Tweet
Turkey and America
Judging genocide
Oct 11th 2007 | ANKARA AND NEW YORK
>From Economist.com
Relations between America and Turkey may be badly strained by
Congress's wish to make a ruling on history
"THE Mohammedans in their fanaticism seemed determined not only to
exterminate the Christian population but to remove all traces of their
religion and...civilisation." So wrote an American consul in Turkey, in
1915, about an incipient campaign by Ottoman Turkey against its
Armenian population. Today, Turkey explains the killings of huge
numbers of Armenians - as many as 1.5m died - as an unpleasant by-product
of the first world war's viciousness, in which Turks suffered too. But
Armenians have long campaigned for recognition of what they say was
genocide.
On Wednesday October 10th America's Congress stepped closer to
endorsing the latter view. The foreign-affairs committee of the House
of Representatives passed a bill stating that "the Armenian Genocide
was conceived and carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to
1923." The bill has enough co-sponsors that it seems likely to pass
the full House. The speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has a large number of
Armenians in her home district and has promised the measure a vote on
the floor. As a foretaste of the trouble this could stir up in Turkey,
the country's president, Abdullah Gul, immediately condemned the
passage of the bill. He called it "unacceptable" and accused American
politicians of being willing to cause "big problems for small domestic
political games".
Turkey is enormously important to American military efforts in the
Middle East. So leading American politicians past and present have
lined up to oppose the resolution. President George Bush has said
historians, not legislators, should decide the matter. Turkey has
hired Dick Gephardt, a former leader of the Democrats in the House, to
lobby against the bill. All eight living former secretaries of state,
>From Henry Kissinger to Madeleine Albright, who lost three
grandparents in the Nazi Holocaust, oppose the bill. So does
Condoleezza Rice, who holds the post now. Jane Harman, a powerful and
hawkish Democrat, initially co-sponsored the measure. But last week
she urged its withdrawal. A trip to Turkey, where she met the prime
minister and the Armenian Orthodox patriarch, changed her mind.
Ms Harman echoed an argument that others have made against the
resolution: that Turkey itself is tiptoeing towards normal relations
with neighbouring Armenia. The resolution could throw that process off
course. But in other ways Turkey has not helped its own case: its
criminal code has been used against writers within the country who
dare to mention genocide.
And other Turkish behaviour has further distanced it from America.
Turkey recently signed a deal to develop oil and gas with Iran, and
has made overtures to Hamas, which runs part of the Palestinian
Authority and continues to refuse to recognise Israel. Such behaviour
has cost Turkey some support among Jewish Americans - formerly ardent
supporters of Turkey as a moderate Muslim republic that is friendly to
Israel. Some even worry that a freshly insulted Turkey will not heed
America's opinion when, for example, it thinks about crossing the
border into Iraq to pound Kurdish fighters.
It is hardly surprising that Turkey is feeling put-upon. Last year,
France's National Assembly passed a bill not only declaring that the
Armenian massacres constituted genocide, but making it a crime to deny
it. Had the bill made it into law this would have resulted in an
absurd situation in which Turkish law forbade mention of genocide
while French law forbade its denial, all during Turkey's application
to join the European Union. Turks complained that the French bill had
less to do with Armenians, and more to do with deterring Turkey's EU
membership. The mood has not improved since. France's new president,
Nicolas Sarkozy, is an outspoken opponent of Turkish membership.
Hurt feelings on both sides are pushing Turkey and the West apart:
Turkey feels mistreated, and acts in such a way. But the deal with
Iran and its pell-mell pursuit of Kurdish terrorists into Iraq
antagonise Americans and Europeans further. At the least, the panicky
reaction of the Bush administration over the genocide resolution shows
that policymakers realise that they can no longer take Turkey 's
friendship for granted.
Source: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.c fm?story_id=9946751&top_story=1
Judging genocide
Oct 11th 2007 | ANKARA AND NEW YORK
>From Economist.com
Relations between America and Turkey may be badly strained by
Congress's wish to make a ruling on history
"THE Mohammedans in their fanaticism seemed determined not only to
exterminate the Christian population but to remove all traces of their
religion and...civilisation." So wrote an American consul in Turkey, in
1915, about an incipient campaign by Ottoman Turkey against its
Armenian population. Today, Turkey explains the killings of huge
numbers of Armenians - as many as 1.5m died - as an unpleasant by-product
of the first world war's viciousness, in which Turks suffered too. But
Armenians have long campaigned for recognition of what they say was
genocide.
On Wednesday October 10th America's Congress stepped closer to
endorsing the latter view. The foreign-affairs committee of the House
of Representatives passed a bill stating that "the Armenian Genocide
was conceived and carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to
1923." The bill has enough co-sponsors that it seems likely to pass
the full House. The speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has a large number of
Armenians in her home district and has promised the measure a vote on
the floor. As a foretaste of the trouble this could stir up in Turkey,
the country's president, Abdullah Gul, immediately condemned the
passage of the bill. He called it "unacceptable" and accused American
politicians of being willing to cause "big problems for small domestic
political games".
Turkey is enormously important to American military efforts in the
Middle East. So leading American politicians past and present have
lined up to oppose the resolution. President George Bush has said
historians, not legislators, should decide the matter. Turkey has
hired Dick Gephardt, a former leader of the Democrats in the House, to
lobby against the bill. All eight living former secretaries of state,
>From Henry Kissinger to Madeleine Albright, who lost three
grandparents in the Nazi Holocaust, oppose the bill. So does
Condoleezza Rice, who holds the post now. Jane Harman, a powerful and
hawkish Democrat, initially co-sponsored the measure. But last week
she urged its withdrawal. A trip to Turkey, where she met the prime
minister and the Armenian Orthodox patriarch, changed her mind.
Ms Harman echoed an argument that others have made against the
resolution: that Turkey itself is tiptoeing towards normal relations
with neighbouring Armenia. The resolution could throw that process off
course. But in other ways Turkey has not helped its own case: its
criminal code has been used against writers within the country who
dare to mention genocide.
And other Turkish behaviour has further distanced it from America.
Turkey recently signed a deal to develop oil and gas with Iran, and
has made overtures to Hamas, which runs part of the Palestinian
Authority and continues to refuse to recognise Israel. Such behaviour
has cost Turkey some support among Jewish Americans - formerly ardent
supporters of Turkey as a moderate Muslim republic that is friendly to
Israel. Some even worry that a freshly insulted Turkey will not heed
America's opinion when, for example, it thinks about crossing the
border into Iraq to pound Kurdish fighters.
It is hardly surprising that Turkey is feeling put-upon. Last year,
France's National Assembly passed a bill not only declaring that the
Armenian massacres constituted genocide, but making it a crime to deny
it. Had the bill made it into law this would have resulted in an
absurd situation in which Turkish law forbade mention of genocide
while French law forbade its denial, all during Turkey's application
to join the European Union. Turks complained that the French bill had
less to do with Armenians, and more to do with deterring Turkey's EU
membership. The mood has not improved since. France's new president,
Nicolas Sarkozy, is an outspoken opponent of Turkish membership.
Hurt feelings on both sides are pushing Turkey and the West apart:
Turkey feels mistreated, and acts in such a way. But the deal with
Iran and its pell-mell pursuit of Kurdish terrorists into Iraq
antagonise Americans and Europeans further. At the least, the panicky
reaction of the Bush administration over the genocide resolution shows
that policymakers realise that they can no longer take Turkey 's
friendship for granted.
Source: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.c fm?story_id=9946751&top_story=1