Tweet
COLUMN: ARMENIAN GENOCIDE SHOULD BE LEAST OF CONGRESS' WORRIES
Dan Sheehan, Guest Columnist
Virginia Tech Collegiate Times Online Edition, VA
Oct 18 2007
Modern America faces many hardships. We have an illegal immigration
problem that awaits solution. The value of our currency is plummeting
on the global market, prompting investors to question the immediate
stability of the dollar.
We have an estimated nine million children without health care in this
country, while we spend $500 million each day in Iraq. So, with all of
these pressing issues immediately affecting the health and well-being
of Americans, why does the 110th Congress spend its time discussing
and crafting House Resolution 106, a non-binding statement condemning
the murder of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians by Turkish soldiers
between 1915 and 1917.
The fearless 110th Congress, surrounded by all of our enemies (foreign
and domestic), has chosen to take on the one foe it knows it can
defeat: The Ottoman Empire, which ceased to exist in 1922. In case
you slept through World History, the Ottomans ruled much of what is
now Eastern Europe and the Middle East, with the central government
being located in modern-day Turkey. The Turkish government denies
having any involvement in the massacre, which is said to have planted
the idea of the final solution in the mind of Hitler.
Resolution 106, sponsored by the House Committee on Foreign Relations
(chaired by Rep. Tom Lantos (D- Calif.)), condemns the 90 year-old
atrocity, and formally labels the incident as genocide.
There's just one problem: the Turkish government rejects the notion
that the Armenian deaths were genocide (genocide implies attempt
to extinguish an entire race), instead saying that many Armenians
and Turks died as a result of WWI and cultural fighting, but it was
not an edict from the Ottoman government to extinguish the Armenian
people. This resolution threatens to strain diplomatic relations with
the U.S. if it passes.
Turkey shares a northwestern border with Iraq. CNN estimates that 75
percent of the supplies we send to Iraq travel through Turkey. Turkey
is an ally in our seemingly endless war; the country is a member of
NATO and a candidate for membership in the European Union.
The country is also becoming more anti-American with each passing
day. Once again, we are sticking our nose in an age-old ethnic
conflict that we have no business being a part of and instead of
presenting a solution, we are simply taking sides, and alienating a
nation whose friendship we cannot currently afford to lose. Today,
Turkey's papers ran headlines including "27 Foolish Americans"
(referring to the committee) and "Bill of Hatred."
My hat's off to the 110th, which has decided to make another nation
of Muslims extremely irritated with us. While many nations make empty
threats, Turkey seems to walk the walk.
France, which passed a similar resolution last year, lost its privilege
to fly over Turkish airspace. What if Turkey decides to close its
airspace, and evict us from our military bases? Maybe Iran will let
us run supplies through its borders so we can get them to our troops.
Or maybe Turkey decides to attack the Kurds in Northern Iraq more
overtly. Any scenario involving our eviction from Turkey spells
disaster for an already downtrodden war.
The President, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense
and have called the Turkish Prime Minister to apologize and express
their deep concern over the resolution. Dubyah doesn't make house
calls unless the situation is dire. In a rare role reversal, the
President is apologizing on behalf of the American people. Usually,
it's the other way around.
Anyway, there you have it: An American position on the death of those
Armenians will solve nothing. The dead remain so, and posthumously
labeling them victims of genocide won't bring them back or vindicate
their struggle for justice.
I think we should be focused on preserving the peace of today (if
there is any left) and leave the past in the past. If we are evicted
from Turkey, the people who will suffer are our men and women in
uniform as well as the people of Iraq. By all means, let's subject
these people to further suffering by throwing our diplomatic fork at
a 90 year-old beef.
We have a hard enough time trying to solve all the world's current
problems. Must we be retroactive, as well? Shouldn't we be focused
on the future rather than working to right past injustices? Will
Congress next censure Ramses II for his enslavement of the Jews?
Or, perhaps censure our friends, the English, in defense of my Irish
ancestors who were occupied and oppressed for hundreds of years
by the Crown. I also find it morbidly ironic that this government,
deeply concerned with genocide past, reacts so pitifully in places
like the Darfur region of Sudan, where genocide occurs today.
The counterargument is strong. Opponents will say if we fail to label
the Armenian Massacre as genocide, we are no different than Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad's Iran denouncing the Holocaust.
Wrong. First off, the German government acknowledges the Holocaust,
has formally apologized, and has taken great steps to memorialize
the many victims. So, by labeling the Nazi Holocaust as genocide,
we are not actually taking sides, since the Germans admit guilt.
Second, the Turkish government is not directly ascended from the Young
Turks, who ruled during the period in question. We don't hold Italian
Prime Minister Romano Prodi responsible for the transgressions of
the Romans. We don't hold Hosni Mubarak's Egypt responsible for its
historical transgressions, so why are we trying to do it to Turkey? The
logic is flawed and the timing is atrocious.
History is full of injustices, not the least of which is the death of
these Armenians at the beginning of the 20th century. Was it truly
genocide acted out by the Young Turks? Perhaps. But I don't see the
logic in creating the potential for new hatred, and new violence
on account of conflict past. And I see even less logic in the idea
of alienating an ally over a crime whose perpetrators have long
since died.
For Congress to involve us in another foreign ethnic dispute, of
which we had no part, is irresponsible and dangerous.
The resolution passed through the Committee on Foreign Affairs by
a vote of 27 to 21 and meets a full session this Friday. Of all the
pressing issues that face this nation, our noble representatives decide
it's best to debate the historical classification of an atrocity 90
years passed; their diligence is awe-inspiring, and their negligence
is frightening.
http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stori es/2007/10/17/column__armenian_genocide_should_be_ least_of_congress__worries
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Dan Sheehan, Guest Columnist
Virginia Tech Collegiate Times Online Edition, VA
Oct 18 2007
Modern America faces many hardships. We have an illegal immigration
problem that awaits solution. The value of our currency is plummeting
on the global market, prompting investors to question the immediate
stability of the dollar.
We have an estimated nine million children without health care in this
country, while we spend $500 million each day in Iraq. So, with all of
these pressing issues immediately affecting the health and well-being
of Americans, why does the 110th Congress spend its time discussing
and crafting House Resolution 106, a non-binding statement condemning
the murder of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians by Turkish soldiers
between 1915 and 1917.
The fearless 110th Congress, surrounded by all of our enemies (foreign
and domestic), has chosen to take on the one foe it knows it can
defeat: The Ottoman Empire, which ceased to exist in 1922. In case
you slept through World History, the Ottomans ruled much of what is
now Eastern Europe and the Middle East, with the central government
being located in modern-day Turkey. The Turkish government denies
having any involvement in the massacre, which is said to have planted
the idea of the final solution in the mind of Hitler.
Resolution 106, sponsored by the House Committee on Foreign Relations
(chaired by Rep. Tom Lantos (D- Calif.)), condemns the 90 year-old
atrocity, and formally labels the incident as genocide.
There's just one problem: the Turkish government rejects the notion
that the Armenian deaths were genocide (genocide implies attempt
to extinguish an entire race), instead saying that many Armenians
and Turks died as a result of WWI and cultural fighting, but it was
not an edict from the Ottoman government to extinguish the Armenian
people. This resolution threatens to strain diplomatic relations with
the U.S. if it passes.
Turkey shares a northwestern border with Iraq. CNN estimates that 75
percent of the supplies we send to Iraq travel through Turkey. Turkey
is an ally in our seemingly endless war; the country is a member of
NATO and a candidate for membership in the European Union.
The country is also becoming more anti-American with each passing
day. Once again, we are sticking our nose in an age-old ethnic
conflict that we have no business being a part of and instead of
presenting a solution, we are simply taking sides, and alienating a
nation whose friendship we cannot currently afford to lose. Today,
Turkey's papers ran headlines including "27 Foolish Americans"
(referring to the committee) and "Bill of Hatred."
My hat's off to the 110th, which has decided to make another nation
of Muslims extremely irritated with us. While many nations make empty
threats, Turkey seems to walk the walk.
France, which passed a similar resolution last year, lost its privilege
to fly over Turkish airspace. What if Turkey decides to close its
airspace, and evict us from our military bases? Maybe Iran will let
us run supplies through its borders so we can get them to our troops.
Or maybe Turkey decides to attack the Kurds in Northern Iraq more
overtly. Any scenario involving our eviction from Turkey spells
disaster for an already downtrodden war.
The President, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense
and have called the Turkish Prime Minister to apologize and express
their deep concern over the resolution. Dubyah doesn't make house
calls unless the situation is dire. In a rare role reversal, the
President is apologizing on behalf of the American people. Usually,
it's the other way around.
Anyway, there you have it: An American position on the death of those
Armenians will solve nothing. The dead remain so, and posthumously
labeling them victims of genocide won't bring them back or vindicate
their struggle for justice.
I think we should be focused on preserving the peace of today (if
there is any left) and leave the past in the past. If we are evicted
from Turkey, the people who will suffer are our men and women in
uniform as well as the people of Iraq. By all means, let's subject
these people to further suffering by throwing our diplomatic fork at
a 90 year-old beef.
We have a hard enough time trying to solve all the world's current
problems. Must we be retroactive, as well? Shouldn't we be focused
on the future rather than working to right past injustices? Will
Congress next censure Ramses II for his enslavement of the Jews?
Or, perhaps censure our friends, the English, in defense of my Irish
ancestors who were occupied and oppressed for hundreds of years
by the Crown. I also find it morbidly ironic that this government,
deeply concerned with genocide past, reacts so pitifully in places
like the Darfur region of Sudan, where genocide occurs today.
The counterargument is strong. Opponents will say if we fail to label
the Armenian Massacre as genocide, we are no different than Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad's Iran denouncing the Holocaust.
Wrong. First off, the German government acknowledges the Holocaust,
has formally apologized, and has taken great steps to memorialize
the many victims. So, by labeling the Nazi Holocaust as genocide,
we are not actually taking sides, since the Germans admit guilt.
Second, the Turkish government is not directly ascended from the Young
Turks, who ruled during the period in question. We don't hold Italian
Prime Minister Romano Prodi responsible for the transgressions of
the Romans. We don't hold Hosni Mubarak's Egypt responsible for its
historical transgressions, so why are we trying to do it to Turkey? The
logic is flawed and the timing is atrocious.
History is full of injustices, not the least of which is the death of
these Armenians at the beginning of the 20th century. Was it truly
genocide acted out by the Young Turks? Perhaps. But I don't see the
logic in creating the potential for new hatred, and new violence
on account of conflict past. And I see even less logic in the idea
of alienating an ally over a crime whose perpetrators have long
since died.
For Congress to involve us in another foreign ethnic dispute, of
which we had no part, is irresponsible and dangerous.
The resolution passed through the Committee on Foreign Affairs by
a vote of 27 to 21 and meets a full session this Friday. Of all the
pressing issues that face this nation, our noble representatives decide
it's best to debate the historical classification of an atrocity 90
years passed; their diligence is awe-inspiring, and their negligence
is frightening.
http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stori es/2007/10/17/column__armenian_genocide_should_be_ least_of_congress__worries
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress