INTERVIEW WITH ADAM SCHIFF

Fox News Network
October 20, 2007 Saturday

PAUL GIGOT, HOST: This week on the "Journal Editorial Report," a
congressional resolution condemning a massacre in Turkey a century
ago threatens to endanger military progress in Iraq today.

Plus, a new report says al-Qaeda in Iraq is on its last legs, but is
it really time to declare victory?

Thinking about making a move? Stay ahead of the tax man with our
state-by-state guide to the best and worst places to live.

Those topics, plus our weekly "Hits and Misses", but first, the
headlines.

(NEWSBREAK)

GIGOT: Welcome to the "Journal Editorial Report." I’m Paul Gigot.

A House committee voted last week to condemn the mass killings of
Armenians in Turkey in World War I as an act of genocide, despite
warnings it would strain relation was an important Iraq war allies.

Following the vote, Turkey recalled its ambassador to the U.S. and
officials there warned if the resolution is approved by the full
House they will reconsider their support for the American war effort,
which includes permission to move essential supplies through Turkey
into northern Iraq.

Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff of California is the author of
the Armenian genocide resolution. He has more than 70,000 ethnic
Armenians in his Los Angeles district.

Congressman, welcome. Good to have you on the program.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF, (D), CALIFORNIA: Thanks, Paul. Nice to join you.

GIGOT: This atrocity occurred 90 years ago. Why bring it up now at
this delicate moment in the Middle East?

SCHIFF: Well, Paul, you have to put it in perspective. We have tried
to recognize the genocide really for years, even decade. We introduced
this resolution before the Iraq war and the administration said now
is not a good time. We introduce it before the war in Afghanistan
and the administration said it wasn’t a good time, before 9/11 and
said it wasn’t a good time.

I stood yesterday in the capitol rotunda and watched the president
bestow the Medal of Honor on the Dalai Lama and I was proud of him. I
was proud of him doing that notwithstanding the fact China protested
that it was deeply offensive to our strategic partner in China.

Someone asked him, Mr. President, why do you risk antagonizing China.

The president earlier said that preventing Iran from getting a nuclear
weapon could be so important it might stop World War III.

Paul, you know whose vote we need on the Security Council to pre-
investment Iran from getting the bomb? We need China’s vote. But,
you know, the president said when America stands up for human rights
and freedom, America is always serving its national interest. The
president was right then.

But the president believes that the situation in Tibet, the invasion
that took place 50 years ago, it is important to recognize what took
place in China but not what took place in Turkey, though it involved
the murder of a million and a half people. It doesn’t make sense to me.

GIGOT: Congressman, the current dispute in Tibet is ongoing and it
is about human rights in Tibet now. This resolution is 100 years ago.

SCHIFF: You know what, Paul? The dispute going on is important now
as well. Just last week, Turkey brought up on charges the son of a
murdered Armenian journalist in Turkey, who was killed this year,
on charges of publishing his father words about the genocide. Is that
freedom in Turkey to speak out about the genocide not important? Is the
freedom of expression the freedom to talk about some of the darkest
chapters in the history of the world not important? Why is freedom
in China important but freedom in Turkey of so little value?

GIGOT: Congressman, let’s say Turkey does take offense, and they
say they will, and they decide to cut off supplies, the supply
route we have, an important airbase there. If they decide to cut off
supplies to Turkey, are you, as a member of Congress, willing to take
responsibility for the consequences of that?

SCHIFF: Paul, we have to expect Turkey will act in their national
interests. They’re an important ally to us and we are pan important
ally to them. The fact that the European Union wants to make genocide
recognition a condition of Turkey getting into the E.U. hasn’t stopped
Turkey from wanting to be in the E.U.

I have to expect Turkey will act rationally. But I also think,
Paul, and maybe can you point to an example of the contrary, that
has inform been the case, that we have served our national interest
well by denying the truth, particularly when it involves genocide. I
don’t think this will be the first time where it was advantageous to
our country to deny the truth.

At the ceremony yesterday, Elie Wiesel said that speaking truth
to power gives power to the truth. That’s true with China. It is
also true with Turkey. And I think we have to speak that compelling
historic truth.

GIGOT: On the other hand…

SCHIFF: Yes, I have an Armenian community in my district. I have
sat in their living rooms and heard stories about how their parents
and grandparents were wiped out. Paul, if it was your parents and
grandparents, you would be screaming to the rafters we should recognize
what happened to them. And the fact that it was our neighbor’s family
and not our own shouldn’t matter.

GIGOT: Congressman, there is a long list of people on the other side
of this. General David Petraeus, head of American forces in Iraq,
eight former secretaries of state, including Madeleine Albright. When
this issue came up in 2000, President Clinton called the Republican
speaker of the House, then Denny Hastert, and asked him to pull this
so if wouldn’t compromise our situation in the Middle East. He did.

Why shouldn’t the Democrats now, at the request of an American
president, decide to pull something like this at a similar moment?

SCHIFF: Paul, these eight secretaries of state you mentioned, this
was their policy. They are defending their policy during those —
the administrations of those eight secretaries they were willing to
deny the genocide and become complicit in Turkey’s denial.

The last president, Paul, who had the courage to recognize the Armenian
genocide, was President Reagan. What would you have said to President
Reagan if you were his advisor? Mr. President, I know you talk about
the United States being a moral beacon for the word but we are in
the middle of the Cold War this was antagonize Turkey. Mr. President,
you shouldn’t do it.

But you know what? Ronald Reagan had the guts to do it. He had the
guts to say, no, this country stand for something and I stand for
something. And you know what, Paul? You applaud him for that. You
applaud him for the courage. Why shouldn’t we ask this president
to have the same courage? He likes to model himself after President
Reagan. All Republican presidents like to, but let’s have the courage
that Ronald Reagan had to speak the truth.

GIGOT: Congressman, what’s your response to Dave Petraeus who says
this will make his mission more difficult to achieve in Iraq?

SCHIFF: I respect General Petraeus. I have been to Iraq three times.

I met him in Mosul on one of my trips there. He is doing his job and
he is, I think, a very honorable man. His mission is Iraq. When he
testified before the Senate and he was asked, is what we are doing
in Iraq making our national security better, is it improving our
national security. You know what he said? I really can’t answer that.

The reason he couldn’t answer that is his mission is only Iraq.

I think the president needs to look to the greater war on terror
and say what about our moral standing in the world. What role does
it have when we espouse truth about history in terms of fighting this
ideological struggle in the war on terror? That’s not General Petraeus’
responsibility. It is the responsibility of the president.

I think Ronald Reagan had it right and I think this president has
it wrong.

GIGOT: Congressman, you get the last word. Thanks for being here.

SCHIFF: Thank you.

GIGOT: When we come back, a new report says the U.S. military dealt
al-Qaeda in Iraq a crippling blow. Should we declare victory? Our
panel debates when the "Journal Editorial Report" continues.