POLITICAL REALITY TRUMPS RECOGNITION OF GENOCIDE
by Andrew Wagner

UW Badger Herald, WI
Oct 12 2007

"Genocide" is one of the most powerful words in existence. The
systematic killing of a people by a government, solely for their
membership in a particular group, has come to represent the ultimate
act of inhumanity to most of the world. Once the word enters a
conversation, the stakes involved rise dramatically, as well they
should. Given the ability of the word to tarnish an entire country
or generation of people, it comes as no surprise that any accusation
of genocide immediately evolves into a pressing political issue.

The United States House of Representatives learned this first
hand Wednesday. The Foreign Affairs Committee voted 27-21 to pass a
resolution saying, "The Armenian Genocide was conceived and carried out
by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923, resulting in the deportation
of nearly 2,000,000 Armenians, of whom 1,500,000 men, women, and
children were killed." According to BBC, the vote crossed party lines,
with both Republicans and Democrats exchanging "yes" and "no" votes.

Unfortunately, the government and citizens of Turkey generally view
the issue in a different light. They contend that genocide did not
actually take place. Their position is that foreign and subversive
forces have unfairly increased the death toll and misconstrued what
amounted to a civil war and other World War I-related casualties as
genocide. Thus, when the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed the
resolution, the Turkish government immediately condemned the effort.

The issue has also sparked protests at the U.S. Embassy in Ankara.

Just yesterday, CNN reported that Turkey had recalled its ambassador
to the United States over the resolution. Clearly, this is spiraling
into a diplomatic crisis.

Despite the Turkish government’s position, the evidence for an Armenian
genocide is incontrovertible. For example, U.S. newspapers widely
reported the genocide, and the United States played a large role in
providing aid to the Armenian survivors. Also, embassy officials from
all of the major nations in Europe and the United States submitted
official reports on the killings. Finally, the Ottoman Empire itself
commissioned trials after the war that convicted some of the government
officials responsible for the genocide, including the former prime
minister and minister of war.

Nearly every citizen of a country wants to believe the best things
about their country. The denial and marginalization of these events
by the modern Turkish government and people represents an attempt
to shelve a past history that is both uncomfortable and potentially
harmful to the national history of Turkey.

Should the House Foreign Affairs Committee have passed this
resolution? Looking at the issue solely on the moral issues, yes, the
committee should have passed the resolution. Other notable countries
have recognized the genocide, including a relatively recent resolution
by France. I firmly believe that part of the way to prevent these
monstrous occurrences from happening in the future is to treat them
in the most transparent way possible. Vigilance and remembrance of
the past can help change the future.

Unfortunately, moral issues do not perfectly translate into the
realm of international politics. Turkey has been a member of NATO
since 1952. Furthermore, Turkey has a relatively unique secular and
democratic state in a part of the world where that model rarely exists.

For the past 60-odd years, American-Turkish relations have been good.

The United States lobbied for the admission of Turkey to the EU.

Shaking this foundation of good relations should require considerable
forethought.

Beyond the past history and foundation of the American-Turkish
relationship, the United States functionally depends on Turkey.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that Turkey constitutes
a vital hub for all of the current Middle Eastern and Afghanistan
operations. Gates remarked that more than 70 percent of air cargo to
Iraq flows through Turkish airbases. When France passed its resolution,
Turkey responded by denying French planes overflight rights. If Turkey
acts in a similar fashion, this will decrease the ability to supply
forces in the Middle East.

Another aspect affected by this crisis is Turkey’s plan to invade
northern Iraq. For decades, Turkey has been fighting a guerilla war
against Kurdish rebels who cross the border from northern Iraq into
Turkey. Recently, Turkey has implemented a major buildup of forces
and publicly declared that it is intent on entering Iraq to eliminate
the rebels.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that this can only destabilize
the region more. It may already be too late to forestall a Turkish
invasion, but this diplomatic crisis makes it almost certain that
the Turkish government will not and cannot be seen heeding U.S. calls
for restraint.

As much as I sympathize with the perspective of the Armenians, this
resolution has already provoked a crisis and could easily create real
difficulties if Turkey invades Iraq or cuts off the supply chain. It
should not have passed out of committee.

In the scheme of things, Turkey is simply a more important issue. If
the full House of Representatives votes on this resolution, as
Democratic leaders have threatened, this move will only make the
situation worse. I hate to say it, but realpolitik must win out
in this case: Turkey is simply more important to the United States
than Armenia.

Andrew Wagner (awagner@badgerherald.com) is a junior majoring in
history and political science.

political_reality_tr.php