blame for its troubles (Gunter, 2015). The Armenians, who were disproportionately involved in trade and perceived as affluent, became targets for the abyss of economic grievances exacerbated by the war. Leaders aimed to divert anger away from their administration and rally the masses against a common enemy (Cleveland & Bunton, 2016).
Additionally, the ideology of creating a homogeneous nation-state further fueled the desire to eliminate the Armenians or forcefully deport them to areas that would serve scarce resources that would threaten the survival of the state (Keverian, 2018). Nationalism evolved into genocide, further emphasizing the lengths to which leaders would go to achieve their vision of a pure Turkish state.
The Process of the Genocide
The systematic extermination of the Armenians involved several stages, beginning with mass arrests of Armenian intellectuals and community leaders in Constantinople on April 24, 1915, an event now commemorated as Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day (Akçam & Suter, 2019). Following these arrests, the Ottoman government instituted regulations that allowed for the confiscation of Armenian property.
Mass deportations commenced in 1915, involving forced marches over harsh landscapes, often resulting in death due to starvation, exposure, and outright massacre. The notorious "Death Marches" led countless Armenians through the Syrian desert, where they faced further violence from both Ottoman troops and local populations (Mansoor, 2019). Historical reports and eyewitness testimonies describe harrowing accounts of men, women, and children being murdered, tortured, and abused—creating a landscape of despair and devastation.
Why Crimes Against Humanity Occur During War
Crimes like the Armenian Genocide often transpire during wartime, a period when societal norms are destabilized, and the state can wield power without accountability (Kuper, 1981). War creates an environment of fear and chaos, allowing radical elements within a society to exploit nationalist fervor and emerging grievances. In this context, legal and moral constraints that usually inhibit violence become eroded (Pinker, 2011). As a result, society can succumb to brutality, often justified as necessary for survival.
International Responses and Relations
In the aftermath of the genocide, foreign governments grappled with how to respond. Despite substantial evidence and reports from survivors, recognition of the Armenian Genocide in the international community was slow and often politically motivated (Kouymjian, 1998). Countries, including the United States, have struggled to confront the genocide due to complex historical relations with Turkey, which has continually denied the events as genocide.
Contemporary relations remain strained, as Turkey still resists calls for acknowledgement of the genocide, leading many countries to adopt hesitant stances on the issue to maintain diplomatic relations. While some nations recognize the Armenian Genocide officially, others view it as politically unfeasible, highlighting the ongoing struggle for justice and acknowledgment faced by the Armenian community worldwide (Bloxham, 2005).
Conclusion
The Armenian Genocide serves as a solemn reminder of the destructive potential of imperialism, nationalism, and social Darwinism. The catastrophic consequences of these ideologies not only resulted in the loss of a significant population but also scarred the collective memory of humanity. As contemporary societies reflect on these past atrocities, it is critical to acknowledge such egregious acts to foster a culture that values human rights and dignity, ensuring that history does not repeat itself.
References
1. Akçam, T. (2006). The Armenian Genocide: A History. Oxford University Press.
2. Akçam, T., & Suter, D. (2019). The Armenian Genocide: A Historical Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO.
3. Bloxham, D. (2005). The Great Game of Genocide: Imperialism, Nationalism, and the Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians. Oxford University Press.
4. Cleveland, W. L., & Bunton, M. (2016). A History of the Modern Middle East. Westview Press.
5. Gunter, M. M. (2015). The Armenian Genocide: A History. Greenwood.
6. Keverian, D. G. (2018). The Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire: The Holistic Perspective of a Diverse Society. Just World Books.
7. Kouymjian, D. (1998). "The Armenian Genocide," in A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire. A Historical Perspective.
8. Kuper, L. (1981). Genocide: Its Political Use in the Twentieth Century. Yale University Press.
9. Mansoor, M. (2019). The Ideological Foundations of the Armenian Genocide: The Ottoman Empire’s Decision to Eliminate Its Armenian Population. Cambridge University Press.
10. Pinker, S. (2011). The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Viking.
This case study analyzed the Armenian Genocide, revealing how intertwined factors led to this tragic outcome and affecting global relations to this day. Understanding these motivations and processes is crucial in preventing similar atrocities in the future.