Tweet
The Armenian Weekly On-Line
80 Bigelow Avenue
Watertown MA 02472 USA
(617) 926-3974
[email protected]
http://www.ar menianweekly.com
The Armenian Weekly; Volume 73, No. 43; Oct. 27, 2007
Commentary and Analysis:
1. Editorial: Ahmadinejad in Armenia
2. When is the Right Time to Finally Recognize the Genocide?
By Michael G. Mensoian
3. Letters to the Editor
***
Editorial: Ahmadinejad in Armenia
With the Turkish and Azerbaijani blockade on Armenia, Iran has become a
lifeline for the landlocked republic. Bilateral relations are good and the
Islamic Republic hosts a vibrant Armenian community that has lived there
peacefully centuries. All this has made high-ranking Iranian officials,
including present-day president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, welcomed guests in
Armenia since 1991. Yerevan State University has also been lavish, perhaps
more than necessary, in bestowing honorary doctorates on visiting heads of
state in the past.
The Iranian president received a warm welcome from the political leadership
of Armenia, and, like other visiting heads of state, he also had the
opportunity to speak to university students in Yerevan-just as he spoke
recently at Columbia University in New York.
Yet, why did Yerevan State University bestow an honorary doctorate and a
gold medal on a politician who has shown complete disregard to basic
historical research and memory by denying the Jewish Holocaust?
One of the manifestations of Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial is calling for
further "impartial" studies on WWII. We have heard that same argument
regarding the Armenian genocide from Turkey and its allies.
The same day Ahmadinejad met with Armenian officials and received the
honorary doctorate, he decided to cut his visit to Armenia short. The reason
for this remains unclear. According to several reports, he either wanted to
avoid visiting the Armenian Genocide Memorial in Yerevan fearing, criticism
>From Turkey, or he was responding to political problems at home.
It would not be surprising if visiting the memorial and planting a sapling
in memory of the victims-as was planned-was viewed as potentially harmful to
Turkish-Iranian relations, and that Ahmadinejad left Armenia to escape that
visit. Trying to avoid hurting Turkey's "feelings" seems to be the norm
these days, with Ahmadinejad, the Bush Administration, many in Congress, and
even some human rights organizations on the same page when it comes to this
issue.
The university's decision to bestow an honorary doctorate is simply
unacceptable. We are surprised that university and government officials of a
nation that rose from the ashes of a genocide did not take this fact into
consideration before deciding to award the honorary degree.
------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- -------
When is the Right Time to Finally Recognize the Genocide?
By Michael G. Mensoian
The resolution to recognize the Armenian genocide finally had its day. By a
favorable vote of 27 to 21, the House Foreign Relations Committee sent the
resolution to the full House for debate. Majority leader Nancy Pelosi will
decide the most efficacious time for it to be considered prior to the
holiday recess.
In the meantime, pressure from Turkey continues unabated. President Abdullah
Gul and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan have publicly expressed their
dismay, alluding to the serious harm passage of the resolution will have on
Turkey's policy of cooperation with the United States and the psyche of the
Turkish people. In a more ominous tone, Turkey's military chief, Gen. Yasar
Buyukanit, warns that passage of the resolution would damage his country's
military ties with an important ally. The Bush White House, with its
inexhaustible list of surrogates, continues to lobby the House to vote
against the resolution. The big guns have been lined up: eight former
Secretaries of State, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Defense
Secretary Robert Gates. On the ground in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus and U. S
Ambassador Ryan Crocker have also voiced their concerns with respect to
Turkey's continued assistance of the United States effort in Iraq. In
Ankara, the Turkish Foreign Ministry has expressed its displeasure to Ross
Wilson, the United States Ambassador to Turkey. For an added dramatic
flourish, Adm. Metin Atac, senior officer in the Turkish navy, unexpectedly
and without explanation had his visit to the United States cancelled, and
the Turkish Ambassador to the United States, Nabi Sansoy, was immediately
recalled for consultations. A Turkish-U.S. Business Council meeting in New
York has also been cancelled. These are the normal theatrics in the game of
diplomacy.
How quickly the "nay" voters have forgotten Turkey's refusal to allow our
troops and equipment to transit their territory into northern Iraq during
the early days of the war. This would have allowed a giant pincers' movement
>From the north and south toward Baghdad that had the potential to reduce the
number of casualties our troops suffered. How convenient for pro-Turkish
House committee members to overlook the comments that Turkish leaders have
made and continue to make concerning their ability to maintain current
levels of cooperation ostensibly against the public's outcry. Is this how a
friendly government responds to an "ally?"
Paradoxically, while some of the committee members were extolling Turkey as
a beacon of democracy within the region, the Turkish courts invoked Article
301 of the Turkish penal code to convict Arat Dink for republishing the
article that led to his father's assassination in January of this year. That
Arat Dink received a one-year suspended sentence is irrelevant. Is this how
Turkish democracy works, by stifling free speech? This egregious affront to
basic human rights took place within hours of and presumably in response to
the favorable vote on the Genocide Resolution by the House Committee on
Foreign Relations.
Then to assuage their own guilt, these same apologists for Turkey give lip
service to the deaths of the 1,500,000 Armenians during the period from 1915
to 1917 by saying it was a grievous wrong, but that now is not the right
time to recognize the Armenian genocide. There's something illogical with
that line of thinking. When is the right time to finally recognize the
Armenian Genocide? There is something reprehensible about an administration,
especially the leadership of a democracy like the United States, that
ignores the truth and decides which genocide to recognize on the basis of
political expediency.
During the committee hearings, numerous statistics were cited to show that
Turkey is an indispensable conduit for United States military equipment and
supplies destined for Iraq. None of these apologists were interested in
mentioning that the Turkish economy is benefiting in terms of U.S dollars
spent and jobs created. Do the U.S. taxpayers know how much it may have cost
them to develop the NATO air facility at Incirlik, Turkey? The Bush
administration would lead us to believe that Turkish cooperation is based on
some concept of national altruism.
None of the committee members who oppose the resolution consider Turkey's
blockade of its border with Armenia as a hostile act; a neighbor with whom
there is no declaration of war. How is Turkey as a member of NATO allowed to
take punitive action against a peaceful neighboring state? The government in
Yerevan has long been agreeable to a normalization of diplomatic relations
with Turkey without any preconditions. Turkey has consistently rejected this
conciliatory offer. Any objective analysis leads to the simple conclusion
that Turkey prefers to maintain its adversarial position with respect to
Armenia. A politically vibrant and economically viable Armenia is anathema
to Turkish interests. Yet the United States does nothing one-on-one or
through NATO to pressure Turkey to alter its stance vis-à-vis Armenia.
Further, what is the United States doing to level the economic and military
playing field for Armenia with respect to Azerbaijan and Georgia?
As the debate unfolds in Congress, Turkey will seek and receive
parliamentary approval to undertake a full-scale military operation in
northern Iraq against separatists of the PKK (Partiya Karkeren Kurdistan)
who seek an independent Kurdistan. Any Turkish military incursion into Iraqi
Kurdistan to root out PKK insurgents seeking refuge has the potential to
destabilize the region. The fact that this operation would be detrimental to
United States' interests in Iraq and increase the potential for the loss of
additional American military deaths seems of no concern to our Turkish ally.
Prime Minister Erdogan is quoted by Reuters correspondent Ferit Demir saying
that "[w]e don't need anyone's advice on northern Iraq and the operation to
be carried out there." Then if that is so, why would United States
Congressmen need Turkey's advice on the Genocide Resolution they seek to
pass? Evidently Turkish leaders believe that advice flows in only one
direction: from Ankara to Washington.
For the moment, those who embrace the Armenian Cause have won a strategic if
not epic victory in the House Committee on Foreign Affairs against an
unparalleled attempt by Turkey and the Bush administration to prevent a
favorable vote.
Since nothing in politics can be guaranteed, the most optimistic statement
that may be made is that the Genocide Resolution will probably pass the
House if and when it is brought to the floor for debate. The various
interest groups, especially the Armenian National Committee, have done
yeoman service in successfully countering the full arsenal of resources
available to Washington and Ankara. Against that backdrop, Catholicos
Karekin II's Invocation before the House of Representatives on Wednesday was
a tribute to the Armenian people and a significant symbolic statement on
behalf of the Genocide Resolution.
The favorable committee hearing that occurred recently is only a skirmish
preceding the main battle that will be waged on the House floor. In
anticipation of this, there is sentiment in the House committee that will
most likely extend to the full House to pass a companion resolution
confirming Turkish-United States solidarity. The purpose is to soften the
impact that passage of the Genocide Resolution will have in Turkey.
However, the outcome of the Genocide Resolution in the Senate is
problematic. Since international politics has neither moral nor ethical
guidelines, it would not be uncharacteristic if the Senate is swayed solely
by the consequences that passage of the resolution will have on
Turkish-United States relations. A "nay" vote will have no connection to the
merits of the resolution. This response is far different then how the House
will have hopefully responded. Foreign policy is the bailiwick of the
Senate. Given that scenario, a compromise will have been engineered that
would please the administration and be reluctantly accepted by the Turkish
government. This could be manipulated by Ankara as a significant victory.
The Bush administration will have rewarded Turkey for its intransigence and
its policy of historic revisionism.
Knowing that there is a possibility for this scenario to be played out
requires that efforts be redoubled to counter the unprecedented pressure
that Turkey and the Bush administration will bring to bear on the Senate.
There are fewer senators to influence and since the vote should follow close
along party lines, a shift of only several votes will make the difference
between victory and defeat. Senators, unlike Representatives, sit for terms
of six years and run state-wide campaigns. They are influenced less by
ethnic concentrations of voters in the House districts or the short-term
swings in voter interest.
The debate surrounding the resolution to recognize the Armenian genocide has
reawakened the public's awareness of the first genocide of the modern era.
On both sides of the Atlantic, people can judge for themselves the
perfidiousness of the Turkish leaders. In the face of an established
historic fact, the obduracy of both Turkey and the United States cannot help
but elicit sympathy for the Armenian Cause, which could be of value sometime
in the future. Without help from others, Turkey can be seen for what it
really is: a nondemocratic state masquerading as a democracy aided and
abetted by the Bush administration.
---------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -----
3. Letters to the Editor
Dear Editor,
The last time a human rights issue created so much soul searching in America
was probably Sept. 22, 1862, when Abraham Lincoln signed a presidential
decree for the emancipation of the slaves.
The House Foreign Relations Committee vote 27-21 on H.Res.106, acknowledging
the Armenian genocide, is the emancipation of the survivors of the victims
of the genocide. This is a giant step forward for more reverence to human
dignity here in the United States of America and in the context of our image
in the world both for our allies and for our adversaries.
This is the greatest gesture of love and respect to the Turkish people.
Those who advocate denial treat the Turkish people as sub-human beings not
able to handle the truth. Our NATO brother-in-arms should know that, just as
David Kaczynski brought his brother Theodore John Kaczynski [the
"unabomber"] to justice, America will not stand idle for deniers of
genocide.
President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of
Defense Robert Gates by opposing this human rights initiative, are giving
the green light to the Turkish government to go ahead and commit another
genocide against its Kurdish population.
All the necessary elements are there: The PKK has been declared a terrorist
organization and the Kurdish minority living in Turkey could easily be
accused of supporting it. George Bush has given his blessings to the Turkish
generals, and there could not be a more perfect opportunity for another
ethnic cleansing.
People who oppose this human rights issue are bigots and racists who do not
think that the Turkish people have the common sense and the decency to be
treated as civilized human beings. Instead, these deniers are treating the
Turks as if they are the "Barbarian of the Middle East" who cannot be
treated as equals to people living in Western democracies.
While we do not deny the Holocaust because we have bases and enlisted
personnel in Germany, these people make us believe that we should treat the
Turks as sub-human barbarians and let their governments deny a crime so that
we can use their bases. What's next? The September 11 attacks never
happened, or it was a civil war?
While other countries are criticized, sanctioned and attacked when they
conquer a neighboring country, according to the U.S. State Department it is
O.K. for the Turkish government to attack and conquer half of Cyprus. Why?
Because we have to appease our barbarian friends so that we can keep our
bases in their country.
It is a shame that the present administration still opposes this important
human rights achievement. It is a disgrace that there are still people
amongst us who see no harm in denying a crime for profit.
This administration and its supporters marched into the White House as the
defenders of faith and family values. Yet, they turned out to be a pack of
wolves ready to sell America's honor to criminals.
I am proud of my representative Congressman Eliot Engle who voted for this
resolution.
I urge you to make sure that your representative votes for the passage of
H.Res.106 when the bill comes to the House floor.
Kevork Kalayjian
***
Dear Editor,
Great work getting the Armenian Weekly on Google News!
I always google "Armenian genocide" to get the latest information on the
internet, and was very happy to see the Weekly articles!
We need to get into the mainstream. We have a lot of ignorance on our
issues, and a whole lot of propoganda to fight off.
Rich Sanikian
Fresno, Calif.
***
Dear Editor,
The American-Jewish community came out against the ADL for its position on
the Armenian genocide. The recent congressional bill recognizing the
Armenian genocide had the overwhelming support of the Jewish members of
Congress. So visible was the Jewish community's support for the official
recognition of the Armenian genocide in the U.S. that Turkey's government,
this week, blamed the Jewish community for the bill itself and the bad press
surrounding it. And yet, nonetheless, on Oct. 22, the Armenian government
and the Yerevan State University gave a denier of the Jewish Holocaust,
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the royal treatment, and an honorary
doctorate.
Daniel Sieradski
***
Response to Jeri Zeder
Dear Mr. Zeder,
Thank you for your comments (Letters, Oct. 14). Since you have taken the
time to write, it is incumbent upon me to respond to your concerns.
First, it is unfair for you to say that I claimed ".a lock-step relationship
between the Israeli government and Jews around the world." My article refers
to the message Turkish Ambassador Namik Tan delivered to Israel. Mr. Tan
specifically stated that "[o]n some issues there is no such thing as Israel
cannot deliver." My comment you objected to simply stated that "[t]his
expectation by the Turkish government is not based on supposition, but on a
realistic understanding of the relationship that the Israel government has
with the Jewish Diaspora" (emphasis mine). Where is the lock step that you
refer to? Please note the words I used: relationship and has and the Jewish
Diaspora. My statement in no way suggests lock step, which implies absolute
control. Lock step is what Ambassador Tan alluded to. The Ambassador should
be the object of your displeasure.
You say that "[h]ysterical rhetoric, conspiracy theories and buy-in to
anti-Semitic lies do nothing for the cause of genocide denial." Mr. Zeder,
what have you read that would prompt such "hysterical rhetoric" on your
part?" Inflammatory language serves no useful purpose.
You mention that the article "refuses to acknowledge the real pain and
soul-searching..." that you have witnessed in the Jewish community.
May I quote from my articles? "There are many parallels between the Armenian
people and the Jewish people, both of whom have a large Diaspora. The Jewish
people fully understand the suffering and hurt that the Armenian people have
experienced." (Weekly, Aug. 25).
May I quote again from my articles? "Their position [the ADL] does a
disservice to the Jewish people who have a long and well documented history
of fighting injustices." (Weekly, Aug. 25).
May I quote from my articles again? "I have served as co-chair and
participant in Holocaust Observances in the City of Newton, Mass., while a
commissioner on the Newton Human Rights Commission. I hold dear a letter
>From Lenny Zakim, then New England director of the ADL, thanking me for my
efforts. His death was a severe loss to the entire community. I mentioned
this because I have always respected the mission of the ADL." (Weekly, Sept.
8). Mr. Zeder, please note my reference to Lenny Zakim's death as a loss to
the entire community, not just to the Jewish community.
Again, may I quote from my articles? "The ability of the national ADL to
speak out on the mass killing of ethnic minorities as a political solution
has been its principal strength and perhaps its most significant
contribution to the elimination of hate and prejudice." (Weekly, Oct. 6).
You mention your approval of Martin Luther King's style of activism. His
accolades are well deserved. However, to ascribe to me a role as an activist
is a compliment that I really do not deserve.
I appreciate this opportunity to correct any misinterpretation you have had
with respect to my objective analysis of events. However, I can fully
appreciate that these are passionate issueswhich easily tend to elicit
emotional responses.
Sincerely,
Michael G. Mensoian
80 Bigelow Avenue
Watertown MA 02472 USA
(617) 926-3974
[email protected]
http://www.ar menianweekly.com
The Armenian Weekly; Volume 73, No. 43; Oct. 27, 2007
Commentary and Analysis:
1. Editorial: Ahmadinejad in Armenia
2. When is the Right Time to Finally Recognize the Genocide?
By Michael G. Mensoian
3. Letters to the Editor
***
Editorial: Ahmadinejad in Armenia
With the Turkish and Azerbaijani blockade on Armenia, Iran has become a
lifeline for the landlocked republic. Bilateral relations are good and the
Islamic Republic hosts a vibrant Armenian community that has lived there
peacefully centuries. All this has made high-ranking Iranian officials,
including present-day president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, welcomed guests in
Armenia since 1991. Yerevan State University has also been lavish, perhaps
more than necessary, in bestowing honorary doctorates on visiting heads of
state in the past.
The Iranian president received a warm welcome from the political leadership
of Armenia, and, like other visiting heads of state, he also had the
opportunity to speak to university students in Yerevan-just as he spoke
recently at Columbia University in New York.
Yet, why did Yerevan State University bestow an honorary doctorate and a
gold medal on a politician who has shown complete disregard to basic
historical research and memory by denying the Jewish Holocaust?
One of the manifestations of Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial is calling for
further "impartial" studies on WWII. We have heard that same argument
regarding the Armenian genocide from Turkey and its allies.
The same day Ahmadinejad met with Armenian officials and received the
honorary doctorate, he decided to cut his visit to Armenia short. The reason
for this remains unclear. According to several reports, he either wanted to
avoid visiting the Armenian Genocide Memorial in Yerevan fearing, criticism
>From Turkey, or he was responding to political problems at home.
It would not be surprising if visiting the memorial and planting a sapling
in memory of the victims-as was planned-was viewed as potentially harmful to
Turkish-Iranian relations, and that Ahmadinejad left Armenia to escape that
visit. Trying to avoid hurting Turkey's "feelings" seems to be the norm
these days, with Ahmadinejad, the Bush Administration, many in Congress, and
even some human rights organizations on the same page when it comes to this
issue.
The university's decision to bestow an honorary doctorate is simply
unacceptable. We are surprised that university and government officials of a
nation that rose from the ashes of a genocide did not take this fact into
consideration before deciding to award the honorary degree.
------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- -------
When is the Right Time to Finally Recognize the Genocide?
By Michael G. Mensoian
The resolution to recognize the Armenian genocide finally had its day. By a
favorable vote of 27 to 21, the House Foreign Relations Committee sent the
resolution to the full House for debate. Majority leader Nancy Pelosi will
decide the most efficacious time for it to be considered prior to the
holiday recess.
In the meantime, pressure from Turkey continues unabated. President Abdullah
Gul and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan have publicly expressed their
dismay, alluding to the serious harm passage of the resolution will have on
Turkey's policy of cooperation with the United States and the psyche of the
Turkish people. In a more ominous tone, Turkey's military chief, Gen. Yasar
Buyukanit, warns that passage of the resolution would damage his country's
military ties with an important ally. The Bush White House, with its
inexhaustible list of surrogates, continues to lobby the House to vote
against the resolution. The big guns have been lined up: eight former
Secretaries of State, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Defense
Secretary Robert Gates. On the ground in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus and U. S
Ambassador Ryan Crocker have also voiced their concerns with respect to
Turkey's continued assistance of the United States effort in Iraq. In
Ankara, the Turkish Foreign Ministry has expressed its displeasure to Ross
Wilson, the United States Ambassador to Turkey. For an added dramatic
flourish, Adm. Metin Atac, senior officer in the Turkish navy, unexpectedly
and without explanation had his visit to the United States cancelled, and
the Turkish Ambassador to the United States, Nabi Sansoy, was immediately
recalled for consultations. A Turkish-U.S. Business Council meeting in New
York has also been cancelled. These are the normal theatrics in the game of
diplomacy.
How quickly the "nay" voters have forgotten Turkey's refusal to allow our
troops and equipment to transit their territory into northern Iraq during
the early days of the war. This would have allowed a giant pincers' movement
>From the north and south toward Baghdad that had the potential to reduce the
number of casualties our troops suffered. How convenient for pro-Turkish
House committee members to overlook the comments that Turkish leaders have
made and continue to make concerning their ability to maintain current
levels of cooperation ostensibly against the public's outcry. Is this how a
friendly government responds to an "ally?"
Paradoxically, while some of the committee members were extolling Turkey as
a beacon of democracy within the region, the Turkish courts invoked Article
301 of the Turkish penal code to convict Arat Dink for republishing the
article that led to his father's assassination in January of this year. That
Arat Dink received a one-year suspended sentence is irrelevant. Is this how
Turkish democracy works, by stifling free speech? This egregious affront to
basic human rights took place within hours of and presumably in response to
the favorable vote on the Genocide Resolution by the House Committee on
Foreign Relations.
Then to assuage their own guilt, these same apologists for Turkey give lip
service to the deaths of the 1,500,000 Armenians during the period from 1915
to 1917 by saying it was a grievous wrong, but that now is not the right
time to recognize the Armenian genocide. There's something illogical with
that line of thinking. When is the right time to finally recognize the
Armenian Genocide? There is something reprehensible about an administration,
especially the leadership of a democracy like the United States, that
ignores the truth and decides which genocide to recognize on the basis of
political expediency.
During the committee hearings, numerous statistics were cited to show that
Turkey is an indispensable conduit for United States military equipment and
supplies destined for Iraq. None of these apologists were interested in
mentioning that the Turkish economy is benefiting in terms of U.S dollars
spent and jobs created. Do the U.S. taxpayers know how much it may have cost
them to develop the NATO air facility at Incirlik, Turkey? The Bush
administration would lead us to believe that Turkish cooperation is based on
some concept of national altruism.
None of the committee members who oppose the resolution consider Turkey's
blockade of its border with Armenia as a hostile act; a neighbor with whom
there is no declaration of war. How is Turkey as a member of NATO allowed to
take punitive action against a peaceful neighboring state? The government in
Yerevan has long been agreeable to a normalization of diplomatic relations
with Turkey without any preconditions. Turkey has consistently rejected this
conciliatory offer. Any objective analysis leads to the simple conclusion
that Turkey prefers to maintain its adversarial position with respect to
Armenia. A politically vibrant and economically viable Armenia is anathema
to Turkish interests. Yet the United States does nothing one-on-one or
through NATO to pressure Turkey to alter its stance vis-à-vis Armenia.
Further, what is the United States doing to level the economic and military
playing field for Armenia with respect to Azerbaijan and Georgia?
As the debate unfolds in Congress, Turkey will seek and receive
parliamentary approval to undertake a full-scale military operation in
northern Iraq against separatists of the PKK (Partiya Karkeren Kurdistan)
who seek an independent Kurdistan. Any Turkish military incursion into Iraqi
Kurdistan to root out PKK insurgents seeking refuge has the potential to
destabilize the region. The fact that this operation would be detrimental to
United States' interests in Iraq and increase the potential for the loss of
additional American military deaths seems of no concern to our Turkish ally.
Prime Minister Erdogan is quoted by Reuters correspondent Ferit Demir saying
that "[w]e don't need anyone's advice on northern Iraq and the operation to
be carried out there." Then if that is so, why would United States
Congressmen need Turkey's advice on the Genocide Resolution they seek to
pass? Evidently Turkish leaders believe that advice flows in only one
direction: from Ankara to Washington.
For the moment, those who embrace the Armenian Cause have won a strategic if
not epic victory in the House Committee on Foreign Affairs against an
unparalleled attempt by Turkey and the Bush administration to prevent a
favorable vote.
Since nothing in politics can be guaranteed, the most optimistic statement
that may be made is that the Genocide Resolution will probably pass the
House if and when it is brought to the floor for debate. The various
interest groups, especially the Armenian National Committee, have done
yeoman service in successfully countering the full arsenal of resources
available to Washington and Ankara. Against that backdrop, Catholicos
Karekin II's Invocation before the House of Representatives on Wednesday was
a tribute to the Armenian people and a significant symbolic statement on
behalf of the Genocide Resolution.
The favorable committee hearing that occurred recently is only a skirmish
preceding the main battle that will be waged on the House floor. In
anticipation of this, there is sentiment in the House committee that will
most likely extend to the full House to pass a companion resolution
confirming Turkish-United States solidarity. The purpose is to soften the
impact that passage of the Genocide Resolution will have in Turkey.
However, the outcome of the Genocide Resolution in the Senate is
problematic. Since international politics has neither moral nor ethical
guidelines, it would not be uncharacteristic if the Senate is swayed solely
by the consequences that passage of the resolution will have on
Turkish-United States relations. A "nay" vote will have no connection to the
merits of the resolution. This response is far different then how the House
will have hopefully responded. Foreign policy is the bailiwick of the
Senate. Given that scenario, a compromise will have been engineered that
would please the administration and be reluctantly accepted by the Turkish
government. This could be manipulated by Ankara as a significant victory.
The Bush administration will have rewarded Turkey for its intransigence and
its policy of historic revisionism.
Knowing that there is a possibility for this scenario to be played out
requires that efforts be redoubled to counter the unprecedented pressure
that Turkey and the Bush administration will bring to bear on the Senate.
There are fewer senators to influence and since the vote should follow close
along party lines, a shift of only several votes will make the difference
between victory and defeat. Senators, unlike Representatives, sit for terms
of six years and run state-wide campaigns. They are influenced less by
ethnic concentrations of voters in the House districts or the short-term
swings in voter interest.
The debate surrounding the resolution to recognize the Armenian genocide has
reawakened the public's awareness of the first genocide of the modern era.
On both sides of the Atlantic, people can judge for themselves the
perfidiousness of the Turkish leaders. In the face of an established
historic fact, the obduracy of both Turkey and the United States cannot help
but elicit sympathy for the Armenian Cause, which could be of value sometime
in the future. Without help from others, Turkey can be seen for what it
really is: a nondemocratic state masquerading as a democracy aided and
abetted by the Bush administration.
---------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -----
3. Letters to the Editor
Dear Editor,
The last time a human rights issue created so much soul searching in America
was probably Sept. 22, 1862, when Abraham Lincoln signed a presidential
decree for the emancipation of the slaves.
The House Foreign Relations Committee vote 27-21 on H.Res.106, acknowledging
the Armenian genocide, is the emancipation of the survivors of the victims
of the genocide. This is a giant step forward for more reverence to human
dignity here in the United States of America and in the context of our image
in the world both for our allies and for our adversaries.
This is the greatest gesture of love and respect to the Turkish people.
Those who advocate denial treat the Turkish people as sub-human beings not
able to handle the truth. Our NATO brother-in-arms should know that, just as
David Kaczynski brought his brother Theodore John Kaczynski [the
"unabomber"] to justice, America will not stand idle for deniers of
genocide.
President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of
Defense Robert Gates by opposing this human rights initiative, are giving
the green light to the Turkish government to go ahead and commit another
genocide against its Kurdish population.
All the necessary elements are there: The PKK has been declared a terrorist
organization and the Kurdish minority living in Turkey could easily be
accused of supporting it. George Bush has given his blessings to the Turkish
generals, and there could not be a more perfect opportunity for another
ethnic cleansing.
People who oppose this human rights issue are bigots and racists who do not
think that the Turkish people have the common sense and the decency to be
treated as civilized human beings. Instead, these deniers are treating the
Turks as if they are the "Barbarian of the Middle East" who cannot be
treated as equals to people living in Western democracies.
While we do not deny the Holocaust because we have bases and enlisted
personnel in Germany, these people make us believe that we should treat the
Turks as sub-human barbarians and let their governments deny a crime so that
we can use their bases. What's next? The September 11 attacks never
happened, or it was a civil war?
While other countries are criticized, sanctioned and attacked when they
conquer a neighboring country, according to the U.S. State Department it is
O.K. for the Turkish government to attack and conquer half of Cyprus. Why?
Because we have to appease our barbarian friends so that we can keep our
bases in their country.
It is a shame that the present administration still opposes this important
human rights achievement. It is a disgrace that there are still people
amongst us who see no harm in denying a crime for profit.
This administration and its supporters marched into the White House as the
defenders of faith and family values. Yet, they turned out to be a pack of
wolves ready to sell America's honor to criminals.
I am proud of my representative Congressman Eliot Engle who voted for this
resolution.
I urge you to make sure that your representative votes for the passage of
H.Res.106 when the bill comes to the House floor.
Kevork Kalayjian
***
Dear Editor,
Great work getting the Armenian Weekly on Google News!
I always google "Armenian genocide" to get the latest information on the
internet, and was very happy to see the Weekly articles!
We need to get into the mainstream. We have a lot of ignorance on our
issues, and a whole lot of propoganda to fight off.
Rich Sanikian
Fresno, Calif.
***
Dear Editor,
The American-Jewish community came out against the ADL for its position on
the Armenian genocide. The recent congressional bill recognizing the
Armenian genocide had the overwhelming support of the Jewish members of
Congress. So visible was the Jewish community's support for the official
recognition of the Armenian genocide in the U.S. that Turkey's government,
this week, blamed the Jewish community for the bill itself and the bad press
surrounding it. And yet, nonetheless, on Oct. 22, the Armenian government
and the Yerevan State University gave a denier of the Jewish Holocaust,
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the royal treatment, and an honorary
doctorate.
Daniel Sieradski
***
Response to Jeri Zeder
Dear Mr. Zeder,
Thank you for your comments (Letters, Oct. 14). Since you have taken the
time to write, it is incumbent upon me to respond to your concerns.
First, it is unfair for you to say that I claimed ".a lock-step relationship
between the Israeli government and Jews around the world." My article refers
to the message Turkish Ambassador Namik Tan delivered to Israel. Mr. Tan
specifically stated that "[o]n some issues there is no such thing as Israel
cannot deliver." My comment you objected to simply stated that "[t]his
expectation by the Turkish government is not based on supposition, but on a
realistic understanding of the relationship that the Israel government has
with the Jewish Diaspora" (emphasis mine). Where is the lock step that you
refer to? Please note the words I used: relationship and has and the Jewish
Diaspora. My statement in no way suggests lock step, which implies absolute
control. Lock step is what Ambassador Tan alluded to. The Ambassador should
be the object of your displeasure.
You say that "[h]ysterical rhetoric, conspiracy theories and buy-in to
anti-Semitic lies do nothing for the cause of genocide denial." Mr. Zeder,
what have you read that would prompt such "hysterical rhetoric" on your
part?" Inflammatory language serves no useful purpose.
You mention that the article "refuses to acknowledge the real pain and
soul-searching..." that you have witnessed in the Jewish community.
May I quote from my articles? "There are many parallels between the Armenian
people and the Jewish people, both of whom have a large Diaspora. The Jewish
people fully understand the suffering and hurt that the Armenian people have
experienced." (Weekly, Aug. 25).
May I quote again from my articles? "Their position [the ADL] does a
disservice to the Jewish people who have a long and well documented history
of fighting injustices." (Weekly, Aug. 25).
May I quote from my articles again? "I have served as co-chair and
participant in Holocaust Observances in the City of Newton, Mass., while a
commissioner on the Newton Human Rights Commission. I hold dear a letter
>From Lenny Zakim, then New England director of the ADL, thanking me for my
efforts. His death was a severe loss to the entire community. I mentioned
this because I have always respected the mission of the ADL." (Weekly, Sept.
8). Mr. Zeder, please note my reference to Lenny Zakim's death as a loss to
the entire community, not just to the Jewish community.
Again, may I quote from my articles? "The ability of the national ADL to
speak out on the mass killing of ethnic minorities as a political solution
has been its principal strength and perhaps its most significant
contribution to the elimination of hate and prejudice." (Weekly, Oct. 6).
You mention your approval of Martin Luther King's style of activism. His
accolades are well deserved. However, to ascribe to me a role as an activist
is a compliment that I really do not deserve.
I appreciate this opportunity to correct any misinterpretation you have had
with respect to my objective analysis of events. However, I can fully
appreciate that these are passionate issueswhich easily tend to elicit
emotional responses.
Sincerely,
Michael G. Mensoian