Tweet
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/yazarDetay.do?ha berno=3D120251
Zaman August 24, 2007
Columnists
ALI H. ASLAN [email protected] Politics
Time for a plan B over 'genocide'
Here we go. The Anti Defamation League (ADL) has issued a
statement acknowledging the Armenian "genocide." This is the first
public endorsement of the Armenian cause by a prominent American Jewish
organization. Am I surprised? Not necessarily -- I sort of knew it was
coming. From my conversations with representatives of American Jewish
lobby groups, I had the impression that there was no consensus on this
controversial matter. Make no mistake, there has always been some
agreement in American Jewish community that those events were
"tantamount to genocide." That's the same case with most other "friends"
of Turkey. But believing something is one thing, and revealing it
publicly is one another. Recently, there has obviously been a tendency
to speak more openly on this matter.
The ADL's position is this: Yes, this was genocide, but the
US Congress should not say so. Frankly, in some ways, I find the ADL
intellectually more honest than many other Jewish organizations. The
Jewish organizations investing in better Turkish-Israeli-American
relations have been trying to be politically correct toward Turkey. The
ADL is more honest because this is what most Jewish organizations have
always believed but had yet to say it publicly. The ADL stops short of
supporting the Armenian genocide resolution in Congress because they
think it would be "counterproductive." If one believes the Jewish
genocide (that is, the Holocaust) should have consequences but an
"Armenian genocide" should not, that is not completely honest. That's
the main problem with the ADL's position. On the other hand, to be fair,
when it comes to talking about politically charged issues like the
Armenian genocide allegations, to expect full honesty from any party
involved would be luxury. There are serious gaps between public and
private positions.
Take the US government for instance. Publicly, they fall
slightly short of naming it "genocide." But I'm sure privately most of
the officials believe it is. "Ethnic cleansing" and "forced exile" are
not things any nation can be proud of. When the US government uses such
terms instead of genocide, we Turks are relieved! In sum, although the
executive branch deep inside agrees there was a genocide against
Armenians, they refuse to call it such because that is
"counterproductive." What's at stake here for them is further
intimidating Turks and hurting US interests within Turkey and its
neighborhood. The three foremost important foreign policy matters for
the US in our region nowadays -- Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan -- require
Ankara's uninterrupted cooperation.
The US Congress is another story. Again, even among the
so-called "friends" of Turkey, including the Turkish caucus, there is
less doubt the events of 1915 were tantamount to a "genocide." Two
hundred and twenty-five of the 435 representatives have publicly
endorsed the Armenian resolution. Again, most of those who have yet to
publicly support the bill believe it is "counterproductive" to say what
they think. It is easy to test my analysis. Tell me how many US
representatives have publicly said so far there is no such thing as an
Armenian genocide. You'll hardly remember any. The senators have
generally a more statesmanlike attitude than the representatives;
therefore the Senate position would fall somewhat between the executive
branch and the House.
Now that the ADL has opened Pandora's box on the part of
powerful Jewish lobby groups, Turkey faces a bigger challenge. Whoever I
talk to in Washington has said sooner or later an Armenian genocide
resolution would pass. It's just a matter of timing and convenience.
Fortunately, the serious problems the US faces in our region have made
it less convenient for American politicians to finalize the bill.
Although current congressional leaders with the Democratic Party seem to
be more inclined to go ahead, it is not completely unlikely that
"national interest" and "national security" arguments would once again
prevail.
The Armenian lobby groups and their collaborators in the US
are trying hard to punish Turkey with this resolution. Frankly, I
believe the process so far has been an even harsher punishment than the
final outcome. The issue consumes a considerable deal of Turkish
diplomatic energy and resources, which could have been otherwise spent
in pursuing more tangible national interests. We can spend our and our
supporters' political capital on other issues. I don't want to sound
like a defeatist but as a realist in foreign policy matters I think
Ankara needs to give a second thought to whether the issue deserves that
level of commitment. The more Turkey seems to be intimidated, the more
mistakes we might make, the more advertisement the Armenian genocide
thesis gets and the happier our international adversaries become. We
have obviously lost debates among US intellectuals, are increasingly
losing them among NGOs like the ADL -- and it looks like sooner or later
we will lose the battle in the US Congress. Perhaps now it's time for
preparing the Turkish public for more negative outcomes and to reflect
on better strategies rather than sticking with the same old tactics.
24.08.2007
Zaman August 24, 2007
Columnists
ALI H. ASLAN [email protected] Politics
Time for a plan B over 'genocide'
Here we go. The Anti Defamation League (ADL) has issued a
statement acknowledging the Armenian "genocide." This is the first
public endorsement of the Armenian cause by a prominent American Jewish
organization. Am I surprised? Not necessarily -- I sort of knew it was
coming. From my conversations with representatives of American Jewish
lobby groups, I had the impression that there was no consensus on this
controversial matter. Make no mistake, there has always been some
agreement in American Jewish community that those events were
"tantamount to genocide." That's the same case with most other "friends"
of Turkey. But believing something is one thing, and revealing it
publicly is one another. Recently, there has obviously been a tendency
to speak more openly on this matter.
The ADL's position is this: Yes, this was genocide, but the
US Congress should not say so. Frankly, in some ways, I find the ADL
intellectually more honest than many other Jewish organizations. The
Jewish organizations investing in better Turkish-Israeli-American
relations have been trying to be politically correct toward Turkey. The
ADL is more honest because this is what most Jewish organizations have
always believed but had yet to say it publicly. The ADL stops short of
supporting the Armenian genocide resolution in Congress because they
think it would be "counterproductive." If one believes the Jewish
genocide (that is, the Holocaust) should have consequences but an
"Armenian genocide" should not, that is not completely honest. That's
the main problem with the ADL's position. On the other hand, to be fair,
when it comes to talking about politically charged issues like the
Armenian genocide allegations, to expect full honesty from any party
involved would be luxury. There are serious gaps between public and
private positions.
Take the US government for instance. Publicly, they fall
slightly short of naming it "genocide." But I'm sure privately most of
the officials believe it is. "Ethnic cleansing" and "forced exile" are
not things any nation can be proud of. When the US government uses such
terms instead of genocide, we Turks are relieved! In sum, although the
executive branch deep inside agrees there was a genocide against
Armenians, they refuse to call it such because that is
"counterproductive." What's at stake here for them is further
intimidating Turks and hurting US interests within Turkey and its
neighborhood. The three foremost important foreign policy matters for
the US in our region nowadays -- Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan -- require
Ankara's uninterrupted cooperation.
The US Congress is another story. Again, even among the
so-called "friends" of Turkey, including the Turkish caucus, there is
less doubt the events of 1915 were tantamount to a "genocide." Two
hundred and twenty-five of the 435 representatives have publicly
endorsed the Armenian resolution. Again, most of those who have yet to
publicly support the bill believe it is "counterproductive" to say what
they think. It is easy to test my analysis. Tell me how many US
representatives have publicly said so far there is no such thing as an
Armenian genocide. You'll hardly remember any. The senators have
generally a more statesmanlike attitude than the representatives;
therefore the Senate position would fall somewhat between the executive
branch and the House.
Now that the ADL has opened Pandora's box on the part of
powerful Jewish lobby groups, Turkey faces a bigger challenge. Whoever I
talk to in Washington has said sooner or later an Armenian genocide
resolution would pass. It's just a matter of timing and convenience.
Fortunately, the serious problems the US faces in our region have made
it less convenient for American politicians to finalize the bill.
Although current congressional leaders with the Democratic Party seem to
be more inclined to go ahead, it is not completely unlikely that
"national interest" and "national security" arguments would once again
prevail.
The Armenian lobby groups and their collaborators in the US
are trying hard to punish Turkey with this resolution. Frankly, I
believe the process so far has been an even harsher punishment than the
final outcome. The issue consumes a considerable deal of Turkish
diplomatic energy and resources, which could have been otherwise spent
in pursuing more tangible national interests. We can spend our and our
supporters' political capital on other issues. I don't want to sound
like a defeatist but as a realist in foreign policy matters I think
Ankara needs to give a second thought to whether the issue deserves that
level of commitment. The more Turkey seems to be intimidated, the more
mistakes we might make, the more advertisement the Armenian genocide
thesis gets and the happier our international adversaries become. We
have obviously lost debates among US intellectuals, are increasingly
losing them among NGOs like the ADL -- and it looks like sooner or later
we will lose the battle in the US Congress. Perhaps now it's time for
preparing the Turkish public for more negative outcomes and to reflect
on better strategies rather than sticking with the same old tactics.
24.08.2007