THE MISGUIDED POLICY OF CENSURING ALLIES
By Tom Ordeman, Jr.

Family Security Matters, NJ
php?id=1385079
Oct 23 2007

A major development in American foreign policy during recent weeks
has been the decision of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign
Affairs Committee to declare the actions by the Ottoman Empire in
1915 to have been genocide. On the surface, this effort appears to
be little more than a symbolic effort to acknowledge a past injustice.

However, the situation is far more complex, with far-reaching
consequences for national security.

In 1915, the present-day nation of Armenia was a possession of the
Ottoman Empire. As World War I escalated, the forces of the Ottoman
Empire forcibly deported and, in some cases, killed the Armenian
people. This led to the deaths of an estimated one million Armenians.

While the Ottomans ostensibly claimed that this effort was part of
a wider war strategy, accusations of genocide have resounded ever
since. The Ottoman Empire, the last remnant of the Islamic Caliphate,
dissolved after the defeat of the Central Powers in 1918. Its
largest remnant, Turkey, was reorganized by the legendary Mustafa
Kemal Ataturk into a secular democracy. Turkey is a NATO member, and
although the Turks expressed concerns regarding the invasion of Iraq,
Turkey remains a crucial logistical hub for American forces operating
in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Armenia, despite sporadic episodes of independence, was a possession
of Ottoman Turkey until the Ottoman Empire dissolved. Despite a
brief stint as a sovereign nation, Armenia was conquered by the
Red Army in 1920 and held as a Soviet possession until the fall of
the Iron Curtain in 1991. Armenia has had a continuing territorial
dispute with neighboring Azerbaijan, another former Soviet holding,
since 1988. The Armenians claim the distinction of being the first
Christian nation in history. Armenia’s neighbors include Christian
Georgia, and Muslim Turkey, Iran, and Azerbaijan. Armenia committed
a contingent of troops to support Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The Bush Administration has opposed the move by the House Foreign
Affairs Committee, and President Bush has consulted with Turkish
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on the matter. In the wake of
the resolution’s approval by the committee (which will likely result
in movement to the House of Representatives for a full vote), the
Turkish ambassador to Washington has been recalled, and the Turkish
government has threatened to restrict its airspace or cut off access
to a Turkish air base used by U.S. forces if the resolution is pushed
through. Turkey has increased in importance following the closure of
several facilities in Central Asia during the past several years.

Of perhaps greater import is the looming incursion of Turkish forces
into northern Iraq in an effort to disrupt outposts in Iraqi territory
that are used by PKK terrorists. Despite recent diplomatic efforts
between Ankara and Baghdad, continued attacks on Turkish forces
by the PKK have resulted in a buildup along the border in recent
months. Turkish lawmakers have authorized the Turkish government to
enter Iraqi territory. Although the Turks have stated that an incursion
is neither imminent nor inevitable, continued attacks by the PKK
continue to raise tensions between Turkey, Iraq, and the United States.

One of Turkey’s major reasons for concern over the invasion of Iraq
was the issue of the Kurds. The most stable region of Iraq, Kurdistan
enjoyed a degree of independence even under Saddam Hussein; as a
result, it has become a sort of de facto safe haven for the Kurdish
PKK terrorists, who attack Turkish forces and then retreat into
sovereign Iraqi territory. A major component of the worldwide Kurdish
population resides in Turkey, and Kurdish separatism is a continuing
concern to the Turkish government. The Turkish build-up on the border
has led to growing concern among both American and Iraqi officials,
as an incursion and major disruption in Iraqi Kurdistan would run the
risk of introducing instability into one of only a handful of stable
regions in Iraq.

The severity of the treatment of the Armenians at the hands of Ottoman
troops should not be trivialized. However, why the House Foreign
Relations Committee decided that October of 2007 was the right time to
bring government attention to an event that happened more than ninety
years ago, and that was perpetrated by a country that no longer exists,
is less than apparent. Further, the motivation for knowingly offending
the only secular, Western-style democracy in the Islamic world (and a
NATO ally, no less) is, in this case, a total mystery. This resolution
has already had a far-reaching negative impact on national security,
and it follows similar congressional proceedings in February aimed
at censuring Japan for sex slavery in World War II.

While both the private and public sectors in the United States should
remain committed to a steadfast accountability for human rights,
cases such as these are yet another reminder that diplomacy and
responsibility are directly tied to our national security. Given that
many claim (though erroneously) that Americans are universally loathed
abroad, surely we as a nation can find better ways than this to show
our solidarity with formerly-oppressed friends without provoking our
closest allies. What’s more – don’t our distinguished elected leaders
in the United States Congress have more important contemporary issues
to address, rather than dredging up symbolic issues from nearly a
century ago?

# #

FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Tom Ordeman, Jr. is a
technical writer for a major defense contractor. He holds a B.S. in
History and Naval Science from Oregon State University. He specializes
in military affairs and international terrorism.