Talk:Settler colonialism

Sources

@Cdjp1 Hello. I'm not quite sure how you arrived at the conclusion in your edit summary [1], but if you look at the sources, virtually all of the sources in the added section have one or more of the following words/phrases: “settler”, “colonial”, “colonialism,” or “settler-colonialism.”

We can see this if we look at the first 9 sources they appear in the text [see below] As per, WP:FIXFIRST, if you take issue with a particular source, please flag it instead of deleting the entire section! However, it is clear that there are multiple reliable sources that verbatim characterize the conflict as settler/colonial or describe policies of planting settlers.

You stated that there were a number of of “irrelevant sources” in the section. Which ones are you referring to?

• Watenpaugh, K. D. (19 October 2022). In…Middle Eastern Studies, unspooling this argument…invites recasting the Ottoman State and the successor Republic of Turkey as a settler-colonial polity in fields beyond the genocide of the Armenians….From a historian’s perspective thinking about the Ottoman State as a colonial-setter state is a tool that….
• Walker, C. J. (1988). …the scheme being put forward for the region's direct administration from Moscow will at least end its [Nagorno-Karabakh’s] colonial status within Azerbaijan…
• Demoyan, H. "The region of Nagorno-Karabakhfought against external forces that sought to impose their dominance on the region….The struggle of the Armenian people of Karabakh against the Azerbaijani colonial rule is also …”
• Camacho, Fernando Padilla (7 February 2024), The swift colonisation programme put in place by President Ilham Aliyev includes urban reorganisation and reoccupation of urban and rural areas.
• Astourian, Stephan H. (5 December 2023), “In a way, imperialism built the nation [of Azerbaijan], its historiography, and its identity.”
• Davis, Angela (9 February 2016) Ongoing efforts to create a popular intellectual environment within which to explore the contemporary impact of the Armenian genocide are central…to global resistance to racism, genocide, and settler colonialism." *Travis, Hannibal (31 December 2019), To view genocide, as did Raphael Lemkin… is to invite comparisons to such important Western projects as settler colonialism or the Vietnam or Iraq wars. In the case of Turkey, the thesis that not only the Armenians … were victims of a long-term process of colonization, Turkification, and Kurdification—across a variety of regimes—threatens the myth of Turkey as a moderate and secular state…
• Jacobin article -- Aidan Simardone Beyond the tragic circumstances, Armenians and Palestinians share a common struggle. Both groups are subjected to colonialism and slaughter supported by Western states.
• THE FUNAMBULIST MAGAZINE. “referencing past and old Azeri architectural styles is an act of deception that tries to hide the military nature of such settler colonial projects.”

Vanezi (talk) 06:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I'll restore the section per my comment above. Thanks! Vanezi (talk) 06:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Noted that of the sources that explicitly mention settler colonialism, the majority refer to eastern Anatolia rather than Karabakh. It's also fair to say that the vast majority of sources are not using this terminology, which is a further indication that it's UNDUE here. (t · c) buidhe 06:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

It's also fair to say that the vast majority of sources are not using this terminology

Please indicate which ones, I just quoted most of the sources. Vanezi (talk) 06:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

The vast majority of the total RS published about the Armenian genocide or Armenia / Azerbaijan conflict. (t · c) buidhe 14:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Of the citations use to justify that it is viewed as a case of, or analysed using a framework of settler-colonialism:

1. Can be used, but it's not as clear as would be ideal, and as added I have concerns over the fact that the ellipses cover multiple paragraphs.
2. Good source, should be used, should include quote.
3. Doesn't really say settler-colonialism
4. Doesn't say settler-colonialism
5. Doesn't say settler-colonialism
6. Does not say it's settler-colonialism, but that the efforts of Hrant Dink and the case of the Armenian genocide are important to building an intellectual environment for a variety of issues.
7. Doesn't say settler-colonialism
8. Doesn't say settler-colonialism
9. I can understand how we use it to support settler-colonialism, though it doesn't specifically say settler-colonialism, needs other sources to support it.
10. Good to use.
11. Doesn't say settler-colonialism
12. Doesn't say settler-colonialism
13. Doesn't say settler-colonialism

There's no issue I see in adding a section on Artsakh here, but you need to cut down a huge chunk of the non-relevant text you added, and use sources that actually support the points being made. You have some sources that can be used, but as shown from these first few, many of them are irrelevant.

As a final bit of clarification, sources that detail potential colonialism are not enough on their own, as the article focuses on settler-colonialism, the sources must specifically deal with settler-colonialism and not just broader colonialism. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 17:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

As to actions taken, I did it as a complete removal due to working via mobile at the time. I am happy to work on re-adding it using better sources, but it is not in my current priorities, so if you are able to add in a first instances of a better edited version, I'll start building on that in the coming weeks. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 18:01, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I’m sorry, I don’t follow the numbering in your post. How do you feel about the following abridged section?

Several sources and human rights organizations interpret the conflict between Armenians and Turkey-Azerbaijan through the framework of settler colonialism. This framework emphasizes that Armenians are indigenous peoples seeking self-determination under imperial colonial powers. Since the mid 18^th century Armenian territory within Eastern Anatolia was seized and allocated to Muslims, a policy which was influenced by the centuries-old Ottoman practice of population transfer (Sürgün) used to import Muslim colonists into conquered areas.

As you requested, I’ve removed most of the sources that that did not explicitly state “settler colonialism.” The following sources are those which focus on the following:

• “settler” and ”colonialism”
• “settler-colonialism”
• direct comparisons to other settler-colonial states (e.g., Israel/United States)

Sources:

Watenpaugh, K. D. (2022).

• In…Middle Eastern Studies, unspooling this argument…invites recasting the Ottoman State and the successor Republic of Turkey as a settler-colonial polity in fields beyond the genocide of the Armenians….From a historian’s perspective thinking about the Ottoman State as a colonial-setter state is a tool that….


Walker, C. J. (1988).

• "The population of Karabagh was changing, from 91-2 per cent in 1939 to 80-5 per cent in 1970. Armenians were being encouraged to move out, and Azerbaijani colonists moved in. This was a kind of population manipulation that we can see in other parts of the world."

• "Now, although it seems extremely unlikely that the unification of Armenia and Karabagh will take place, at least for the present, the scheme being put forward, for the region's direct administration from Moscow, will at least end its colonial status within Azerbaijan, and its resultant depopulation, as had happened in Nakhichevan."

• "It was at this time especially that their proportional numbers in their land were reduced, when the Ottoman Sultan installed in Armenia Kurds from southern regions to guard the frontier with Persia."


Demoyan, H. 

• "The region of Nagorno-Karabakh fought against external forces that sought to impose their dominance on the region….The struggle of the Armenian people of Karabakh against the Azerbaijani colonial rule is also …”


Travis, Hannibal (31 December 2019),

• To view genocide, as did Raphael Lemkin… is to invite comparisons to such important Western projects as settler colonialism or the Vietnam or Iraq wars. In the case of Turkey, the thesis that not only the Armenians … were victims of a long-term process of colonization, Turkification, and Kurdification—across a variety of regimes—threatens the myth of Turkey as a moderate and secular state…


Jacobin article -- Aidan Simardone

• Beyond the tragic circumstances, Armenians and Palestinians share a common struggle. Both groups are subjected to colonialism and slaughter supported by Western states.


THE FUNAMBULIST MAGAZINE

• “The blockade of the existing road, happening in parallel to the construction of the new road, as well as the blockade of this new road, showcases the settler colonial ambitions of the Azeri government…referencing past and old Azeri architectural styles is an act of deception that tries to hide the military nature of such settler colonial projects.”


Armenians in NYC Are Organizing for Palestinian Liberation. Erik VanBezooijen, (2024, August 06). Retrieved from https://jacobin.com/2024/05/armenians-kurds-palestinians-liberation-nyc

• “Israel, Turkey, and Azerbaijan are all colonizers,” Nadia explained during our interview”...“They marched from the UN Headquarters to the Turkish, Azerbaijani, and Israeli consulates, carrying Palestinian and Armenian flags and homemade signs linking the Palestinian struggle to anti-colonial struggles across the world”


Mashinka Firunts Hakopia  ("On the Struggle for Indigenous Self-Determination in the Republic of Artsakh". Los Angeles Review of Books)

• "A policy of Azerbaijani settlement was pursued in an express effort to 'dilute the Armenian majority' and fortify a settler-colonial campaign through Indigenous erasure. Today, settler-colonial logic suffuses the statements issued by Azerbaijan and Turkey’s autocratic rulers."


Suny, Ronald Grigor; Göçek, Fatma Müge; Naimark, Norman M., eds. (10 March 2011). "A Question of Genocide": 

• The goal of the Ottoman policies was clear: to settle Muslim immigrants from the Balkans and the Caucasus in the six eastern provinces (Erzurum, Harput, Sivas, Diyarbakır, Van, and Bitlis) inhabited by a dense Armenian population. To this end, confiscated Armenian lands were handed over to the new refugees. In the meantime, genocidal destruction raged in full force. The Armenians and Syriacs were being massacred while the Muslim settlers were en route to replace them. However, some preparations were necessary for their successful settlement.


 Hovannisian, R.G. (2003). Hovannisian, R.G. (ed.). Looking Backward, Moving Forward: Confronting the Armenian Genocide 

• The Ittihadists' demographic deliberations of 1913-14 and the pattern of muhajir settlement over the preceding generations owed a conceptual debt to a practice of population transfer (sürgün) that had been employed in the empire since the fourteenth century. Originally a method of importing Muslim colonists into conquered regions, the practice of sürgün had developed over time to incorporate punitive deportations of religious and other groups. Eastern Anatolia witnessed both manifestations of this practice, first as a recipient of a sort of internal Ottoman colonization by 'desirable' groups, then as a site of ethnic cleansing of the 'undesirable,' during which colonization continued as Muslim refugees were relocated into vacant Armenian dwellings.


Samuel Dolbee (The Washington Post)

• ‘in a reminder of how the settler colonialism and racism of the United States has been emulated, Talaat added, in conversation with U.S. ambassador Henry Morgenthau, that the goal was to treat Armenians like Americans “treat the Negroes.” In his diary, Morgenthau added, “I think he meant like the Indians.”’

There are also other sources which do not explicitly mention settler colonialism, but are extremely close that could probably be included

The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention:

• “Artsakh was given to Azerbaijan under the colonial rule of the Soviet Union, without the consent or input of the majority Armenian population residing within.” [2]
• Self-determination is further a recognized right of all peoples under oppressive colonial regimes…The land and the people of Artsakh – an historic Armenian territory granted to Azerbaijan by the Soviet Union – has never before been under the governance of the state of Azerbaijan. [3]

Vanezi (talk) 06:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Since there is no opposition to adding an abbreviated section with relevant to this article sources quoted above, I'll add an abbreviated version of the section. Vanezi (talk) 14:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

This does not make much sense. How can Azerbaijan colonize its own sovereign territory? Lemkin Institute is not a scholarly source, and has a strong bias in Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict. Cannot be used for statements of historical facts. Los Angeles Review of Books is not a scholarly source either, and the publication appears to be an opinion piece, as everything published there. Funambulist is not a scholarly source either. The sourcing is extremely poor for strong statements like this, in particular concerning Azerbaijan and its region of Karabakh. Grandmaster 21:14, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you read the article where you will find that settler colonialism is unrelated to the legal ownership of territory by a state (unless this control is used to facilitate the displacement and replacement of indigenous people, as arguably is happening in Karabakh) . Still I have some reservations about this section, at minimum its size is UNDUE. (t · c) buidhe 21:31, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

There is also an article from the leftist Jacobin that quotes a person called Nadia, who repeatedly refers to Israel as a "Zionist entity" (?!), and some people marching on street accusing Azerbaijan of colonialism. Another very bad source. Since when do we refer to street protestors with questionable views as reliable sources? I see no strong sources concerning Azerbaijan, especially considering that Armenian authorities were engaged in internationally documented illegal settling in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan. [4] Grandmaster 21:41, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

I think the whole section is WP:UNDUE. I see that Buidhe removed most of it. Cdjp1 analyzed most of these sources, and they do not discuss settler colonialism. As Buidhe noted above, most of them do not use the terminology, and do not mention Karabakh. As I pointed above, some others are of extremely poor quality, one is even anti-Semitic. To claim something as a fact in a wiki voice, one must demonstrate that it is generally accepted by reliable sources to call the process settler colonialism. A few occasional mentions of the word "colonist" or "colonialism" do not prove that there is a general consensus among reliable sources to call the process settler colonialism. And 1 or 2 publications in scholarly journals calling Azerbaijan's activity in Karabakh colonialism, while turning a blind eye to Armenia's own illegal settling activity in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan is still a minority view that should not be given undue weight. Therefore, I believe there should be no mention of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in the article. Grandmaster 06:53, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The WP:WIKIVOICE was never used. All statements were qualified with "Researcher X, said", or other qualifiers were used such as "interpret" or "framework": Various sources interpret the conflict between Armenians and Turkey-Azerbaijan through the framework of settler colonialism. This framework..."

• The statements from the Funambulist was also attributed and the WIKIVOICE was never used; although the author is an architect with a masters degree and talking specifically about architecture in the territories of Nagorno-Karabakh that Azerbaijan now controls. Her statements were also attributed, despite the fact that the Funambulist publication mission statement "provides a useful platform where activist/academic/practitioner voices can meet and build solidarities across geographical scales."
• For Los Angeles Review of Books, Mashinka Firunts Hakopian's view from the LA Review of Books was qualified as such and the WIKIVOICE was never used, everything attributed. She is an accomplished academic so her statement is relevant.
• The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention is a US-based non-profit human rights organization, run by multiple experts with PhDs in genocide studies. The institute does not exclusively focus on Azerbaijan/Armenia, but also covers topics ranging from Iraq, Bangladesh, Transphobia, and Ukraine. It is non-partisan. The Lemkin Institute is notable for being cited in dozens of peer-reviewed publications, in different languages, as well as in Reuters, RFERL, and JAMnews, University of London City Press, and Genocide Watch. The Lemkin Institute has also been mentioned in the proceedings of the UK Parliament. You can also see that the Lemkin Institute is listed by Genocide Studies International along with the United Nations as one among "five institutes... dedicated to the prevention of genocide and mass atrocity crimes around the world." I kindly suggest that you look at the Lemkin Institute's page before inserting your own WP:OR when characterizing this source. A good starting place might be the Wikipedia page on the Lemkin Institute. It's a good introduction at this organization's methodology and harks back to Rafael Lemkin, himself. Given the reach, scope, and references to the Lemkin Institute, it is clear that it is a reputable source that reaches a large audience.
• Jacobin is literally listed as Generally reliable in Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources.

Vanezi (talk) 09:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't find the above sources to be sufficiently good. Los Angeles Review of Books and Funambulist are not well-established sources on political affairs, first is a source on architecture, another for review of books, and both articles appear to be opinion pieces. The sources must be also reliably published. Lemkin is a small NGO that shows a clear bias, and is also not a source on history. As for Jacobin, while it is listed as generally reliable, context matters. One Jacobin article quotes an anti-Semitic person who calls Israel a "Zionist entity", and this person also accuses Azerbaijan of colonialism, per your quote above. The second article is by a journalist who makes questionable statements like: "Armenians and Palestinians share a common struggle. Both groups are subjected to colonialism and slaughter supported by Western states". This is not impartial reporting, by rather an expression of a personal strong opinion. WP:RSP also states that Jacobin is biased, and "editors should take care to adhere to the neutral point of view policy when using Jacobin as a source in articles, for example by quoting and attributing statements that present its authors' opinions". Not the best source for an article like this that should be based an facts, and not strong or biased opinions. Also, Azerbaijan being a settler-colonialist is still a minority view, not a generally established fact. Grandmaster 12:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Buidhe I wouldn't mind your trim and I do understand your reservations about undue, however I don't think it's an undue case here and here's why:

Four sentences on an issue that has a number of sources is not WP:UNDUE. I abbreviated the section as per @Cdjp1 who stated "The section needs to be rewritten...[and]...I am happy to work on re-adding it using better sources." The following sources support the statement in the section "Various sources interpret the conflict between Armenians and Turkey-Azerbaijan through the framework of settler colonialism."

• Turkey as a settler colonial state:
• Azerbaijan as a settler colonial state:

Your trimmed version suggests that it was only Nagorno-Karabakh that was subject to settler colonialism; however, multiple sources state that the other half of the Armenian Highlands (i.e., Eastern Anatolia) was also subjected to settler colonialism. The section should clearly indicate that these two distinct sections of the Armenian highlands were targeted. This section is merited given the number of sources and the direct comparisons of the Azeri/Turkish bloc to other settler colonial states like the USA and Israel. Vanezi (talk) 09:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:DUE should be judged mainly by sources that are specifically about settler colonialism, particularly overviews—most of which are not focused on individual case studies, let alone the Armenian Highlands. (Thus, we need to rewrite the article to focus on overall trends instead of a list of examples). I personally think that we can only cite sources that explicitly mention "settler colonialism" to avoid OR. And I'd agree that the Jacobin source is not a suitable one to cite. (t · c) buidhe 13:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Buidhe Settler colonialism is the replacement of indigenous peoples with settlers through imperial colonial rule.

All of the sources in the modified text either directly state "settler colonialism" or refer to the replacement of indigenous Armenians with Turkish/Azeri/Muslim settlers.

Sample sources that verbatim state "settler colonialism"/"colonial settler"/"settler-colonial":

Sample sources that state that autochthonous/indigenous Armenians were replaced by settlers, through imperial/colonial rule or demographic engineering:

Jacobin sources: Per Wiki:Perennial Sources "editors should take care to adhere to the neutral point of view policy when using Jacobin as a source in articles, for example by quoting and attributing statements that present its authors' opinions."

Please note that this entire section (as well as Buidhe's version) is attributed and does not use the WIKI:VOICE. This mirrors many of the other "Example sections" in this article:

• Liberia: "Liberia is often regarded by scholars as a unique example of settler colonialism..."
• Israel:..."Zionism has been characterized by some scholars as a form of settler colonialism..."
• Russia and the Soviet Union: "Some scholars describe Russia as a settler colonial state..."
• Taiwan: "According to a PhD thesis by Lin-chin Tsai...Taiwan's contemporary population is largely the result of Chinese settler colonialism..."

As per WP:OOS "Artificially or unnecessarily restricting the scope of an article to select a particular POV on a subject area is frowned upon, even if it is the most popular POV." Wikipedia:Notability "does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic may have its own article."

How about the following abbreviated version? It is attributed (does not use WP:WIKIVOICE) and well-sourced.

• Various sources interpret the conflict between Armenians and Turkey-Azerbaijan through the framework of settler colonialism. This framework emphasizes that Armenians are indigenous peoples who have been displaced under imperial colonial rule from Eastern Anatolia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

Vanezi (talk) 14:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

While I personally agree with your interpretation, in my research I noted that settler colonialism is not a common analysis for either the Armenian genocide (few if any sources reference the theory explicitly) or works about settler colonialism. I don't think we can use nonscholarly publications to judge the acceptance of this analysis among scholars in the relevant fields. The academic sources you quote here don't explicitly mention settler colonialism. (t · c) buidhe 18:50, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Buidhe I'm sorry but;

1. You didn't address your comments, re: WP:OOS and WP:Notability

2. Is there a Wiki policy says that academic sources are needed to include attributed perspectives? All the sources are still WP:RS even if they are not in academic journals among scholars. Besides the content is still RS and most of the authors have PhDs. This is RS and you attributed them anyway. Having a couple sentences from multiple RS is consistent with wikipedia policy, especially if they're attributed.

3. There is at least one source that is academic (i.e. in a peer-reviewed journal among academic scholar types) and which uses the phrase settler colonialism: [5] Vanezi (talk) 22:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you bring up OOS (out of scope?) and notability—neither is very relevant here, I don't argue that the content is non-notable or out of scape, I am talking about WP:UNDUE. There are a great deal of scholarly sources whose stated topic is settler colonialism. We cite those, and the article content follows. We don't get a NPOV article by setting out to include content about Armenians and digging up news articles (which to be fair, are a RS for their authors' opinion) that don't show that this interpretation is gaining sufficient acceptance in academic circles to be DUE here. Furthermore, the label of settler colonialism has been applied to innumerable real world situations. If we adhered to npov and used the same inclusion criteria to mention many other incidents, I believe the article would become List of alleged incidents of settler colonialism, which would be a disservice to readers who are hoping to understand the general concept. (t · c) buidhe 04:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Also see the last part of my previous comment, I'm suggesting adding an abbreviated version that does not use wikivoice, to take into account your concerns. Vanezi (talk) 22:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

References

The China section is incorrect

the china section is written by without an understanding of the history of Xinjiang and Tibet, For example The Dzungars are not indigenous to the area and arrived AFTER the Han Chinese, the Han Chinese controlled the area starting from the Qin dynasty and during the Tang Dynasty expanded control as far as Kazakhstan. The Dzungars or the Oirats are the remnants of the Mongol Empire who colonized the area, The Qing Dynasty like the Ming dynasty was in constant conflict with the Mongols and which eventually led to the Dzungar genocide. 2600:4040:9900:C000:FD00:C331:4B6E:2ECF (talk) 00:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

The China section links to things like the Dzungar genocide, but does not itself name them. Your point assumes that because from Han times, China repeatedly tried and at times succeeded in establishing tributary states among the tribes on its northern and western borders, the numerous nomadic/semi-settled tribes mentioned in very early and later Chinese chronicles (the various nomadic tribes, often referred to generally as 戎, who in later Chinese tradition these were considered to be ancestors of the Xiongnu who in turn had wrested power from their southern neighbours the Yuezhi, etc.etc) were under Chinese suzereignty from Han times onwards, so whoever gained regional ascendency after was a 'colonizer' unlike the Chinese. Secondly you are confused in writing:'Han Chinese controlled the area starting from the Qin dynasty'. The Han created their dynasty immediately after the Qin, and were not coterminous with it. I guess you are thinking of Han as an ethnonym, and not a political formation. One last point: we go by reliable sources, and the Djungar are mentioned in them as victims of Han colonialism. Nishidani (talk) 11:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

More Examples of Settler Colonialism

Under the map [of the colonial empires before the Seven Years’ War], the following settler colonial projects should be listed: Western Sahara (by Morocco), the Golan Heights (by Israel), Xinjiang and Tibet (by China), Crimea and Siberia (by Russia/USSR), Angola and Mozambique (by Portugal), Greenland (by Denmark), & Northern Cyprus (by Turkey). Maximations (talk) 18:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 October 2024

You need to mention setttler-colonialism today. Further down the wilipedia article you have, "The Australian historian Patrick Wolfe, credited with originating the field, famously defined Israel as the most through example of a settler colonialist state today.[67][14][10]" - this should be moved to be the last line in the introudction, so settler-colonialism has some context. Fadz86 (talk) 11:58, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Not done. There is an article Zionism as settler colonialism that deals with the Israeli case. Selfstudier (talk) 12:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 November 2024

Change

As such settler colonialism has been identified as a form of environmental racism.[11]

To

As such, settler colonialism has been identified as a form of environmental racism.[11]

<!-As such settler colonialism has been identified as a form of environmental racism.[11]- Write your request ABOVE this line and do not remove the tildes and curly brackets below. --> 109.202.241.203 (talk) 09:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Done... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)