Tweet
Kerry's Dilemma: The Groupthink On Turkey
Secretary of State John Kerry
BY SETO BOYADJIAN, ESQ.
Last week Sen. John Kerry - a long-time supporter of Armenian American
issues - was confirmed as our new Secretary of State. In the process
of his confirmation hearing, Kerry shied away from his continued
stance on Armenian issues and revealed a new face, which in fact is
the old face of the outgoing Secretary Hillary Clinton.
In his responses to the written questionnaires submitted by Senators
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Kerry sounded
pathetic enough to evade his outspoken convictions on the Armenian
Genocide and Armenia. At the same time he sounded hypocritical enough
to reflect President Obama's unabashed retreat on Armenian issues.
We have become accustomed to this kind of `change of heart' by our
friends on Capitol Hill as soon as they are offered the opportunity to
hold an executive pedestal within the Administration. As such, there
must be an explanation to the about-face of `friends' such as Obama,
Biden, Clinton, Kerry and their ilk.
The explanation lies in the groupthink on Turkey that is embedded
within the National Security Council circles and State Department
staffers. This groupthink expresses itself in favor of Turkey on all
issues that relate to Armenia and Armenian American concerns.
Groupthink on Turkey at the level of the Administration operates in
rationalizing and decision making to support, to please and to appease
Turkey irrespective of prevalent realities that manifest harmful
consequences to U.S. interests. This is an utterly biased practice
that has been going on unchallenged over that past fifty years.
In meetings and dealings with the White House and State Department
staffers on Armenian American concerns, it is easily detected how they
display an instinctive as well as rationalized conformity to a policy
that blindly favors Turkey. When confronted with hard political and
geopolitical facts denoting the damaging effects of Turkish positions
on U.S. strategic interests, they try to minimize or ignore the
problem and stubbornly adhere to their fallacious analysis of the
problem.
Groupthink on Turkey is so perfected that our policy makers in the
Administration are not bothered with their incorrect or deviant
decisions that place our national interests in the harm's way.
A case in point is the overblown assumption that Turkey is a valuable
and loyal ally. Time and again Turkey has evidenced that its
credentials as a U.S. ally - let alone as valuable and loyal - is
highly dubious. Turkey, just like any other country, pursues its own
national interest. In this pursuit it has crossed and conflicted with
U.S. strategic interest over and over again. Since 2002, the Erdogan
government, with its Ottoman empirical ambitions and Islamist
penchants, has repeatedly proven that it has no qualms in ignoring and
even confronting U.S. interests.
Another case in point is the exaggerated importance of Turkey in
geopolitical terms. Turkey is an important country. It carries its
weight in the region. However, in reference to the South Caucasus,
Turkey's geopolitical importance is counterbalanced in significant
measures by Armenia. Given the current regional realities and the
prevalent instabilities in Georgia and Azerbaijan, Armenia is an
important gatekeeper to Eurasia in general and to the South Central
Asian countries in particular. In reference to the latter Armenia
becomes significantly important given those countries' proximity to
China and China's relations with the U.S.
Turkey is not the only country that carries geopolitical weight in the
region. Armenia, with its geographic location and stability, presents
significant geopolitical importance to U.S. strategic interests in the
region. Turkey has made one of its main political objectives to
minimize Armenia's geopolitical importance in the eyes of U.S. and the
West. The Baku-Ceyhan pipeline is a glaring example of Turkish
attempts to bypass Armenia, thereby trying to diminish Armenia's
geopolitical value.
Unfortunately, the U.S. groupthink on Turkey has become a major
obstacle for our policy makers to render Armenia its due share of
importance. As explained by the groupthink theory pioneer Irving
Janis, the groupthink `tends to override realistic appraisal of
alternative courses of action.' Such an attitude does not serve our
national interest well.
Secretary Kerry became the new victim of groupthink on Turkey. The
choice now rests with him not too victimize U.S. interests to this
groupthink process. This choice is also Kerry's dilemma.
Seto Boyadjian is an attorney and serves on the national board of ANCA.
http://asbarez.com/108218/kerry%E2%80%99s-dilemma-the-groupthink-on-turkey/
Secretary of State John Kerry
BY SETO BOYADJIAN, ESQ.
Last week Sen. John Kerry - a long-time supporter of Armenian American
issues - was confirmed as our new Secretary of State. In the process
of his confirmation hearing, Kerry shied away from his continued
stance on Armenian issues and revealed a new face, which in fact is
the old face of the outgoing Secretary Hillary Clinton.
In his responses to the written questionnaires submitted by Senators
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Kerry sounded
pathetic enough to evade his outspoken convictions on the Armenian
Genocide and Armenia. At the same time he sounded hypocritical enough
to reflect President Obama's unabashed retreat on Armenian issues.
We have become accustomed to this kind of `change of heart' by our
friends on Capitol Hill as soon as they are offered the opportunity to
hold an executive pedestal within the Administration. As such, there
must be an explanation to the about-face of `friends' such as Obama,
Biden, Clinton, Kerry and their ilk.
The explanation lies in the groupthink on Turkey that is embedded
within the National Security Council circles and State Department
staffers. This groupthink expresses itself in favor of Turkey on all
issues that relate to Armenia and Armenian American concerns.
Groupthink on Turkey at the level of the Administration operates in
rationalizing and decision making to support, to please and to appease
Turkey irrespective of prevalent realities that manifest harmful
consequences to U.S. interests. This is an utterly biased practice
that has been going on unchallenged over that past fifty years.
In meetings and dealings with the White House and State Department
staffers on Armenian American concerns, it is easily detected how they
display an instinctive as well as rationalized conformity to a policy
that blindly favors Turkey. When confronted with hard political and
geopolitical facts denoting the damaging effects of Turkish positions
on U.S. strategic interests, they try to minimize or ignore the
problem and stubbornly adhere to their fallacious analysis of the
problem.
Groupthink on Turkey is so perfected that our policy makers in the
Administration are not bothered with their incorrect or deviant
decisions that place our national interests in the harm's way.
A case in point is the overblown assumption that Turkey is a valuable
and loyal ally. Time and again Turkey has evidenced that its
credentials as a U.S. ally - let alone as valuable and loyal - is
highly dubious. Turkey, just like any other country, pursues its own
national interest. In this pursuit it has crossed and conflicted with
U.S. strategic interest over and over again. Since 2002, the Erdogan
government, with its Ottoman empirical ambitions and Islamist
penchants, has repeatedly proven that it has no qualms in ignoring and
even confronting U.S. interests.
Another case in point is the exaggerated importance of Turkey in
geopolitical terms. Turkey is an important country. It carries its
weight in the region. However, in reference to the South Caucasus,
Turkey's geopolitical importance is counterbalanced in significant
measures by Armenia. Given the current regional realities and the
prevalent instabilities in Georgia and Azerbaijan, Armenia is an
important gatekeeper to Eurasia in general and to the South Central
Asian countries in particular. In reference to the latter Armenia
becomes significantly important given those countries' proximity to
China and China's relations with the U.S.
Turkey is not the only country that carries geopolitical weight in the
region. Armenia, with its geographic location and stability, presents
significant geopolitical importance to U.S. strategic interests in the
region. Turkey has made one of its main political objectives to
minimize Armenia's geopolitical importance in the eyes of U.S. and the
West. The Baku-Ceyhan pipeline is a glaring example of Turkish
attempts to bypass Armenia, thereby trying to diminish Armenia's
geopolitical value.
Unfortunately, the U.S. groupthink on Turkey has become a major
obstacle for our policy makers to render Armenia its due share of
importance. As explained by the groupthink theory pioneer Irving
Janis, the groupthink `tends to override realistic appraisal of
alternative courses of action.' Such an attitude does not serve our
national interest well.
Secretary Kerry became the new victim of groupthink on Turkey. The
choice now rests with him not too victimize U.S. interests to this
groupthink process. This choice is also Kerry's dilemma.
Seto Boyadjian is an attorney and serves on the national board of ANCA.
http://asbarez.com/108218/kerry%E2%80%99s-dilemma-the-groupthink-on-turkey/