Tweet
RIGHT INTENTIONS, WRONG TIME
Vivian Salama, a producer and blogger
Washington Post
Oct 15 2007
The decision by a United States congressional panel to recognize
the genocide of Armenians in Turkey during World War I is a classic
example of being in the right place at the wrong time.
A great number of experts worldwide have concluded that the atrocities
that occurred between 1915 and 1923 resulted from the Ottoman Empire's
deliberate actions to exterminate this particular minority group,
which represented both political and religious opposition to Ottoman
rule. Acrimony between Turks and Armenians has stretched back over
several centuries.
Historical accounts by Western researchers have revealed that Ottoman
troops and paramilitaries killed tens of thousands of men, women and
children and left hundreds of thousands more to die of starvation
or exposure to harsh weather. The Turkish government maintains that
these people were victims of civil war and unrest, adding that the
many Muslim Turks died as well. Most scholars agree that the number
of deaths is irrelevant; however numerous the victims, the Ottoman
government sought to annihilate them people on the basis of their
ethnicity.
What does that mean for Turkey? Technically speaking, the passing of
this US legislation does not bind Turkey to take any legal action.
Among Ankara's concerns is that recognition will empower the Armenian
lobby to seek reparations. Turkey also worries - legitimately - that
having genocide on its record will hurt its chances of European Union
integration. Last year, the French government adopted a bill making
it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide, emphasizing that Turkey
must recognize the Armenian deaths as genocide before it enters the EU.
To recognize such atrocities is learn from them. The Turkish government
of today is not the Ottoman regime of 100 years ago, and we must not
confuse the two. Turks have a deep-rooted sense of nationalism and many
Turkish analysts argue that the country will not bear the burden of
a genocide in the way several other countries have done. (An example:
Article 301 of Turkey's controversial penal code, which took effect on
June 1, 2005, states: "A person who publicly denigrates Turkishness,
the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, shall be
punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years.")
The decision by the House to push for genocide recognition at this
point in time is a bit perplexing. The Democrats took a contentious
stand against an ally in the belief that what they were doing was
right. It was an opportunity to reassert their majority status and
undermine the Bush Administration's foreign policy.
But can America afford to burn any more bridges in the region? Turkey
has long served as a strategic ally to the United States. Despite
refusing to allow U.S. forces to use their soil for staging the
ground war that would topple Saddam Hussein in 2003, Turkey permits
the use of Incirlik Air Base and roads. These privileges, according to
U.S. Secretary of State Robert Gates, would "very much be put at risk"
by recognizing the genocide. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has
said Turkey may retaliate by shutting the flow of material to Iraq and
even Afghanistan. The country continues to amass troops on its border
with Iraq and has said that it will take all necessary measures against
Kurdish separatists, whom it suspects are hiding in Iraqi Kurdistan.
The escalating sectarian violence at Turkey's doorstep undoubtedly
adds to EU concerns. While it is unlikely that the violence will
spill across the Iraq-Turkey border, Kurdish involvement may bring
this war too close for Europe's comfort and further complicate
the coalition struggle in Iraq. Turkey has thus far held back from
getting directly involved, mainly due to U.S. persuasion. However,
the Turkish government views the genocide resolution as a major slap
in the face; given the tone emanating from Ankara these last few days,
there is no telling what retaliatory measures they will take.
The ruling has been a long time coming, so it is certainly a battle won
in the Armenian fight for justice. For the Turks, it is an added hurdle
on the road to EU integration but a power card in their relationship
with the United States. For America, it is just another setback in
what has become a regional struggle.
Vivian Salama, a producer and blogger
Washington Post
Oct 15 2007
The decision by a United States congressional panel to recognize
the genocide of Armenians in Turkey during World War I is a classic
example of being in the right place at the wrong time.
A great number of experts worldwide have concluded that the atrocities
that occurred between 1915 and 1923 resulted from the Ottoman Empire's
deliberate actions to exterminate this particular minority group,
which represented both political and religious opposition to Ottoman
rule. Acrimony between Turks and Armenians has stretched back over
several centuries.
Historical accounts by Western researchers have revealed that Ottoman
troops and paramilitaries killed tens of thousands of men, women and
children and left hundreds of thousands more to die of starvation
or exposure to harsh weather. The Turkish government maintains that
these people were victims of civil war and unrest, adding that the
many Muslim Turks died as well. Most scholars agree that the number
of deaths is irrelevant; however numerous the victims, the Ottoman
government sought to annihilate them people on the basis of their
ethnicity.
What does that mean for Turkey? Technically speaking, the passing of
this US legislation does not bind Turkey to take any legal action.
Among Ankara's concerns is that recognition will empower the Armenian
lobby to seek reparations. Turkey also worries - legitimately - that
having genocide on its record will hurt its chances of European Union
integration. Last year, the French government adopted a bill making
it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide, emphasizing that Turkey
must recognize the Armenian deaths as genocide before it enters the EU.
To recognize such atrocities is learn from them. The Turkish government
of today is not the Ottoman regime of 100 years ago, and we must not
confuse the two. Turks have a deep-rooted sense of nationalism and many
Turkish analysts argue that the country will not bear the burden of
a genocide in the way several other countries have done. (An example:
Article 301 of Turkey's controversial penal code, which took effect on
June 1, 2005, states: "A person who publicly denigrates Turkishness,
the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, shall be
punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years.")
The decision by the House to push for genocide recognition at this
point in time is a bit perplexing. The Democrats took a contentious
stand against an ally in the belief that what they were doing was
right. It was an opportunity to reassert their majority status and
undermine the Bush Administration's foreign policy.
But can America afford to burn any more bridges in the region? Turkey
has long served as a strategic ally to the United States. Despite
refusing to allow U.S. forces to use their soil for staging the
ground war that would topple Saddam Hussein in 2003, Turkey permits
the use of Incirlik Air Base and roads. These privileges, according to
U.S. Secretary of State Robert Gates, would "very much be put at risk"
by recognizing the genocide. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has
said Turkey may retaliate by shutting the flow of material to Iraq and
even Afghanistan. The country continues to amass troops on its border
with Iraq and has said that it will take all necessary measures against
Kurdish separatists, whom it suspects are hiding in Iraqi Kurdistan.
The escalating sectarian violence at Turkey's doorstep undoubtedly
adds to EU concerns. While it is unlikely that the violence will
spill across the Iraq-Turkey border, Kurdish involvement may bring
this war too close for Europe's comfort and further complicate
the coalition struggle in Iraq. Turkey has thus far held back from
getting directly involved, mainly due to U.S. persuasion. However,
the Turkish government views the genocide resolution as a major slap
in the face; given the tone emanating from Ankara these last few days,
there is no telling what retaliatory measures they will take.
The ruling has been a long time coming, so it is certainly a battle won
in the Armenian fight for justice. For the Turks, it is an added hurdle
on the road to EU integration but a power card in their relationship
with the United States. For America, it is just another setback in
what has become a regional struggle.