Tweet
WAS IT GENOCIDE OR NOT?
by Thomas Omestad
U.S. News & World Report
October 22, 2007 Monday
U.S. resolution over a historical event triggers Turkish anger
It was either a nod toward justice and the recognition of truth--or a
supremely ill-advised foray into a historical tragedy that will come
back to damage current U.S. interests in the Middle East. The action
last week that cheered Armenian-Americans but incensed a key U.S.
ally, Turkey, was a House panel's approval of a resolution labeling as
"genocide" the deaths of up to 1.5 million Armenians amid the collapse
of the Ottoman Empire early in the 20th century.
The measure next moves to the full House, with the promise of
intensified opposition by the Bush administration and Turkey. Though
nonbinding declarations are common on Capitol Hill, this resolution
is different from most. It threatens a rupture in relations with a
strategically key NATO ally through which pass essential military
supplies for the U.S. fight in Iraq. About 70 percent of U.S. air
cargo to Iraq transits Turkey, most through the Incirlik Air Base,
along with 30 percent of the fuel used.
The administration last week expressed disappointment and braced
for the fallout. Turkey ordered its ambassador in Washington home
for "consultations," saying, "It is not possible to accept such an
accusation of a crime which was never committed by the Turkish nation."
Passions. The resolution, with the backing of two California
Democrats--House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Tom Lantos, chairman
of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs--appears to have majority
support in the House. California is home to more than half of all
Armenian-Americans, many of whom feel passionate about the issue.
U.S. officials and analysts worry about the consequences if it
is adopted in the full House. "There's no safety net under this
relationship," says Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at
Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies. "It can
go a long, long way down." A headline in the popular Turkish daily
Hurriyet proclaimed: "End of a 100-Year Alliance."
The congressional move not only comes at a time of angry disenchantment
with the United States; it also is seen in Turkey as deeply offensive
to national pride. "It is a profound political issue in Turkey,"
says Morton Abramowitz, a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey. "Here,
it is a narrow political issue."
Turkey spent a reported $300,000 a month in fees to lobbying firms
to fight the measure. Separately, all eight living former U.S.
secretaries of state came out in opposition. But what has prevailed
instead is the desire to make a moral statement on the mass killings,
combined with the political impulse to respond to a mobilized community
of Armenian-Americans. "To a large extent, this is a function of
ethnic politics," argues Abramowitz.
Pelosi plays down the foreign policy risks, citing "continued mutual
interest" with Ankara. "There's never a good time," she adds. Bad
moment or not, the costs of legislating on foreign history may be
about to come due.
by Thomas Omestad
U.S. News & World Report
October 22, 2007 Monday
U.S. resolution over a historical event triggers Turkish anger
It was either a nod toward justice and the recognition of truth--or a
supremely ill-advised foray into a historical tragedy that will come
back to damage current U.S. interests in the Middle East. The action
last week that cheered Armenian-Americans but incensed a key U.S.
ally, Turkey, was a House panel's approval of a resolution labeling as
"genocide" the deaths of up to 1.5 million Armenians amid the collapse
of the Ottoman Empire early in the 20th century.
The measure next moves to the full House, with the promise of
intensified opposition by the Bush administration and Turkey. Though
nonbinding declarations are common on Capitol Hill, this resolution
is different from most. It threatens a rupture in relations with a
strategically key NATO ally through which pass essential military
supplies for the U.S. fight in Iraq. About 70 percent of U.S. air
cargo to Iraq transits Turkey, most through the Incirlik Air Base,
along with 30 percent of the fuel used.
The administration last week expressed disappointment and braced
for the fallout. Turkey ordered its ambassador in Washington home
for "consultations," saying, "It is not possible to accept such an
accusation of a crime which was never committed by the Turkish nation."
Passions. The resolution, with the backing of two California
Democrats--House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Tom Lantos, chairman
of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs--appears to have majority
support in the House. California is home to more than half of all
Armenian-Americans, many of whom feel passionate about the issue.
U.S. officials and analysts worry about the consequences if it
is adopted in the full House. "There's no safety net under this
relationship," says Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at
Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies. "It can
go a long, long way down." A headline in the popular Turkish daily
Hurriyet proclaimed: "End of a 100-Year Alliance."
The congressional move not only comes at a time of angry disenchantment
with the United States; it also is seen in Turkey as deeply offensive
to national pride. "It is a profound political issue in Turkey,"
says Morton Abramowitz, a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey. "Here,
it is a narrow political issue."
Turkey spent a reported $300,000 a month in fees to lobbying firms
to fight the measure. Separately, all eight living former U.S.
secretaries of state came out in opposition. But what has prevailed
instead is the desire to make a moral statement on the mass killings,
combined with the political impulse to respond to a mobilized community
of Armenian-Americans. "To a large extent, this is a function of
ethnic politics," argues Abramowitz.
Pelosi plays down the foreign policy risks, citing "continued mutual
interest" with Ankara. "There's never a good time," she adds. Bad
moment or not, the costs of legislating on foreign history may be
about to come due.