Monday, March 1, 2010 - 7:02 PM
On Thursday, the House Foreign Affairs Committee will debate a resolution to recognize the 1915 killing of Armenian civilians by Turkish troops as a genocide. A similar resolution failed in 2007. The Obama administration has not taken a stand on the resolution, which is largely supported by the Armenian-American community, but it's long been supported by House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
A Turkish parliamentary delegation, including members of both the ruling AKP party and opposition CHP party, is currently visiting Washington to lobby against the resolution. At a media briefing at the Turkish embassy this morning, they made very clear that the passage of the resolution would "seriously affect the relationship between the two countries."
Foreign relations committee chairman Murat Mercan discussed some specific U.S. projects that could be affected:
I envision for instance the withdrawal of American troops, which is a huge logistical operation involving thousands of soldiers moving away from Iraq [through Turkey.] Thousands of tons of equipment. This type of thing might require parliamentary approval. It will come to our committee.
The Turkish military precence in Afghanistan is extended in the Turkish parliament. Every year year present of Turkish troops needs to be approved by the parliament This too will come through our committee.
Former U.S. ambassador Sukru Elekdag described Turkey's importance to the United States as a back-channel to Iran, interlocutor with Pakistan, and ally in resolving the frozen conflicts in the South Caucasus.
The new measure comes up at a time when Turkey and Armenia finally seem to be moving toward rapproachment, a process the MPs also said would be jeopardized by the House motion.
It seems a bit contradictory to me that the Turkish government on the one hand says it sees the Armenian rapproachment as vital to its own national interest, but on the other hand says the U.S. resolution will imperil it. I asked Mercan why Turkish-Armenian relations should be affected by what the U.S. congress says:
The rapprocahment has three pillars: one is opening the borders, one is diplomatic relations, one is setting up a historical commission that would explore what happened in the past, in 1915. If other parliaments decide things like this without merit or investigaiton, then how would you convince your Armenian counterpart that this kind of committee is needed?
In realist terms, it's certainly hard to justify jeopardizing U.S.-Turkish cooperation today over something that happened almost a century ago, and it seems unlikely to me that this one will ever reach President Obama's desk. On the other hand, Turkey is not doing a great job making it seem like they care about the rapproachement for its own sake, rather than as a result of U.S. pressure.
In any event, it's very interesting to see how a Turkish government that realizes its crucial role in U.S. policy is learning throw its weight around a bit.
Update: Ben Katcher weighs in with a different take on the same event over at The Washington Note.
Realist Dinosaurs and Mass Murder at the Hands of the Turks
"In realist terms, it's certainly hard to justify jeopardizing U.S.-Turkish cooperation today over something that happened almost a century ago, and it seems unlikely to me that this one will ever reach President Obama's desk..." (Joshua Keating)
That's one of many reasons that the realist school of foreign policy is moribund. There are no realists left in Congress (with a tiny number of exceptions) and precious few in the Obama Administration. Not one of the credible Republican candidates for the 2012 nomination are realists nor are any of the conceivable candidates for the 2016 democratic nomination.
The only place "realism" remains alive is in academe where it assumes its rightful place next to the department of classic literature and archeology
Realism is a spent force unlikely to rear its ugly head again any time soon. For better or for worse, realists have been thoroughly vanquished by the neoconservatives.
As for Turkey's role in the Armenian Genocide, I wonder how the United States would react if instead of acknowledging its role in the Holocaust and doing everything it could to make amends, Germany followed Turkey's lead and pretended the whole thing never happened.
It is true that the Armenian Genocide happened 95 years ago but that's only a quarter century before Hitler started rounding up and murdering the Jews of Europe.
The cavalier attitude that Keating and others take to the murder of 1.5 million Armenians is telling. Turkey should confront its past just as Germany has.
At the very least, the United States should call mass murder by its real name; genocide.
If Turkey is unhappy and wants to expel American troops, here's my idea; station them right next store in Northern Iraq where the Kurds will be sure to welcome them with open arms.
Come to think of it, the Kurds know a little about mass murder at the hands ot the Turks just like the Armenians do.
We hv to Live for the Future ,Not for Past
All wars was very bad and tragic .History books has many dirty pages, but we should look for the future ,peace and friendship.
If intention is war , open old books and find many more tragic reason. But I prefer to look peaceful future
And then, once Turkey becomes outright hostile to the US, NATO can eject Turkey. Then, as tensions escalte, the Central European countries can start evicting their Turkish populations. And Greece can invade Thrace and take back Constantinople to take revenge for 5 centuries of cruel occupation. And so on.
The Turks have had a history that's as black as any European country. If they want to be belligerent, then maybe the west will remember that the Turks were the enemy for most of the previous millenium.
Are we advocating Genocide Denial??!?!?
How can any human being with half a heart deny the Armenian Genocide.
If Germany denied the Jewish Holocaust would it be alright for the U.S., as an ally of Germany, to also deny the Holocaust in the U.S. Congress?
Maybe we need some moral introspection in this country.
As far as the Turkish-Armenian rapproachment is concerned, Turkey has reneged on this by asking for preconditions after the protocols were already signed. Also Keating is wrong to say that there would be a commission setup to "discuss" any facts regarding the Armenian Genocide. The President of Armenia has made it clear that the Armenian Genocide is not up for "debate". That would be shameful.
Turkey has been anti-American in regards to its friendship with Iran and its problems with Israel. It also persecutes its own Kurdish citizens, allows the genocidal leader of Darfur to come to its parliament and is now rounding up secular leaders in the country to further Islamify that country. The U.S. must pressure Turkey and this resolution, besides reinforcing the U.S. national archives in regards to the Armenian Genoicde, will help do that.
Turkey is a part of the WTO and the World Bank and cannot put too much pressure on the U.S.; that's all fluff.
Let us all stand up and, ask for recognition and restitution for the 1.5 million Christian Armenians killed in Turkey.
Moral introspection? You mean actual self examination. What a wonderful idea. Let us insist that all nations of the world condemn us for the genocide of the Native Americans. No? Or does introspection not mean what I think it means.
The Turkish parliament is free to condemn the USA's "genocide" of Native Americans, even though American actions were never state policy and Turkey's were. In fact the federal government actively tried to oppose what was being done to the Indians by locals on the ground, but failed. Quite a difference, which you seem to be unaware of.
U.S. condemnation/commemoration of the Armenian Genocide
The very troubling premise of Mr. Keating's piece is that America's willingness to stand against genocide does not represent a moral responsibility, but rather a political commodity that can be bartered away to genocide denying regimes - whether they be in Ankara, Khartoum, or Tehran.
We hv to Live for the Future ,Not for Past
All wars was very bad and tragic .History books has many dirty pages, but we should look for the future ,peace and friendship.
If intention is war , open old books and find many more tragic reason
The Word Genocide and Its Origin
It is noteworthy what Raphael Lemkin, the lawyer who coined the term genocide, stated, "I became interested in genocide because it happened
to the Armenians; and after the Armenians got a very rough deal at the
Versailles Conference because their criminals were guilty of genocide and were not punished." see 1949 CBS TV interview with Quincy Howe.
The central organizer of the Turkish genocide of the Armenians, Talaat Pasha is quoted by the Turkish feminist-nationalist Halide Edip in, _Memoirs of Halide Edip_ The Century Company, NY, 1926, page 387, "I have the conviction that as long as a nation does the best for its own interests, and succeeds, with world admires it and thinks it moral. I am ready to die for what I have done, and I know I shall die for it."
In 1921, the Turkish Interior Minister, Talaat Pasha, was assassinated by an Armenian in Berlin. It was the assassin's trial and subsequent acquittal that caught the attention of Raphael Lemkin.
Although "almost a century old", the UN Convention on Genocide states there is no statute of limitations on the crime of genocide.
Regards
Turkey doesn't have a veto over Congress, and under Erdogan it has behaved as an enemy of the United States, not an ally, despite American favours such as strong lobbying for EU entry. Turkey should be removed from NATO before the Islamists cripple our security apparatus from within.
I totally agree with you. We have no more job with the USA nor the EU.
We should see the Eurasia fact anymore. We should get together with all those "Turkish speaking countries" like Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan etc. (and luckly we have been doing it even today with a conference in Ankara)
We should get together with Iran, Syria, Egypt, India and China too... And of course, sometimes with Russia...
Everybody must sit at their continent...
I totally agree with you and that's what we are trying to do today. That's why Turkish Army which is the second powerful and moveable army in NATO now has been a little sufferring by this american-sided and the us's islamic fethullah gulen feeded erdogan today.
But we believe, we'll get rid of Nato from here soon like we already did in Blacksea region.
When it's come to this armenian problem in american congress...
We Turkish people do not mind... american congresse can announce whatever they want.
The important matter is from now on, our future parliament will interview the HOCALI genocide by armenians soon. Because it seems they maintain their bad habits like killing tens of thousands of Turkish people in 1915.
I just want to ask...
Why the Ottoman waited to kill only some "eastern Anatolian" armenians for almost a thousand year?? Why that Great Ottoman waited to become that weak to destroy some armenians? Why they waited for "world war I" period? Why they waited from 1071 to 1915??
Was it because those eastern Anatolian armenians were in a murder cooperation against Ottoman and Turkish people? Could it be the real and in fact a very right reason?
And what is this armenia? Just a computer system's name? Or maybe a country's name? Maybe a country which was founded by american Indians(!) or Vietnamies or Aztecs??
You think no Turkish people were murdered by armenians during those conflicts? You think those aggressive actions first came from Turkish side??
Anyway...
This has become so boring every 2 years american congresse discuss armenian genocide. Instead, i advise you to discuss Iran has captured some oil reserves in Iraq.
It is undisputed that Armenians and Turks fought each other fiercely in the early days of WWI; that the Turks had a stronger force and killed many more Armenians than the other way around, and drove Armenians from their homes and villages. What was unresolved, the last time I checked, was whether the intent of the Ottomans was to substantially wipe out the Armenian people or the more limited goal of driving an ethnic rebel group from "Ottoman" territory - equivalent to ethnic cleansing. Unlike the case of the Holocaust, there in so far no smoking gun documenting genocidal intent.
For Armenian Americans, who keep the memories fresh, death, rape, and displacement were horrid and the hated Turks deserve the strongest condemnation possible. Congress is urged to take it up as a matter of justice.
But there are different philosophies and standards of justice. Retributive justice looks to the past and demands punishment. Restorative justice looks to the future and strive to repair the injuries to society so that communities can survive, thrive, and eventually heal.
With my respects to my Armenian neighbors, in light of the history and potential future of the region, I believe that restorative justice is the better philosophy to follow.
Congress could pass a resolution recognizing the great suffering of the Armenians, and acknowledge that the questions of how to characterize the events and heal the injuries are best left to a truth and reconciliation commission representing the nations of Armenia and Turkey.
"Blessed are the Peacemakers"
who escapes from facing himself? Turks or all the others?
1
If Turks committed a genocide which is the greatest crime of humanity, and if Turkey really avoids of facing its history, and if the Armenians and their supporters sincerely want Turkey to do it, then why do the Armenians persistently refuse Turkey’s suggestions to discuss these events together with historians from both sides and other countries? For example:
“Our objective is to have the matter investigated by historians and experts. We are ready to accept the decision of the joint historical commission. We agree for different professionals from various countries to be involved” Abdullah Gul recently said. If historians committee project could be realized, issue of so called Armenian genocide will not be discussed by politicians but by historians. Furthermore, other than Turkish and Armenian historians, historians from third countries will also be included.
The Turks who were eager for establishment of such an historical commission, were supported by the United Nations, European Parliament and Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). http://www.tegenwicht.org/weblog_2006/67_armeens.htm, http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/bericht/77330, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/9337483.asp?scr=1 and was very happy.
While Turkey was eager and very happy, the Armenians were exceedingly unwilling and very angry.
In an interview with Armenian Reporter, Prof Richard Hovannisian from California University and the father of Raffi Hovannisian, the first Foreign Minister of Armenia, said: ‘It is very dangerous to establish such an historical commission…because according to 1948 United Nations’s Genocide Convention, a deliberate and planned massacre is mandatory
The Turks will accept that nearly 200-300 thousand Armenian died; but nobody can call them deliberate acts. In Turkish Archives the Turks have the telegrams sent from vilayets about the then Armenian upraisals and documents about the Armenians who fled from the Ottoman Army. So, the Turkish historians will accuse the Armenians and say that all these events were a reaction to what the Armenians did and were not deliberate’ http://www.kophaber.com/news_detail.php?id=4726
One of the supporters of so called Armenian genocide resolutions in U.S. Congress, Adam Schiff said “A committee about history is a struggle for distracting the truth. Turkey cannot rewrite history in exchange for good relations with Armenia.”
ANCA and other Armenian lobbying organizations stated that Armenia is forced to make dangerous concessions by Turkey and that Turkey’s moves towards establishing joint historians commission aims to call so called Armenian genocide into question and suspend its international recognition. ANCA’s aim is to provide recognition of so called Armenian genocide by U.S. Congress before establishment of a historians committee to discuss the events by keeping U. S. Congress under pressure. (See the previous news entitled ‘RA foreign minister didn’t say Armenia agrees to form commission of historians’ on November 26, 2008 in Panarmenian and ‘Dashnaks warn Sarkisian over Armenian genocide study’ on July 9, 2008 in Armenia Liberty; http://www.hairenik.com/armenianweekly/august_2004/history001.html)
Have you ever seen a victim who considers the act of displaying all the proofs against the person whom he fiercefully accuses in a court as ‘a struggle of distracting the truth’ and ‘a dangerous act’?
Have you ever heard a victim who avoids to admit to a court or a referee not to call his rightness into question?
Dear readers, in the modern world, what i
s the function of justice if admitting to it means distorting the truth, and calling a victim’s rightness into question?
What would you think about a victim (or so-called victim) who accuses people who advise to go to court (or referees) of betrayal?
In this situation, do you not suspect of that the victim himself is distracting the truth and even he himself does not believe himself and he is struggling with the truth itself.
who escapes from facing himself? Turks or all the others?
2
Now let us go a few years ago, to see the Turks’ extreme efforts to face their history, and the Armenian’s consistent fright to do it:
*In 2004, the Viennese Armenian-Turkish Platform (VAT) was founded to exchange documents about the 1915 events by Austrian, Turkish and Armenian historians. After receiving 100 Turkish documents, the Armenians abondened the project refusing to continue to fulfil their commitments and afterwards the Armenian foreign minister announced that they did not want to discuss the 1915 events with historians.
*Armenia refused the Turkish prime minister's and the Turkish Assembly's invitation announced on April 13, 2005 which suggested to establish a Joint Commission composed of historians from both sides and discuss the events which took place during the 1st World War.
*Turkey sent full page ads to five popular newspapers of the United States (US) calling on Armenia to ‘bring light the events of 1915 together with Turkey and to establish a joint commission composed of historians from both sides in addition to historians from other nations’, in April 2007.
*And the Turkish prime minister repeated the same invitation on February 2008 , in Munich at the 44th Security Conference where the Armenian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr. Oskanian also attended?
In neither of these invitations was there any precondition, unlike it is claimed by the Armenians.
*Why did the Armenian historian Sarafyan, who accepted the invitation of the then chief of Turkish History Foundation, Halacoglu, for cooperation to investigate Harput events, abandon the project, after talking the Armenian diaspora?
*The Ottoman and Turkish archives are open, unlike it is claimed by the diaspora. http://www.ankara.edu.tr/english/yazi.php?yad=36. http://www.tsk.mil.tr/ENGLISH/8_FRAGMENTS_FORM_HISTORY/8_1_Armenian_Issues/issues/Armenian_Activities_in_the_Archive_Documents/Armenian_Activities_in_the_Archive_Documents.html;
http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents2.pdf; http://louisville.edu/a-s/history/turks/Documents3.pdf; http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr/kitap/kitap.asp?kitap=991.
Even, Armenian historian Ara Sarafian from Gomitas Institute and Hilmar Kaiser searched the Ottoman archives (www.sarigelinbelgeseli.com)
*In spite of this, why are the Armenian archives including the one in Zoryan Armenian Institute in Boston closed? Both Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation offered the Armenians to open these archives; but the directors of the Zoryan Institute replied that they did not have enough money to open the archives. Turkish government and Turkish History Foundation promised financial support.Why did the Armenians refuse this suggestion too? (Nüzhet Kandemir, http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/418517.asp). Note that Zoryan Institute has quite enough money to provide financial support for Taner Akçam who advocated the Armenian claims while working in Minnesota University until recently.
Why have the Armenians always been terribly afraid of establishment of historical joint commissions?
Is it not striking that Sarafian, the head of the London-based Gomidas Institute, said Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an’s offer to Armenia to establish a commission of historians to resolve the Armenian issue was positive, but Armenia was the wrong address. He also said that freedom of expression for historians in Armenia is limited and the genocide issue has become a political tool. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/10426989.asp?scr=1
If a genocide had really occured, why did Brian Ardouny of the Armenian Assembly of America announce ‘We don’t need to prove the genocide historically, because it has already been accepted politically’? Why did the chief of the Armenian Archives in Armenia tell that they were not interested in the achives, but all they are interested is the world’s public opinion.
Or why have the Armenians not admitted to an international court yet?
In your life, have you ever seen a criminal who persistently calls the victim to bring his evidences? And, have you ever seen a victim who passionately accuses somebody of committing crime and giving him great harm but strictly avoids of bringing his proofs before the referees or going to court, and tells that he need not prove that person’s guilt, because the community has already accepted him as guilty?
In this situation would you not question the era you are living in? 5000 BC or 2000BC?
What else should the Turks do to face their history? Is it Turkey/Turks or Armenia and those who support them who are terribly afraid of facing their history?
estimated 50 million indians..!
Now 50 million indians were murdered and some say that it wasn't a government policy. But it is done, helped and ignored by the officials. So, since there is no paper issued from government to kill all indians it is not that bad. At least, it is not as bad as turks killed 1 million armenians. What a perspective!
I think no country in the world has the right to condemn another country for what happened 100 years ago. Because if you go back you will find a lot of unjust and killing in every country's past.
SO, IS THIS WHERE WE HUMANITY SHOULD GET STUCK?
THERE IS ANOUGH TROUBLE IN THE WORLD THAT CAUSES SUFFERING AND KILLING TODAY. AND, TODAY'S PROBLEMS ARE OVERWHELMING. THEN WHY WE SHOULD KEEP ADDING PROBLEMS OF PAST TO WHAT IS ALREADY WAY MORE THAN WE CAN HANDLE.
IS THIS BECAUSE SOME ARMENIAN NATIONALISTS THINK THAT THEIR TAKING REVENGE FROM TURKS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN TRYING TO END SUFFERING AND KILLING THAT IS HAPPENING TODAY?
Do you stop to consider that maybe the problems we have today are due to the injustices of the past not being resolved???
I don't know where you got the 50 million number, but for the most part it your view brings to mind a great many issues. Slavery for one, in the United States. I was not involved as everyone who was is/are dead. The same can be said about this and many other genocides and abuses through out history. No body alive today owns these crimes. The killing of Jews in WW2, the Armenians during WW1 the 50 million "Indians" in America. It's over...got it...IT'S OVER... as bad as it WAS it is over...it's time to move on. The poison will not go away until people let it go and try to build a better world, understanding history's lessons. If you can remember what you had for breakfast, which so many can't.
Every group of people on Earth has done something horrable to another group of people sometime in it's history. END OF THE STORY.
DOES IT SUCK?
YES.
SHOULD IT HAVE HAPPENED?
NO.
DOES THIS SAME DEBATE ALWAYS HAVE TO HAPPEN OR CAN WE ALL JUST ADMIT BAD THINGS HAPPEN SOMETIMES AND THAT SUCKS.....
Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.
Read More
(19)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE