FPIF Commentary |
U.S. Denial of the Armenian Genocide
Stephen Zunes | October 22, 2007
Editor: John Feffer
|
|
|
|
It continues to boggle the mind what the Democratic leadership in Congress will do whenever the Republicans raise the specter of labeling them “soft on terrorism.” They approve wiretapping without a court order. They allow for indefinite detention of suspects without charge. They authorize the invasion and occupation of a country on the far side of the world that was no threat to us and then provide unconditional funding for the bloody and unwinnable counter-insurgency war that inevitably followed.
Now, it appears, the Democrats are also willing to deny history, even when it involves genocide.
The non-binding resolution commemorating the Armenian genocide attracted 226 co-sponsors and won passage through the House Foreign Relations Committee. Nevertheless, it appears that as of this writing that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi – in response to pressure from the White House and Republican congressional leaders that it would harm the “Global War on Terrorism” – will prevent the resolution from coming up for vote in the full House.
Call It Genocide
Between 1915 and 1918, under orders of the leadership of the Ottoman Empire, an estimated two million Armenians were forcibly removed from their homes in a region that had been part of the Armenian nation for more than 2,500 years. Three-quarters of them died as a result of execution, starvation, and related reasons.
Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. ambassador to the Ottoman Empire during that period, noted that, “When the Turkish authorities gave the orders for these deportations, they were merely giving the death warrant to a whole race; they understood this well, and, in their conversations with me, they made no particular attempt to conceal the fact...” While issuing a “death warrant to a whole race” would normally be considered genocide by any definition, it apparently does not in the view of the current administration and Congress of the government he was representing.
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, signed and ratified by the United States, officially defines genocide as any effort “to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.” Raphael Lemkin was the Polish Jewish lawyer who originally coined the term “genocide” in 1944. The earliest proponent of an international convention on its prevention and the punishment of its perpetrators, Lemkin identified the Armenian case as a definitive example.
Dozens of other governments – including Canada, France, Italy, and Russia – and several UN bodies have formally recognized the Armenian genocide, as have the governments of 40 U.S. states. Neither the Bush administration nor Congress appears willing to do so, however.
Ironically, Congress earlier this year overwhelmingly passed a resolution condemning Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for refusing to acknowledge the German genocide of the Jews. That same Congress, however, appears quite willing to refuse to acknowledge the Turkish genocide of the Armenians.
While awareness of anti-Semitism is fortunately widespread enough to dismiss those who refuse to acknowledge the Holocaust to the political fringe, it appears that tolerance for anti-Armenian bigotry is strong enough that it is still apparently politically acceptable to refuse to acknowledge their genocide.
The Turkey Factor
Opponents of the measure acknowledging the Armenian genocide claim argue that they are worried about harming relations with Turkey, the successor state to the Ottoman Empire and an important U.S. ally.
In reality, however, if the Bush administration and Congress were really concerned about hurting relations with Turkey, Bush would have never asked for and Congress would have never approved authorization for the United States to have invaded Iraq, which the Turks vehemently opposed. As a result of the U.S. war and occupation of Turkey’s southern neighbor, public opinion polls have shown that percentage of the Turkish population holding a positive view of the United States has declined from 52% to only 9%.
Turkish opposition was so strong that, despite the Bush administration offering Turkey $6 billion in grants and $20 billion in loan guarantees in return for allowing U.S. forces to use bases in Turkey to launch the invasion in 2003, the Turkish parliament refused to authorize the request. Soon thereafter, then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, in an interview with CNN in Turkey, expressed his disappointment that the Turkish military had not taken its traditional “leadership role” in the matter, which – given its periodic military intervention in Turkish governance – many Turks took as advocacy for a military coup. Furthermore, in testimony on Capitol Hill, Wolfowitz further angered the Turks by claiming that the civilian government made a "big, big mistake” in failing to back U.S. military plans and claimed that the country’s democratically elected parliament “didn't quite know what it was doing.”
The United States has antagonized Turkey still further as a result of U.S. support for Kurdish nationalists in northern Iraq who, with the support of billions of dollars worth of U.S. aid and thousands of American troops, have created an autonomous enclave that has served as a based for KADEK (formerly known as the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK), which Turkey considers a terrorist group. KADEK forces, which had largely observed a cease fire prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the resulting consolidation of the quasi-independent Kurdish region, have since been emboldened to launch countless forays into Turkish territory at the cost of hundreds of lives.
Since almost all House members who oppose this non-binding resolution on the Armenian genocide were among the majority of Republicans and the minority of Democrats who voted to authorize the invasion, antagonizing Turkey is clearly not the real reason for their opposition. Anyone actually concerned about the future of U.S.-Turkish relations would never have rejected the Turkish government’s pleas for restraint and voted to authorize the invasion of Iraq nor would they vote to continue U.S. funding of the pro-KADEK separatist government in northern Iraq.
Why a Resolution Now?
Another bogus argument put forward by President Bush and his bipartisan supporters on Capitol Hill is that Congress should not bother passing resolutions regarding historical events. Yet these critics have not objected to other recent successful congressional resolutions on historic events: recognizing the 65th anniversary of the death of the Polish musician and political leader Ignacy Jan Paderewski, commemorating the 100th anniversary of the founding of the American Jewish Committee, commemorating the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz extermination camp in Poland, or commemorating the 150th anniversary of the first meeting of the Republican Party in Wisconsin, just to name a few.
These opponents of the resolution also claim that this is a “bad time” to upset the Turkish government, given that U.S. access to Turkish bases is part of the re-supply efforts to support the counter-insurgency war by U.S. occupation forces in Iraq. However, it was also considered a “bad time” when a similar resolution was put forward in 2000 because U.S. bases in Turkey were being used to patrol the “no fly zones” in northern Iraq. And it was also considered a “bad time” in 1985 and 1987 when similar resolutions were put forward because U.S. bases in Turkey were considered important listening posts for monitoring the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
For deniers of the Armenian genocide, it is always a “bad time.”
The Bush administration, like both Republican and Democratic administrations before it, has refused to acknowledge that the Armenian genocide even took place. For example, under the Reagan administration, the Bulletin of the Department of State claimed that, "Because the historical record of the 1915 events in Asia Minor is ambiguous, the Department of State does not endorse allegations that the Turkish Government committed genocide against the Armenian people."
Similarly, Paul Wolfowitz, who served as deputy secretary of defense in President Bush’s first term, stated in 2002 that “one of the things that impress me about Turkish history is the way Turkey treats its own minorities."
The operative clause of the resolution simply calls upon President Bush “to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian genocide, and for other purposes." Therefore, if President Bush really doesn’t want Congress to pass such a resolution, all he needs to do is make a statement acknowledging the genocide. Not surprisingly for someone with a notorious lack of knowledge of history, however, he has refused to do so. Bush has only gone as far as acknowledging that what happened to the Armenians was simply part of “a horrible tragedy” which reflects “a deep sorrow that continues to haunt them and their neighbors, the Turkish people,” even though Turkey has never expressed sorrow for their genocide.
Failure to pass a resolution calling on President Bush to acknowledge the genocide, then, amounts to an acceptance of his genocide denial.
Genocide Denial
Given the indisputable documentary record of the Armenian genocide, it would appear that at least some of those who refuse to go on record recognizing Turkey’s genocide of Armenians are, like those who refuse to recognize Germany’s genocide of European Jews, motivated by ignorance and bigotry. Claims that it would harm relations with Turkey or that the timing is wrong appear to be no more than desperate excuses to deny reality. If the Bush administration and members of Congress recognized that genocide took place, they should have no problem going on record saying so.
One problem may be that members of Congress, like President Bush, are themselves ignorant of history. For example, the Middle East scholar most often cited by both Republican and Democratic members of Congress as influencing their understanding of the region is the notorious genocide-denier Bernard Lewis, a fellow at Washington’s Institute of Turkish Studies. In France, where genocide denial is considered a criminal offense, he was convicted in 1996 following a statement in Le Monde in which the emeritus Princeton University professor dismissed the claim of genocide as nothing more than "the Armenian version of this story." The court noted how, typical of those who deny genocide, he reached his conclusion by “concealing elements contrary to his thesis” and “failed in his duties of objectivity and prudence.”
This is not to say that every single opponent of the resolution explicitly denies the genocide. Some have acknowledged that genocide indeed occurred, but have apparently been convinced that it is contrary to perceived U.S. national security interest to state this publicly. This is just as inexcusable, however. Such people are moral cowards who apparently would be just as willing to refuse to acknowledge the Holocaust if the Bush administration told them that it might also upset the German government enough to restrict access to U.S. bases.
Though it has been Democratic members of the House, led by California Congressman Adam Schiff, who have most vigorously led the effort this time to recognize the Armenian genocide, opposition to acknowledging history has been a bipartisan effort. In 2000, President Bill Clinton successfully persuaded House Speaker Dennis Hastert to suppress a similar bill after it passed the Republican-led Foreign Relations Committee by a vote of 40-7 and was on its way to easy passage before the full House. Currently, former Democratic House leader Dick Gephardt has joined in lobbying his former colleagues on behalf of the Turkish government. And now, the current Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, despite having earlier promised to place it before a vote of the full House, appears ready to pull the bill from consideration.
Not only is this a tragic affront to the remaining genocide survivors and their descendents, it is also a disservice to the many Turks who opposed their government’s policies at that time and tried to stop the genocide, as well as to contemporary Turks who face jail by their U.S.-backed regime for daring to acknowledge it. If the world’s one remaining superpower refuses to acknowledge the genocide, there is little chance that justice will ever be served.
Adolf Hitler, responding to concerns about the legacy of his crimes, once asked, “Who, after all, is today speaking of the destruction of the Armenians?” Failure to pass this resolution would send a message to future tyrants that they can commit genocide and not even have it acknowledged by the world’s most powerful countries.
Indeed, refusing to recognize genocide and those responsible for it in a historical context makes it easier to deny genocide today. In 1994, the Clinton administration – which consistently refused to fully acknowledge Armenia’s tragedy – also refused to use the word “genocide” in the midst of the Rwandan government’s massacres of over half that country’s Tutsi population, a decision that delayed the deployment of international peacekeeping forces until after 800,000 people had been slaughtered.
As a result, the fate of the resolution on the Armenian genocide is not simply about commemorating a tragedy that took place 90 years ago. It is about where we stand as a nation in facing up to the most horrible of crimes. It is about whether we are willing to stand up for the truth in the face of lies. It is about whether we see our nation’s glory based on appeasing our strategic allies or in upholding our longstanding principles.
Stephen Zunes is Middle East editor for Foreign Policy in Focus . He is a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco and the author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press, 2003.)
|
|
|
|
Published by Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at www.ips-dc.org). Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies.
Recommended citation:
Stephen Zunes, "U.S. Denial of Armenian Genocide," (Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, October 22, 2007).
Web location:
http://fpif.org/fpiftxt/4660
Production Information:
Author(s): Stephen Zunes
Editor(s): John Feffer
Production: John Feffer |
|
Latest Comments & Conversation Area
Editor's Note: FPIF.org editors read and approve each comment.
Comments are checked for content only; spelling and grammar errors are not
corrected and comments that include vulgar language or libelous content are
rejected. |
| |
| Name: |
Dennis R. Papazian |
Date: Oct 22, 2007 |
| I appreciate your strong and reasonable statement on the Armenian Genocide. Turkey and the US embarrass themselves. Even the Turkish leadership must know the truth, which is why they fight so hard. |
|
| Name: |
Charles |
Date: Oct 22, 2007 |
| This is the best summary of the latest US rationale for denying the Armenian Genocide. It looks like article 301 of the Turkish penal code was not only adopted by the US; it was crafted here as well. |
|
| Name: |
Roberta Jost |
Date: Oct 22, 2007 |
| I am just a simple housewife, mother of 9, wife of 1. My background is simple, but my mind is still working well. What is Mr. Zunes trying to accomplish? This business with the Turkish people was long, long ago!!! Are we going to condemn our own country for what we did to the American Indians? Get a life!!! Live TODAY and do what is right in this present age!!!! Roberta Jost |
|
| Name: |
Richard |
Date: Oct 22, 2007 |
| It is suggested that we "live today and do what is right in this present age." Isn't it true that what our sense of right tells us depends, for many of us, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and others, on what happened thousands of years ago---lest we forget Jesus, Moses, Mohammed, the Buddha, et. al.? Does ninety-two years really seem that long ago in comparison? |
|
| Name: |
Greg |
Date: Oct 22, 2007 |
| I am contemplating the sad fact of Roberta Jost. Despite of her admitting that she has a simple mind, she is interested in reading and commenting a carefully researched article by Stephen Zunes. Indeed partial knowledge is more dangerous than no knowledge. Isn't she aware of the steps taken by her country to compensate American natives? For Heaven's sake don't call them Indians it is very offensive! I think she believes in cultured ignorance. If ignorance is a bliss then Roberta is in Heaven. |
|
| Name: |
Edgar |
Date: Oct 22, 2007 |
| And what's about the Vietnamese genocide? 3 million Vietnamese killed by US soldiers. I agree that there was an Armenian Genocide, and I wish someday there will be also a recognition of the others, especially the Vietnamese and the Iraqi. |
|
| Name: |
JerseyGuy |
Date: Oct 22, 2007 |
| Why must Turkey take accountability for the dark chapters of their history? There have been hundreds of massacres/genocides through history including some still underway. Why are we so interested in having Turkey acknowledge their past wrongdoings and not going after anyone else? What gives us the moral authority to pass judgment on anyone else? Have we acknowledged our dark history?
We have nearly wiped out the Native American population, we enslaved millions for hundreds of years, we dropped two atomic bombs on Japan with the sole aim of killing hundreds of thousands of civilians, and our actions in Iraq have cost hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. Have we acknowledged these wrong doings? What moral authority can we possibly have over what others have done?
We are the world's sole superpower and that comes with responsibilities. What have we done about the genocide in Rwanda and Darfur?
Are we at all surprised that Turkey is infuriated about this resolution? We are supposed to be their ally and we selectively pursue a strategy of embarrassing them while we ignore every other instance of far worse events in history.
Our congress needs to drop this Armenian Genocide resolution forever, because it is discriminatory and immoral. Let us face our own history before we pass judgment on others.
Most of the evidence for Genocide claims are based on Ambassador Morgnethau's notes. Ambassador Morgenthau's depiction of events has been proven to be biased by famous Princeton historian Heath Lowry. He did not speak Turkish or Armenian and depended on his Armenian secretary and another Armenian adviser. Someone by the same unusual last name as his secretary (Adnonian) fabricated forged telegrams to make the case. Morgenthau relies completely on their advice on coming to his own conclusions. See the thorough analysis at http://www.tetedeturc.com/home/spip.php?article77.
Lastly Turkey has opened up all of her archives for review for historians. The Armenians refuse to open their archives. Why? What are they hiding? Turkey has already offered to have an international committee of historians analyze this entire chapter and come to a conclusion and Turkey has to accept whatever their findings are. Armenia wants nothing to do with this?
At the conclusion of WWI Great Britain rounded up everyone they could at the time and held a trial for crimes against humanity and could not prove their case and let everyone go.
The Armenians refuse to take their case to International Courts because they know they will be unbiased and render a fair judgment on the matter. They find it much easier to buy politicians to pass resolutions without any research against Turkey. The resolution in our congress is prime example of this. Our democratic congressmen have been bought and paid for by the rich Armenian lobby.
Don't believe the Armenian propaganda machine. Do your own research.
|
|
| Name: |
Jackie |
Date: Oct 23, 2007 |
Dear Roberta Jost:
Today's denial opens way for tomorrow's new genocide and holocaust. The Holocaust during World War II was, let's say, number one. If you keep denying then Holocaust number two cannot be far away and that may include your 9 children and your husband and you ending in a Turkish harem. |
|
| Name: |
Robert Mann |
Date: Oct 23, 2007 |
| This whole business reeks of emotionalism and domestic politics. "Now, it appears, the Democrats are also willing to deny history, even when it involves genocide." To "deny history" would be a positive act of contradicting an historical fact. There has been no such act. "Even when it involves genocide" -- what is Zunes trying to say? That the historical fact being denied IS genocide? Why not say this in English? This is REALLY NOT A GOOD TIME for the United States to be throwing around charges of genocide. The genocide in Tibet is an ongoing crime against humanity, but it is NOT IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST to be unilaterally charging the Chinese with this crime. |
|
| Name: |
Nevin |
Date: Oct 23, 2007 |
| Armenian lobby spends millions for the "genocide" issue here in the US and in Europe. They preach and brainwash the next generation of Armenians of hatred towards Turks and absolute rejection of any type of an agreement with Turkey. Any one with half a brain knows this is not about what happened 90 years ago but rather using the genocide issue as a political gun against Turkeys head. I would like to see the congress talk about labeling France, Britain, Spain, Belgium, and indeed US with genocidal behaviour committed against peoples of Africa, South America, and Australia???? |
|
| Name: |
Charles |
Date: Oct 23, 2007 |
| When moral indignation becomes conditional it becomes meaningless. Taner Akcam and Orhan Pamuk saw that their government's version of history was a total fabrication, JerseyGuy and Roberta Jost have not and might never. Ever wonder why people go to jail in Turkey for mentioning the Armenian Genocide?...It's not because it didn't happen. |
|
| Name: |
Arsen Sarapinian |
Date: Oct 23, 2007 |
| Mr. Zunes does a good job of gathering significant data in an effort of forming a critical arguement that should be noteworthy and praised among scholars. The information presented in this article is true and should be essential for anyone who dares to make a difference in the world. |
|
| Name: |
Greg |
Date: Oct 23, 2007 |
| JerseyGuy, you say you do not accept any genocide because there are lots of others not accepted. Well you need to start with one at least. It has taken 92 years and Turkey instead of recognizing it, has financed genocide deniers to falsify history and convince you as well. Heath Lowry is not so convincing. Turkey must come to terms with its past. This is not penalizing Turkey. It is treating Turkey honorably. |
|
| Name: |
Armen Sedrakian |
Date: Oct 24, 2007 |
| Dear JerseyGuy,
I agree with your point that Turkey is not unique in its crime of genocide. Congress should not only honor those Americans that witnessed the Genocide of Armenians, Assyrians, and Pontic Greeks and came to the aid of the survivors, but Congress should apologize and pay reparations for the US crimes against the Native Americans and the US involvement in slavery. Japan should come clean with its atrocities in Nanking. China should cease its genocidal policies in Tibet. France and Belgiam should come to terms with what it did in the Congo. There is much more, of course.
But why do you insist that it wasn't a Genocide? That it is merely part of the "Armenian propaganda machine?" Please, do some honest research for yourself.
It is not easy to admit humans can do such terrible things. Armenians are by no means perfect or holy. But it would be good for the Turkish soul to come clean. It worked for Germany.
If you have a hard time believing that the genocide was possible, how do you explain the Azeri Turk pogrom of Armenians in Sumgait and Baku in 1989 and 1990? Or the 2004 hacking to death of Armenian citizen Gurgen Margaryan by Ramil Safarov, a Lieutenant of the Azerbaijani Army. Both were participants of an English language training course within the framework of the NATO-sponsored “Partnership for Peace” program held in Budapest, Hungary.
Denial is what is keeping this issue alive. Taking responsibility will put this issue in the past. |
|
| Name: |
Carnyx |
Date: Oct 24, 2007 |
| JerseyGuy asked "Why must Turkey take accountability for the dark chapters of their history? "
America does not criminalise those who argue a genocide of native Americans occurred, it does not spend millions on an international campaign of denial, it doesn't threaten and bully countries who think of recognising this genocide, it doesn't educate its children that Native Americans were traitors who stabbed America in the back and who killed more White Americans than they themselves lost. It doesn't prosecute publishers, authors don't get assassinated, and the assassins aren't allowed by the police to parade with the national flag.
All these things happen in Turkey. Turkey has the greater problem dealing with its past because active denial is far worse than omission and in Turkey it is both repressive and breeding a dangerous resentful ethnic ultranationalism. Congress recognising the Armenian genocide makes it a little harder for the Turkish state to deny its past and mislead their citizens into thinking they were the victims of Armenians and that is a good thing for Turkey because it undermines the authoritarian leader worshipping nature of its nationalism.
The fact is America and its morality is irrelevant to condemning the Armenian genocide, just as Welsh, Swedish, German, French, or Argentinean, history is irrelevant to their recognising the Armenian genocide. What matters here is Turkey and its repressive active denial and ultranationalism, that fact alone requires the genocide to be recognised internationally by America and everyone else, until Turkey grows up and faces its past.
It's a laugh you cite Heath Lowry who holds a chair at Princeton funded by the Govt of Turkey and who has been condemned in international academic circles for "scholarly corruption" including a petition against him signed by 100 major academics. You repeat the lie that Turkey has opened its archives while Armenia has not, in fact Turkey restricts access to sensitive documents to only friendly researchers, while Armenian archives have always been open to all, but useless for researching the genocide because Armenia didn't exist until after the genocide occurred, and then it was swallowed up by the Soviet Union.
Luckily though we have enough evidence for genocide in German archives alone, Germany's archives are particularly convincing since they where Turkey's W.W.I allies, but it's not only Germany but British and US archives with corroborating witness testimony from victims, international observers, and many brave Turks.
You go on lying JerseyGuy saying "At the conclusion of WWI Great Britain rounded up everyone they could at the time and held a trial for crimes against humanity and could not prove their case and let everyone go." You are talking about the Ottoman officials held by the British in Malta, in fact no trial ever occurred as the British chose to exchange the officials for British POWs held by Turkey.
Foreign Affairs Minister Lord Curzon said of the Turkish Malta prisoners and their exchange-
"The less we say about these people [the Turks detained at Malta] the better...I had to explain why we released the Turkish deportees from Malta skating over thin ice as quickly as I could. There would have been a row I think...The staunch belief among members [of Parliament is] that one British prisoner is worth a shipload of Turks, and so the exchange was excused," (British Foreign Office Archives, FO 371/7882/E4425, folio 182)
Anyway thanks for the opportunity to prove what a pack of lies Turkish denial is based on, I've done my own research. |
|
| Name: |
JerseyWiseMan |
Date: Oct 24, 2007 |
| As Reference to the comment by Jersey-Guy: Most of the evidence does not come from the testimony of Amb. Morgenthau. Go to the Zoryan Institute where you can spend the rest of your life researching the materials and proofs they have on the Armenian genocide in their library.(ZoryanInatitute.org). The historians have long spoken, it's time now for the politicans to speak. There is no justification for a genocidial act. Few Armenians were guilty who were mostly from Russian Armenia and not from Turkish Armenia. Majority of Armenians were innocents, you cannot massacre the majority of the innocents for the sake of few guilty ones. You can not burn the whole blanket if you cannot get rid of one miserable flea in that blanket if you do that (as the Turks did) it means you have the mind-set or mentality of the serial-killers. Armenians will keep being a thorn in the side of the Turks until the Turks give up their serial killer mentality and become civilized & human. |
|
| Name: |
Richard Plettau |
Date: Oct 24, 2007 |
| Don't forget that, officially, it was a Jihad against ALL Christians in Turkey (but not those in Germany or Austro-Hungary which were allies in WW I). Assyrian Christians and Greek Christians also suffered similar treatment. |
|
| Name: |
Mike |
Date: Oct 24, 2007 |
| Well, what the Turks did to the Armenians and continue to do to the Armenians and Kurds to this present day is Terrorism. The threat of arrest for speaking the truth in Turkey is state sanctioned terrorism against the Christian minority. It is no different than when people were arrested in Afghanistan under the Talibans for converting to Christianity. Both are terror organizations. Because the US hides Turkish atrocities, this hypocrisy will haunt America. America lost its moral high ground. |
|
| Name: |
Ronald Parvanian J.D. |
Date: Oct 24, 2007 |
| No objective and rational person doubts that the Armenian genocide occurred. My great grandfather was beheaded by the Turks for refusing to renounce Christianity and convert to Islam. Supporters of the current bill will ask when is a good time if it is not now? I would ask why now when we need the help of Turkey more than ever. We are in the beginning stages of World War 3! The vast majority of Armenians in the U.S. are deeply entrenched in American society. For example the most decorated Marine of 1942 was one Victor "Transport" Mahakian. However, the Armenian so called "cultural community" centered in our universities and colleges operate in a vacuum. Increasingly preoccupied solely with the genocide of 1915 and the earlier genocide of 1899 and the the subsequent events including the "diaspora" of Armenians throughout the world. As Americans first back off of this now or never ultimatum and seek a set date from the Bush administration to agree to a resolution in exchange for help from the Armenian community.
In 2003 as was mentioned the U.S. offered BILLIONS for the use of Turkish airbases for airstrikes on Iraq. Armenia is located adjacent to Turkey. Members of the Armenian cultural community boast of their strong ties to the nation and government of Armenia. Where was the lobbying by the Armenian cultural community to use Armenia as a staging area for airstrikes? For the amount of money being offered new bases in Armenia (a poor country) could have been built for this purpose. Didn't want to get involved? Opposed to war as a general principal? Whatever! The Armenian community needs to stop sounding like a "one note Johnny" and get involved as Americans first and Armenians second. Incidently my grandparents told me the Kurds were actively involved in the slaughter of the Armenians during the genocide. I understand the present Turkish government is now bombing the Kurds. |
|
| Name: |
REVOLT! |
Date: Oct 25, 2007 |
| we need to wake up from the brainwashing of "american culture" which has us by the balls and almost brain dead, it's time to revolt now and rise up for real! the time is short and no it does not have to be a violent revolution, but this country has to change asap because time is not on our side. |
|
| Name: |
Big V |
Date: Oct 25, 2007 |
| I might not have background in politics, but just out of curiosity, how about the genocide the US did to Native Indians? And while at it, wasn't it Columbus himself who did genocide on Native Indians, too? And just to keep myself rolling, how about Japanese genocide to Chinese people? Now that I managed to catch some attention, can someone of you 'geniuses' define genocide in terms of "necessary number of people needed to be executed for whatever reason in order to fulfill the sinister plans of some retards"? |
|
| Name: |
MARK |
Date: Oct 26, 2007 |
There is a legitimate historical controversy concerning the interpretation of the events in question and most of the scholars who have propounded a contra genocide viewpoint are of the highest calibre and repute, including Bernard Lewis, Stanford Shaw, David Fromkin, Justin McCarthy, Guenther Lewy, Norman Stone, Kamuran Gürün, Michael Gunter, Gilles Veinstein, Andrew Mango, Roderic Davidson, J.C. Hurwitz, William Batkay, Edward J. Erickson and Steven Katz. This is by no means an exhaustive list. A good number of well-respected scholars recognize the deportation decision in 1915, taken under World War I conditions, as a security measure to stop the Armenians from co-operating with the foreign forces invading Anatolia.
On the legal aspect, the elements of the genocide crime are strictly defined and codified by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Genocide, adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1948. However, Armenians, claiming that "the evidence is so overwhelming", so far have failed to submit even one credible evidence of genocide.
IT IS A BIG LIE |
|
| Name: |
Jaganniwas Iyer |
Date: Oct 27, 2007 |
| The dilemma of the American Congress is rooted in short-term political expediency and crass realpolitik. Now obviously, you cannot have it both ways; preaching human rights and values of liberty and tolerance to others and then being toungue-tied about condemning genocide carried out - either in the pat or in the present - by countries that are perceived allies or are seen as convenient to furthering trade interests or seen as delivering a piece of the financial cake. The genocide of Hindus in the Kashmir Valley (an ongoing tragedy) by Islamic terrorists (trained, financed and backed by Pakistan), the ongoing cultural genocide of ancient Tibet by China, and other similar incidents have not drawn even a whimper of protest from the US. China's seeming economic dazzle has possibly awed the US, while Pakistan, itself a terrorist state, is "a valuable ally in the war on teror" (some ally, that is). The Armenian victims of Turkey's genoicide suffer a similar handicap. They're not prized enough. But selective concern for 'human rights' doesn't last long and ends up failing to impress anyone. Jaganniwas Iyer, India |
|
| Name: |
I AM AN AMERICAN JEW |
Date: Oct 27, 2007 |
| I understand and sympathize with this as I am a Jew and my people went through ethnic cleansing which is the only definition of genocide, not what the Armenians have labeled as Genocide, which was a massacre. If it was true genocide, then at the same time that this was happening the Ottoman Empire that was occupying Palestine and Jerusalem would have wiped out the Armenian Quarter that resided there. However, instead they gave them many freedoms. Therefore, once more this Turkish/Armenian massacre, was not a genocide, but a horrific consequence of war in which all sides lost many.
As Jewish woman I have a huge respect for the Ottoman Empire as they gave us freedom of religion to not only Jews but to the Christians as well. My grandfather was born under the Ottoman Empire in Jerusalem. We return to our history books that once again show us that the Ottomans allowed freedom of religion unlike every other empire that existed. This set the precedence for a friendship between Israel and Turkey. Obviously one does not befriend its enemy. Jerusalem has had an Armenian quarter for centuries. In all honesty, if the Ottomans goal was ethnic cleansing then they would have started in Jerusalem. In fact, under the Ottoman Empire, the Armenians would withhold their taxes as they added onto their churches. Much like when one adds an addition to their home their homes are reassessed. This is what we call "following the law". It is a known fact that even though they refused to pay taxes the Ottomans still did not initiate a war much less any kind of genocide. It is easy to see that the Palestine and Jerusalem occupation was at the same timeline that this so-called genocide had occurred. There is proof in this. So I ask Chris Helms and the Armenian community why the Armenians of Jerusalem who now have a thriving quarter were spared? Could it be that the Armenians massacred were only the victims of war?
When the public is given the correct information, then we can make an intelligent choice. Our history books give us the proof as the Armenians had a complete alphabet at that time and kept good records as did the Ottomans. However in 2007 history ignored and replaced with slanting, propaganda and lies.
The House's decision to rewrite history and call the Armenian/Turkish conflict as genocide is ridiculous. Not even the United Nations or Israel has supported this as true. It was not racially motivated. There was no ethnic cleansing. If this held any truth then the Armenian quarter could have been wiped out in an hour but instead was respected by the Muslim Ottomans allowing the Armenian quarter to flourish and grow giving them freedom of religion.
Was every massacre throughout history motivated by ethnic cleansing? Certainly not. What Hitler tried to accomplish is a far cry from any Armenian so-called genocide. You cannot deny that many Armenians lost their lives as they were looking for a land of their own, however, what is not recognized is that the Armenians themselves inflicted as much damage as others in the hostilities of that time for their own selfish objectives.
The Turk's only policy was the removal of Armenians from the front line with Russia, where they were collaborating with the Ottoman Empire's enemies. They were a threat to security. This is called war.
Regarding persecution, the Ottomans had one of the most tolerant policies towards non-Turks of any empire of its day. The three communities of Jews, Greeks and Armenians were virtually autonomous within the empire. It cannot be denied that throughout history the Ottoman Empire unlike any other empire of its time allowed Jews to practice their own religion as well as many freedoms of their time. When the Ottoman Empire had taken over Jerusalem had they tried to annihilate the strong presence of the Armenians who had their own quarter? Never. Could you say that the Russians committed genocide against the Circassians and Adyghes? If you could then the Armenians slaughtered 200,000 people including Turks and Kurds and Jews in Eastern Anatolia during Turkey's Independence War while the Turks were fighting against the imperial powers of Europe in 5 fronts. Armenians took the advantage of Turks' weak position and waged a war against them by opening a new front. But, this was war.
In a recent article in the Jerusalem Post Armenians in Israel led a small protest and were upset that Israel had not taken an official position. One would think that Israel would be the first country to define Genocide with its own history. The problem is that Genocide is being used as a loose term. Israel, a people who have tasted the bitterness of ethnic cleansing would be the first to declare this as a genocide. They have had nearly 90 years to do so. Instead, they have befriended Turkey as the two nations train their military together and have become close allies.
Here in the year 2007 nearly 100 years after the decline of the Ottoman Empire Armenians are still trying wake the dead in this controversy. This is alike to Black African Americans looking for reparations for slavery. And like this it falls upon deaf ears. Society has little tolerance for people with a chip on their shoulder.
It is not enough that this country had not learned from Vietnam and Iraq, but now the House wants to re-write history concerning the Armenian Turkish conflict. The problem is, the West is trying to judge history with respect to its own historical and cultural references. Racism is a Western concept, which didn't have a place in Turkish or Ottoman history and the West cannot understand anti-racist Ottomans. Annihilation is a Western concept and the West cannot understand the Ottomans which chose to let live instead of wipe out. Assimilation is a Western concept and the West cannot accept the fact that different ethnic groups could live together.
Mainstream Western understanding has given the word "culture" a specific meaning and does not understand culture beyond that. And it chooses to denigrate what it does not understand. The problem is, the last real empire that the West had was the Roman Empire. Later so-called "empires" were only colonial formations, not real empires, and depended on exploitation and repression. Like Ilber Ortayli said, the last Roman type empire was the Ottoman empire.
You can't really expect the (declining) Western powers to understand and appreciate something that is really different from their understanding of politics. That's like Americans appreciating Martian culture and politics. However while the House voted, acknowledging the Armenian Genocide, it disregarded the Azerbaijan Genocide of 1905-1907 by the Armenians. War is war. This genocide happened as much as the Jews crucified Jesus. When will the House stop robbing Peter to pay Paul?
|
|
| Name: |
John |
Date: Oct 30, 2007 |
| Your history is mixed-up Dear 'American Jew.' The Turks did not give the order to exterminate the Armenians in Anatolia. The Young Turks, who in majority were crypto-Jews and followers of Sabattai Zevi and Jacob Frank were the ones who gave that order. They did not order extermination of Jerusalem Armenians because they knew an order like that will NOT be obeyed and carried on in Jerusalem. Those crypto-Jews of the Ottoman Empire wanted to clean Anatolia so they could have repopulated it with their fellow Jews from Russia-that plan did not work because they lost the war. Ancient Armenia was were the Garden of Eden and Mt. Ararat were located which are two holy places for the Jews after Jerusalem and Mt. Sinai. Armenians were uprooted from land they lived on for thousands of years, in contrast your people were aliens to Germany & Poland. What the Nazis did to some of your people can be considered a vacation holiday to what the Turks were manipulated to do to the Armenians by those crypt-Jews. The other day I read a recent article by an Israeli writer living in Israel and without shame in his article he said Armenians were Ameliketes and historical enemy to Jews and deserve what comes upon them. All his assuptions were erronious and not a shred of truth in them proving once more who are the liars here. |
|
| Name: |
kevin |
Date: Nov 07, 2007 |
| I totally agree with the "American Jew". Besides the Ottoman Empire ruled for 600 years. If the intention was to commit genocide on Armenians there were definitely more suitable times than 1915 when the Ottoman Empire was invaded by foreign armies on 7 different fronts.
The Armenians who were living in the eastern part of ottoman Empire joined the invading ennemies in 1915, in able to have their own state around the holy Mountain Ararat in Turkey and killed alltogether 5 million Ottomans. What did a newly political party called young Turks, the party's complete name was "Union and Progress Party" which existed for 10 years between 1908 and 1918 to defend the other people of Ottoman Empire from the attacs of Armenians? They gave the order of RELOCATION to Syria of these Armenians who were treaching their own people Ottomans. Syria at that time was still a region in the Ottoman Empire
All the founding members of The Union and progress Party, Talat, Enver and Cemal Pascha were killed on the open street by Armenian terrorists in Germany, Russia and Georgien in the beginning of 1920. Now let's here what the worlds most prominent historians say about this issue. Please have a look at the following videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCmg7AdM1tU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7Q77jAaIhk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr0kWla0UFs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_p7lh2m8Vw
.....
And some more useful links:
http://www.ermenisorunu.gen.tr/english/intro/index.html
http://www.sarigelinbelgeseli.com/indexi.php
http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/
P.S. This allegation by Armenians have become a billion dollar industry for them. Armenian lobbysts' and Armenian diaspora's annual budget for this purpose is 100 billion dollars.
A question to the Armenian diaspora?:
If it was a genocide would you need 100 years to make it labelled as a genocide...!?
|
|
| Discussion for this article has been closed. |
| |
Contact FPIF's webmaster with inquiries regarding the functionality of this website.
Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies.
|
|
|
|
