The realm of Political Constellation is a very recent development of Systemic Constellation Therapy. In its traditional expression, Systemic Constellation Therapy considers issues not as isolated incidents but as a part of a very connected system. In this way, by restoring harmony to one element, the whole system finds its balance. Systemic Political Constellation addresses conflict in the same way. Unveiling the hidden and unconscious dynamics between groups promotes understanding and creates a favorable environment for compassion. Inspired by the theories of Bert Hellinger’s Systemic Constellations and Ann Ancelin-Schutzenberger’s Psycogenealogy, my work unveils a new dimension to the investigation of the unconscious aspects of the conflicting relationship between ethnic Armenians and ethnic Turks .

An unknown number of young Armenians survived the massacres of 1915 as adopted daughters and sons of Muslim families. Fewer others became wives and, in exceptional cases, husbands. While some of these survivors (particularly young men) re-united with their families or relatives in later years, or were taken into orphanages by missionaries and relief workers, many others lived the rest of their lives as “Muslims,” taking on Turkish, Kurdish, or Arabic names. In recent years, the stories of these survivors have become publicly visible through memoirs, novels, and historical works in Turkey. This new visibility has raised questions about the absence of this particular group of survivors in Armenian, Turkish, Kurdish, as well as international scholarly and popular histories of the Armenian genocide. Simply put, the stories of these survivors have been silenced by all historiographies. Based on an analysis of these works as well as interviews with 30 “grandchildren” who have Armenian grandparents, this paper analyzes the ways in which “familial” history told through the eyes of grandchildren is cracking a constitutive silence in Turkish and Armenian historiographies and is opening up a new path of reconciliation with a nationalized and militarized history.

This paper examines how reconciliation may be advanced when memory is enlarged beyond the moment of trauma and shared with “enemies” by recognizing their common humanity and their common ghosts. My work investigates what happens to memory when American Armenians, describing themselves as pilgrims, “return” to Turkey in search of their family’s houses, villages and towns lost in 1915. They bring with them stories of traumatic loss, but also stories of the warmth of family life in Anatolia, which becomes even realer to them as they enter a culture that feels like their own. But along with this confrontation with the familiar is a confrontation with the historic enemy, who lives it. These are Turkish citizens who also had Ottoman ancestors. Their families, too, were uprooted from their Ottoman heritage after WWI; but their identity was influenced by a Turkish nationalism in which the Metz Yeghern, the pogrom-like violence at the heart of Armenian memory is often categorically denied. Interactions between these groups, including those who find that they are actually related (often first cousins), helps narrow a chasm between the two identities that has been wide and complex. Without political recognition of real events, reconciliation may be impossible. But the pilgrimage route, with its mapping of oral histories and mental pain and its recognition of the shared humanity of once or imaginary neighbors, affects both sides profoundly and can only help in this process. This paper attempts to read my material objectively, but also with hope.

The important, if not crucial, role civil society can play in conflict transformation has been well documented. However, one finds very few studies on civil society initiatives attempting to bridge the Turkish-Armenian divide. This paper presents an overview of such initiatives and tries to assess the impact they had on the mutual perceptions of Turks and Armenians. The paper treats the apology campaign initiated by 200 Turkish intellectuals as a case study. By looking at the way Turkish intellectuals, the Turkish and Armenian media and organizations portrayed the apology and reacted to it, the paper attempts to demonstrate the pitfalls and opportunities that civil society initiatives present for the Turkish-Armenian case.