Talk:Turkey and the Holocaust

Sources not used properly
I am going through some of the sources in this article and I find that they are not properly quoted. For example, the article says,

Page 4 of Baer does not name any historian besides himself who believes that. On the contrary he admits that "historians of the Ottoman Empire" have promoted what he calls the myth. That means he's admitting to his view being controversial among academia. He also blames "Turkish Jewish elites", "major American Jewish organizations" and "the State of Israel" for promoting the myth. None of this is reflected in the article.VR talk 21:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC) This source is also partially quoted. Webman calls Guttstadt's treatment of the topic "balanced" and she gives Turkey credit for things like. Overall this article casts Turkey is a more negative light than is done by the sources it uses.VR talk 21:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  13:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's clear that the negative impacts on Jews are from Turkish nationalist policies rather than antisemitism per se.
 * I don't think that Baer says his views are controversial among academia. Most of the historians he refers to are either non-academics or, like Shaw, are discredited. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  22:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yet you included the "antisemitism in Turkey" category in this article. You also didn't respond to my contention that sources hold both the State of Israel and American and Turkish Jews to be responsible for the myth, yet you seem to only hold Turkey responsible. I have provided in sections below other scholars who offer views contrary to Baer's (which is something he admits in his book).VR talk 03:19, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * can you explain this edit? On page 4, Baer says:
 * VR talk 11:57, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No one else supports your edit to this article. As I stated, Baer's book covers a broader topic, starting in 1492; only one chapter in it is devoted to the Holocaust issue. Furthermore, it is not accurate that Israel or Jewish organizations generally endorse the fabricated rescue tales of Necdet Kent et al., none of whom have been recognized as Righteous Among the Nations (and they didn't get a place in the USHMM either). No reliable source says so, so it shouldn't be in the article. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  12:02, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I provided the quote above where Baer says what I edited in.VR talk 12:21, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you're quoting out of context; I see no evidence that Baer is referring to Israel or Jewish organizations outside of Turkey specifically supporting myths related to the Holocaust. The next sentence says that what they are promoting is, "A resurrected version of the 1892 propaganda efforts [i.e. based on the 1492 expulsion of Jews from Spain], this campaign was a brew made of one part Armenian genocide denial and one part stale Jewish tropes of a Muslim-Jewish alliance against the Christian enemy."
 * I looked through the entire chapter on the Holocaust to see if he gives any examples of non-Turkish Jewish organizations or Israel supporting the myth of Holocaust rescue, but the only time he mentions Israel is, "Most significant is the lack of eyewitness and documentation to support Kent’s claims. For this reason, no international Holocaust organization, not even the Israeli Holocaust Memorial and Museum Yad Vashem, has acknowledged Kent’s self-declared rescue of Turkish Jews. (p. 196)"
 * I looked through the entire chapter on the Holocaust to see if he gives any examples of non-Turkish Jewish organizations or Israel supporting the myth of Holocaust rescue, but the only time he mentions Israel is, "Most significant is the lack of eyewitness and documentation to support Kent’s claims. For this reason, no international Holocaust organization, not even the Israeli Holocaust Memorial and Museum Yad Vashem, has acknowledged Kent’s self-declared rescue of Turkish Jews. (p. 196)"
 * I looked through the entire chapter on the Holocaust to see if he gives any examples of non-Turkish Jewish organizations or Israel supporting the myth of Holocaust rescue, but the only time he mentions Israel is, "Most significant is the lack of eyewitness and documentation to support Kent’s claims. For this reason, no international Holocaust organization, not even the Israeli Holocaust Memorial and Museum Yad Vashem, has acknowledged Kent’s self-declared rescue of Turkish Jews. (p. 196)"

Shaw
This article could benefit from the works of Stanford Shaw who wrote Turkey and the Holocaust: Turkey’s Role in Rescuing Turkish and European Jewry from Nazi Persecution, 1933–1945, published by New York University Press. I understand that Baer and others have strongly criticized that work, but other scholars have endorsed it.
 * It received a positive review in International Journal of Middle East Studies by professor Howard Reed (University of Connecticut).
 * Professor Avigdor Levy from Brandeis University gives it a qualified endorsement in the AJS Review: In spite of these shortcomings, this is an important work that no serious student of the Holocaust can ignore.
 * Professor Feroz Ahmed of University of Boston also endorses it, in Review of Middle East Studies, as a significant contribution to our understanding of the relationship between the Jewish community and the state in the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish republic.VR talk 22:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It's true that Shaw's work got favorable reviews in the 1990s, but it is now known for its errors and lacking "a reputation for fact checking and accuracy" as required by WP:RS. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  22:38, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * He seems to continued to be cited by scholarly publications. For example, Nazi Germany and the Arab world (page 245) cites him for the claim that The role of Turkey in this developing process was very important. By 1943, Istanbul had replaced Switzerland as the central location for ... efforts to rescue Jews from German-occupied Europe.VR talk 23:05, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * In that book, Shaw prints fabricated claims about Necdet Kent and other Turkish diplomats. I would not consider it a RS for anything related to this topic. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree, the defects of Shaw are commented on by more recent scholarship. GPinkerton (talk) 03:25, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Stanford Shaw also wrote a chapter in Jews, Turks, and Ottomans: A Shared History, Fifteenth Through the Twentieth Century published Syracuse University Press in 2002. The book was edited professor Avigdor Levy and reviewed positively in Shofar (journal) in 2004 (therefore this is not "the 1990s"). Would you consider that chapter an acceptable source? VR talk 02:24, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No. Shaw claims that 100,000 Jews transmitted through Turkey. But only 16,474 arrived in Palestine, including thousands of Jews who emigrated from Turkey. Where did the other 90,000 go? This is not the kind of discrepancy that results from an honest disagreement between academics. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  02:42, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That sounds like you're doing WP:SYNTH. I'm evaluating sources based on how other scholars evaluate them, rather then doing WP:Original research for myself and see which scholar is right. At this point, I'm not seeing evidence that Shaw's views are so WP:FRINGE that they can't be included in this article. At best, his views can be treated as minority and given lesser WP:WEIGHT than other scholars.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 03:17, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Err, we do not give equal weight to facts and falsehoods. The issue isn't about Shaw's opinions but actual fabricated information in his books. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  04:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I've been asked to weigh in. I must admit that I agree with Buidhe on this point. Shaw is already mentioned in the "commemoration" section - it is not like his book is otherwise entirely omitted. At the same time, we must accept that scholarly consensus changes over time and does so relatively quickly in a field such as Holocaust studies where there are a large number of writers and scholarly accuracy is considered particularly important. From the scholarship today as I understand it, it is WP:FRINGE now even if it was not 20 years ago. Are there not more productive ways in which this article could be expanded? —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This article is quite one-sided and part of that is because facts sympathetic to Turkey are ommitted, scholarly opinions sympathetic to Turkey are removed, yet opinions critical of Turkey are stated as fact in wikivoice.
 * According to google scholar Shaw's book is cited 124 times, including 61 times after 2010. His book is cited many times in a 2006 book by Arnold Reisman which received a positive review by Karpat (University of Wisconsin) in The Historian (journal). Arnold Reisman is himself a Holocaust survivor and Karpat's review asserts Albert Eckstein persuaded the Turkish government to let twenty thousand European Jews go through the country, among them 233 who came out of Bergen-Belsen in July 1944. Reisman's book also contains a lot of details on Jews immigrating to Turkey in the 1930s.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 17:17, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a rather vague claim. What dates, what countries exactly? If it includes Jews who transited through Turkey after they were liberated elsewhere, then it's not relevant to the article subject. (Furthermore, just looking at the citation count is misleading because many of these cite the book just to criticize it all come up in the search). (t &#183; c)  buidhe  17:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Evaluating Turkey vs other countries
The article says Turkey was also the only neutral country to implement anti-Jewish laws during the war. Baer indeed says that. But Bahar's Turkey and the Rescue of European Jews (p 263-4), Routledge, takes a contrary view: This view should be reflected in the article.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 22:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That doesn't contradict what it says in the other source. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  22:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * My point is that this article is not neutral because it only presents views that are critical of Turkey, but not sympathetic views, even though sympathetic views can be found in scholarship.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 22:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If you want to include opinions from various scholars, why not this one: "Guttstadt overturns the conventional wisdom that Turkey devoted considerable effort to rescue Jews; indeed, his documentation from fifty archives in eleven countries and from oral histories reveals vivid vignettes of horror that convince the reader that Turkey facilitated the Holocaust." (from Baer's review of the book).
 * It's a mistake to call that a "sympathetic" view, considering that historians also negatively evaluate the role of other neutral countries. No one is blaming Turkey for what Germany did. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  23:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You literally just blamed Turkey for what Germany did by saying "Turkey facilitated the Holocaust". That is an WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim which will require extraordinary sourcing.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 02:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't assume that I agree with an opinion just because I quote it. (Also, I interpret Baer's statement as blaming Turkey solely for the actions that it undertook, as opposed to Germany's actions.) However, if we're going to cover comparisons between Turkey and other countries, I think it's best to emphasize objective and factual information of how Turkey's policies compared to that of other countries, rather than subjective opinions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  02:33, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, Corry Guttstadt seems to contradict the statement Turkey was also the only neutral country to implement anti-Jewish laws. Guttstadt says (page 313),
 * VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 03:36, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * "Anti-Semitic laws" != "anti-Jewish laws", the former are those that actively target Jews alone and the latter those that have a negative effect on Jews. The fact that the laws also discriminated against Christians means that they are not strictly speaking antisemitic, but can hardly be described as less anti-Jewish for this reason. Similarly, not all anti-Jewish violence is motivated by antisemitism, see the distinction made in anti-Jewish violence in Poland. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:40, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This same distinction is made by Guttstadt, see how she repeatedly refers to Turkey's "anti-Jewish" policies in this paper. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Then the term "anti-Jewish" should not be used because even on wikipedia Anti-Jewish actually redirects to Antisemitism.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 04:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This same distinction is made by Guttstadt, see how she repeatedly refers to Turkey's "anti-Jewish" policies in this paper. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Then the term "anti-Jewish" should not be used because even on wikipedia Anti-Jewish actually redirects to Antisemitism.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 04:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Turkey saved thousands by aiding their escape
the information you removed here is supported by scholarship. I even attributed it in case it was contradicted.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 03:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't remove any information—although I did move it to a more relevant place next to Struma disaster that also affects Jewish refugees. Furthermore, the characterization "granted transit visas to" as "saved" is imprecise and does not satisfy WP:IMPARTIAL. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * "saved" was never put in wikivoice but rather attributed, so it is not a violation.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 03:39, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It was in wikivoice, later attributed, but you never have made a case why Hale's opinion that this constitutes "saving" is WP:DUE in the article. His book is mostly about other topics, so I just don't see the relevance. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  04:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Its WP:DUE because it is in a scholarly source and my proposed text mentioned it briefly.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 04:11, 15 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The statement More Turkish Jews suffered as a result of discriminatory policies during the war than were saved by Turkey is clearly an opinion. What is it even based on, is there some calculation where this determination is made? At the very least it should be attributed and balanced with scholarly opinions who credit Turkey for assisting Jews during the Holocaust.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 17:27, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I actually partly agree with VR on this point. "More Turkish Jews suffered as a result of discriminatory policies during the war than were saved by Turkey" is a scholarly opinion unless "suffered" and "saved" are given entirely literal meanings which I do not think was intended. I do not see any harm on attributing it to a particular writer, along the lines of "X has noted that..."? —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:20, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I was thinking that you could reliably and objectively calculate it by adding up the number of Jews affected by various policies such as wealth tax and denaturalization, and compare that to the number who were actually saved by Turkish policies. However, I will attribute it to the author. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  16:33, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the attribution. Does any other scholar make a similar assessment? If not, maybe it should be moved to body instead of the lead, as per due weight.
 * Also, if Bali's opinion is mentioned, why can't we also mention the scholarly opinions of Hale, Bahar and Guttstadt that don't judge Turkey as harshly as others.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 22:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Clearly Baer does. Hale follows a longer discussion on the discriminatory wealth tax with an extremely vague sentence about escapes. It's not clear if either he or Guttstadt would disagree with Bali's assessment or whether their assessment is actually more positive, judging as a whole. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  22:34, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * How is professor Hale's statement vague? He is clearly crediting Turkey for "saving" thousands of European Jews. Its inclusion is as due as other scholars' opinions.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 00:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I hope you agree that it would be cherrypicking to quote him on "saving" Jews without covering his criticism of the wealth tax and other Turkish policies, in the same proportion of coverage as used in the source. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  09:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree all of those things should be mentioned. Lets not leave any of the scholarly sourced material out.VR <b style="color:Black">talk</b> 11:50, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually that's not how it works, Wikipedia summarizes sources rather than copying every bit of info from them. One sentence coverage in a source is probably WP:UNDUE. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  12:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * I suspect this mirrors the "rescue" of the Bulgarian Jews: a retrospective myth constructed in the post-war period by the Bulgarian regime to downplay the previous regime's own cupidity and complicity in the Holocaust. The Bulgarian embassy in Paris notably refused to recognize the nationality of Bulgarian Jews detained in France, though it insisted that their confiscated property belonged to Bulgaria. As can be seen from what I have just added to the article, the Turkish mission in France was the same. GPinkerton (talk) 23:40, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Turkey was obviously a Nazi friendly neutral country during most of the war until 1945. I find it very unlikely that the Turkish government saved thousands of Jews, maybe that some individuals decided to save Jews, but the only person to have actually saved Jews was Selahattin Ülkümen which is supported by evidence. The 1930s and 1940s are a very dark period in Turkish history that requires more research, Nazism wasn't embraced by all Turks, but the nationalist and Turanist Turks clearly supported Nazism because of the Soviet threat. Redman19 (talk) 15:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I also suggest this article should be expanded and feature more details about the faith of Turkish Jews in Nazi Germany, mostly students, Turkish nationals who were mistaken for Jews were saved by the Turkish government, those who were actually Jews, were stripped off their Turkish nationality and forgotton about, there are lots of sources about this, its a part of the German-Turkish studies, I however lack the time to get it all on here. I remember reading lots of articles about this subject, it shouldn't be that hard to find it on Google. Key people you might wish to look up; Uğur Ümit Üngör. Redman19 (talk) 18:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Entire topic is based on person's sources
The entire topic is written by using one person's sources. His name is Marc David Baer, a strange man, could not have shown any proof or official documents to justify these claims in his book. Actually, it is hard to say that his articles and books have reliable sources or follow any scientific approaches. Please just look over his book "Sultanic Saviors and Tolerant Turks: Writing Ottoman Jewish History, Denying the Armenian Genocide". 188.119.60.128 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 07:42, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * there is only this one book used to accuse Turkey of deporting Jewish people to Nazi Germany, and even on the part they referenced, it doesn’t say Turkey deported Jews. The book based its claim on one film recording. This entire article is filled with absurd claims from that absurd book. This is wikipedia for you. Muru3xi (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Marc Baer and Friends
This is a rich topic with lots of documentary evidence. Marc Baer's controversial book is being cited here to cast doubt on all of this documentary evidence. Baer is an aggressive ideologue, not a neutral source. His views are not the be-all truth on these topics. A lot of this has the form of: here is the Turkish historian citing Turkish sources and document sources, and German documents, and Jewish persons interviews and documents; and here is Baer saying: eh I don't believe it, its Turkish nationalism. Then suddenly we are presented with an edit which portrays Baer's unsubstantiated opinions as verified fact. I don't want to conjecture too much but it seems self evident that Baer is really motivated by a political-vendetta against Turkey in his 'works', and he is not a neutral source trying to produce historical scholarship on this topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ungitow (talk • contribs) 06:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Please provide evidence or retract your allegation about Baer. WP:BLP also applies to talk pages. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  02:23, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Turkey deported 2,200 to 2,500 Jews to extermination camps. Did it really?
From the mentioned book, this is the part given as reference to this claim.

“Turkey denaturalized approximately 3,000 to 5,000 Turkish Jews during the war. The film also silences the Nazis deportation of between 2,200 and 2,500 Turkish Jews to death camps (Auschwitz and Sobibór) and another three to four hundred to concentration camps (Ravensbrück, Buchenwald, Mauthausen, Dachau, Bergen-Belsen), where many succumbed.”

is this what wikipedia became? showing Turkey as a party to the holocaust because some people lack basic English skills. Muru3xi (talk) 06:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah, Turkey did. You gave the reference which supported the claim in your comment here. Do you have a stronger source to back up Turkey not deporting 2,200-2,500 Jews to extermination camps? Dialmayo 14:02, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The denaturalization of these Jews enabled their later deportation. The entire point of denaturalization is that you lose the benefits and protection of citizenship. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  14:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)