Tweet
Today's Zaman
27.09.2007
[ARMENIAN RESOLUTION TAKES US-TURKEY RELATIONS HOSTAGE-2]
`Will Turks lose the battle they have never fought?'
by
MEHMET KALYONCU*
Both psychological and contextual reasons lay behind the somewhat
incomprehensible ready support for the Armenian allegations in both
public and political circles in the United States.
California's Democrat Representative Adam Schiff, whose constituency
and campaign sponsors consist of Armenian Americans of Glendale,
introduced the so-called genocide bill, HR-106.
First of all, the primary reason for the relevant representatives'
introducing the HR-106 bill was not their own convictions about the
Turks or the Ottoman Empire, but the insistence of their
Armenian-American constituency for them to do so. After all, the
representatives are supposed to be the voice of the very constituency
who has elected them, be they right or wrong. A legislative aide to
one of the chief sponsors of HR-106 noted that `we do not have a
commitment to pass this bill, but to bring it up and keep it alive.'
Similarly, conversations with both members of Congress and their
political advisors reveal that the majority of co-sponsors of the
HR-106 bill are not even aware of its content, but have pledged their
support due either to the request of their fellow colleagues who
introduced the bill, or most likely to get rid of the ceaseless
pressure of the Armenian lobbyists, which in some case appear in the
form of the threat of lost votes in the next elections.
Secondly, as explicit in the relentless attitude of the Armenian
diaspora, those members who do not acknowledge the so-called Armenian
genocide, let alone call for an objective investigation of it, are
readily accused of being on the payroll of the Turkish government, as
if, as some would argue, those who acknowledge it are not on that of
members of the wealthy Armenian diaspora. Thirdly, under the influence
of the constructed `Terrible Turk' image, just like any ordinary
American, the Congress members are inclined to believe that the
Turkish Ottoman state may well have carried out genocide against the
Christian Armenians. One should not undermine the impact of the
`Terrible Turk' image; especially so given that movies such as
`Lawrence of Arabia' and `Midnight Express,' are still screened in
some movie theaters across the United States. Finally, the silence of
the Turkish-Americans in the whole genocide debate and their
sluggishness to even call their representatives to express th
eir objection to the HR-106 only encourages Congress members to
support the resolution and move on.
The very fact that the battle of ideas in the so-called genocide
debate has been fought by the official Turkey, meaning primarily
Turkish diplomats and the Foreign Ministry, vis-à-vis the allegedly
`underdog' people of the Armenian diaspora has undermined the
credibility of the Turkish theses on what happened in 1915 and Turks'
commitment to finalize this prolonged debate. Illustrative of the
general Armenian diaspora, in his article titled `Armenian Patriarch
of Turkey in US on Turkish Propaganda Tour Once Again,' and published
in the California Courier, Harut Sassounian alleges that His Beatitude
Mesrob II Mutafyan's visit to the United States and speaking
engagements at various prestigious institutions such as the Capitol
and Georgetown University is organized by the Turkish government to
prevent the possible voting on the infamous HR-106 genocide bill in
the House of Representatives. He continued to proudly explain how the
Armenian-American Church had previously pressured the Southern
Methodist University administration, a co-sponsor of a conference
titled, `Turkish-Armenian Question: What to do now?' to withdraw its
sponsorship, and succeeded in its endeavor. Yet, with almost complete
denial or disregard of how the Armenian diaspora inhibits `free
speech,' Sassounian accuses the Turkish government of inhibition of
`free speech.' Apparently, according to him as well as a marginal, but
noisy, political faction within the Armenian-American community, `free
speech' is allowed only if what is to be said is what they want to
hear.
However, not only the American public and members of Congress, but
also the majority of the Armenian-American community is fed-up with
and sick of the militantly hostile attitude of certain Armenian
organizations, such as the Armenian National Committee of America
(ANCA), and with their efforts to inhibit a possible reconciliation
between Armenians and Turks. The Turkish-American organizers of the
conference held in Dallas note that most of the Armenian scholars
invited to speak at the conference had to decline the invitation,
complaining about the likely attack on them to be launched by
organizations such as ANCA and other militant Armenian-American
groups. Similarly the members of Congress who have not signed on to
support the infamous HR-106 bill complain about the Armenian lobby's
manipulation of the US Congress and about some members falling prey to
such manipulation while the country is faced by much more severe
problems ranging from healthcare to the war in Iraq.
Moreover, the intellectuals are raising their opposition to the
one-sided story of the so-called genocide. In his article titled
`Tawdry genocide tale,' The Washington Times columnist Bruce Fein
disputes the alleged analogy between the Holocaust and the
Turkish-Armenian atrocities which took place during World War I by
pointing at the real causes of those atrocities, `As Bernard Lewis has
observed, an analogy would have been if Adolf Hitler had left Jews in
Berlin, Frankfurt and Vienna exempt from the Final Solution. For more
than three centuries, under the Ottoman millet system, Armenians
enjoyed religious, cultural and social harmony. Conflict with the
Ottoman Empire was largely provoked by Armenian terrorism and plotting
secession comparable to the Confederate States of America, not by a
late-blooming desire to destroy Armenians as a group.' Similarly,
Jerusalem Post columnist Lenny Ben-David notes that not only did
Armenians massacre 2.5 million of the Muslim population of Armenia
between 1914 and 1920, but also that some contemporary Armenians hold
Jews to be accountable for the killings of Armenians in 1915.
The bottom line is that there is already great suspicion within the
political and intellectual communities about the Armenian allegations
of genocide. Yet the third parties, be they intellectuals or members
of the US Congress, have either preferred to remain silent about it,
or seemed to have supported it mainly to get rid of the Armenian
lobby's pressure. The absence of the Turkish grassroots within the
whole genocide debate has only made it easier for US Congress members
to rightly justify their support by asking this simple question, `If
there was no genocide and the passage of this genocide bill is so
detrimental to the Turkish interests, why does no single
Turkish-American call our office to express his or her objection while
we are overwhelmed with letters, emails, faxes and telephone calls
from Armenian-Americans?' It is time for the Turkish grassroots to
take over the task of tackling the Armenian allegations, and it takes
only a few dedicated nongovernmental organizations to help the
American public realize how they are being manipulated. Once the
Americans realize it, they would certainly deliver justice.
* Mehmet Kalyoncu is an international relations analyst and can be
reached at [email protected]
27.09.2007
[ARMENIAN RESOLUTION TAKES US-TURKEY RELATIONS HOSTAGE-2]
`Will Turks lose the battle they have never fought?'
by
MEHMET KALYONCU*
Both psychological and contextual reasons lay behind the somewhat
incomprehensible ready support for the Armenian allegations in both
public and political circles in the United States.
California's Democrat Representative Adam Schiff, whose constituency
and campaign sponsors consist of Armenian Americans of Glendale,
introduced the so-called genocide bill, HR-106.
First of all, the primary reason for the relevant representatives'
introducing the HR-106 bill was not their own convictions about the
Turks or the Ottoman Empire, but the insistence of their
Armenian-American constituency for them to do so. After all, the
representatives are supposed to be the voice of the very constituency
who has elected them, be they right or wrong. A legislative aide to
one of the chief sponsors of HR-106 noted that `we do not have a
commitment to pass this bill, but to bring it up and keep it alive.'
Similarly, conversations with both members of Congress and their
political advisors reveal that the majority of co-sponsors of the
HR-106 bill are not even aware of its content, but have pledged their
support due either to the request of their fellow colleagues who
introduced the bill, or most likely to get rid of the ceaseless
pressure of the Armenian lobbyists, which in some case appear in the
form of the threat of lost votes in the next elections.
Secondly, as explicit in the relentless attitude of the Armenian
diaspora, those members who do not acknowledge the so-called Armenian
genocide, let alone call for an objective investigation of it, are
readily accused of being on the payroll of the Turkish government, as
if, as some would argue, those who acknowledge it are not on that of
members of the wealthy Armenian diaspora. Thirdly, under the influence
of the constructed `Terrible Turk' image, just like any ordinary
American, the Congress members are inclined to believe that the
Turkish Ottoman state may well have carried out genocide against the
Christian Armenians. One should not undermine the impact of the
`Terrible Turk' image; especially so given that movies such as
`Lawrence of Arabia' and `Midnight Express,' are still screened in
some movie theaters across the United States. Finally, the silence of
the Turkish-Americans in the whole genocide debate and their
sluggishness to even call their representatives to express th
eir objection to the HR-106 only encourages Congress members to
support the resolution and move on.
The very fact that the battle of ideas in the so-called genocide
debate has been fought by the official Turkey, meaning primarily
Turkish diplomats and the Foreign Ministry, vis-à-vis the allegedly
`underdog' people of the Armenian diaspora has undermined the
credibility of the Turkish theses on what happened in 1915 and Turks'
commitment to finalize this prolonged debate. Illustrative of the
general Armenian diaspora, in his article titled `Armenian Patriarch
of Turkey in US on Turkish Propaganda Tour Once Again,' and published
in the California Courier, Harut Sassounian alleges that His Beatitude
Mesrob II Mutafyan's visit to the United States and speaking
engagements at various prestigious institutions such as the Capitol
and Georgetown University is organized by the Turkish government to
prevent the possible voting on the infamous HR-106 genocide bill in
the House of Representatives. He continued to proudly explain how the
Armenian-American Church had previously pressured the Southern
Methodist University administration, a co-sponsor of a conference
titled, `Turkish-Armenian Question: What to do now?' to withdraw its
sponsorship, and succeeded in its endeavor. Yet, with almost complete
denial or disregard of how the Armenian diaspora inhibits `free
speech,' Sassounian accuses the Turkish government of inhibition of
`free speech.' Apparently, according to him as well as a marginal, but
noisy, political faction within the Armenian-American community, `free
speech' is allowed only if what is to be said is what they want to
hear.
However, not only the American public and members of Congress, but
also the majority of the Armenian-American community is fed-up with
and sick of the militantly hostile attitude of certain Armenian
organizations, such as the Armenian National Committee of America
(ANCA), and with their efforts to inhibit a possible reconciliation
between Armenians and Turks. The Turkish-American organizers of the
conference held in Dallas note that most of the Armenian scholars
invited to speak at the conference had to decline the invitation,
complaining about the likely attack on them to be launched by
organizations such as ANCA and other militant Armenian-American
groups. Similarly the members of Congress who have not signed on to
support the infamous HR-106 bill complain about the Armenian lobby's
manipulation of the US Congress and about some members falling prey to
such manipulation while the country is faced by much more severe
problems ranging from healthcare to the war in Iraq.
Moreover, the intellectuals are raising their opposition to the
one-sided story of the so-called genocide. In his article titled
`Tawdry genocide tale,' The Washington Times columnist Bruce Fein
disputes the alleged analogy between the Holocaust and the
Turkish-Armenian atrocities which took place during World War I by
pointing at the real causes of those atrocities, `As Bernard Lewis has
observed, an analogy would have been if Adolf Hitler had left Jews in
Berlin, Frankfurt and Vienna exempt from the Final Solution. For more
than three centuries, under the Ottoman millet system, Armenians
enjoyed religious, cultural and social harmony. Conflict with the
Ottoman Empire was largely provoked by Armenian terrorism and plotting
secession comparable to the Confederate States of America, not by a
late-blooming desire to destroy Armenians as a group.' Similarly,
Jerusalem Post columnist Lenny Ben-David notes that not only did
Armenians massacre 2.5 million of the Muslim population of Armenia
between 1914 and 1920, but also that some contemporary Armenians hold
Jews to be accountable for the killings of Armenians in 1915.
The bottom line is that there is already great suspicion within the
political and intellectual communities about the Armenian allegations
of genocide. Yet the third parties, be they intellectuals or members
of the US Congress, have either preferred to remain silent about it,
or seemed to have supported it mainly to get rid of the Armenian
lobby's pressure. The absence of the Turkish grassroots within the
whole genocide debate has only made it easier for US Congress members
to rightly justify their support by asking this simple question, `If
there was no genocide and the passage of this genocide bill is so
detrimental to the Turkish interests, why does no single
Turkish-American call our office to express his or her objection while
we are overwhelmed with letters, emails, faxes and telephone calls
from Armenian-Americans?' It is time for the Turkish grassroots to
take over the task of tackling the Armenian allegations, and it takes
only a few dedicated nongovernmental organizations to help the
American public realize how they are being manipulated. Once the
Americans realize it, they would certainly deliver justice.
* Mehmet Kalyoncu is an international relations analyst and can be
reached at [email protected]