TURKEY NEEDS TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
by Paul Kujawsky

Examiner.com
814-LA-Middle-Eastern-Policy-Examiner~y2009m4d1-Tu rkey-needs-to-accept-responsibility-for-the-Armeni an-Genocide
April 1 2009

Turkey is a not a simple country. As the Ottoman Turkish Empire,
it was the seat of the Islamic Caliphate until World War I, but has
been a secular republic since the Ataturk revolution; a member of
NATO that seeks to join the European Union while also wanting closer
ties with the Turkic and Muslim nations to its east; and a democracy
whose prime minister can fairly be described as "Islamist."

One of the issues Turkey finds most troublesome is the death of
some million and a half Armenians beginning in 1915 in eastern
Anatolia. This is known almost universally as the "Armenian
Genocide." However, Turkey has always, angrily, rejected the charge
of genocide. The Turkish position is that there were many deaths,
on all sides, in the context of World War I.

Questioning this position in Turkey can be dangerous. The foremost
example is Hrant Dink, the Turkish-Armenian journalist. Because of his
writings about the Armenian Genocide, he was tried and convicted of
violating Turkish Penal Code section 301, which forbids "insulting
Turkishness." He was murdered in 2007 by Turkish nationalist Ogun
Samast.

The U.S. Congress is considering weighing in on the subject. Southern
California Congressmember Adam Schiff (whose district includes a
substantial Armenian-American population) and over eighty co-sponsors
have introduced House Resolution 252, the "Affirmation of the United
States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution." The resolution
includes the following findings:

(1) 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, 500,000 survivors were expelled from their homes, and
which succeeded in the elimination of the over 2,500-year presence
of Armenians in their historic homeland.

(2) On May 24, 1915, the Allied Powers, England, France, and Russia,
jointly issued a statement explicitly charging for the first time
ever another government of committing "a crime against humanity."

(3) This joint statement stated "the Allied Governments announce
publicly to the Sublime Porte that they will hold personally
responsible for these crimes all members of the Ottoman Government,
as well as those of their agents who are implicated in such massacres."

(4) The post-World War I Turkish Government indicted the top leaders
involved in the "organization and execution" of the Armenian Genocide
and in the "massacre and destruction of the Armenians."

(5) In a series of courts-martial, officials of the Young Turk Regime
were tried and convicted, as charged, for organizing and executing
massacres against the Armenian people.

(6) The chief organizers of the Armenian Genocide, Minister of War
Enver, Minister of the Interior Talaat, and Minister of the Navy Jemal
were all condemned to death for their crimes, however, the verdicts
of the courts were not enforced.

(7) The Armenian Genocide and these domestic judicial failures are
documented with overwhelming evidence in the national archives of
Austria, France, Germany, Great Britain, Russia, the United States,
the Vatican and many other countries, and this vast body of evidence
attests to the same facts, the same events, and the same consequences.

(8) The United States National Archives and Record Administration
holds extensive and thorough documentation on the Armenian Genocide,
especially in its holdings under Record Group 59 of the United States
Department of State, files 867.00 and 867.40, which are open and
widely available to the public and interested institutions.

(9) The Honorable Henry Morgenthau, United States Ambassador to
the Ottoman Empire from 1913 to 1916, organized and led protests by
officials of many countries, among them the allies of the Ottoman
Empire, against the Armenian Genocide.

(10) Ambassador Morgenthau explicitly described to the United States
Department of State the policy of the Government of the Ottoman
Empire as "a campaign of race extermination"’ and was instructed on
July 16, 1915, by United States Secretary of State Robert Lansing
that the "Department approves your procedure . . . to stop Armenian
persecution."

(The statements from period don’t use the word "genocide" simply
because that word wouldn’t be coined until the 1940s.) The resolution
calls on the president to ensure that American foreign policy reflects
the view that the Armenians were the victims of genocide.

This puts President Barack Obama in a delicate position. He will
visit Turkey April 5-7. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted that
the visit is "a reflection of the value we place on our friendship
with Turkey." U.S. relations with Turkey have been strained by the
American liberation of Iraq. The visit is part of Obama’s design to
repair relations with the Muslim world.

The problem is, during the presidential campaign Obama promised
American recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Foreign policy
"realists" are urging Obama to betray that promise:

"If President Obama takes no action to prevent congressional enactment
of the resolution, endorses the measure, or uses the word genocide
himself, the Turkish response will be harsh and trigger a bitter
breach in relations."

They’re probably right about the official Turkish reaction. But
they’re still wrong.

Joe Ribakoff, the former executive director of the Southern California
Council on Soviet Jewry, writes an illuminating piece explaining
why. The essential point is that Turkey’s rigid denial only harms
itself, while making the recurrence of genocide more likely:

Genocide is not a trait peculiar to a handful of outlaw nations. It
is human failing. It is something that can occur in any nation and to
any people. Only when nations admit to it can when we begin to combat
against this human failing. The moral leaders in the modern world are
the nations that can admit to this. Turkey is no different. Turkey,
a great nation, will elevate itself to a world leader by acknowledging
the Armenian Genocide.

A pertinent comparison is the post-war history of the World War II Axis
powers. No crime is more universally abhorred than the Shoa–the murder
of millions of Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators. West Germany
(and later, reunified Germany) won respect for facing its history
without flinching or evasion. By contrast, Japanese society’s failure
to reach a consensus on guilt and shame regarding its war crimes leads
to periodic eruptions of outrage in China, South Korea and elsewhere.

Ribakoff also sees a strategic reason for Turkey to accept
responsibility, relating to Russian-Caucasian politics:

As the Soviet Union collapsed in the early 1990s, war broke between
Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno Karabagh, a region that is
historically and demographically Armenian, but which was transferred
to Azerbaijan by Josef Stalin. Armenia prevailed over Azerbaijan over
Nagorno Karabagh, then expanded the war to a grab for territory that
is historically and demographically Azeri. In the course of the war,
Armenia ethnically cleansed the Azeris.

Turkey responded to plight of its Azeri cousins and deployed its
armed forces along the Armenian border. At Armenia’s invitation,
the Russian army was deployed in Armenia to square off against Turkey.

The war between Armenia and Azerbaijan is now more than 15 years
old. Yet, there is still no peace agreement. It is a frozen war, with
no permanent resolution. There still are border skirmishes between the
two countries. And Russian soldiers are still garrisoned in Armenia.

Russian forces in Armenia are estimated to be around 4,000 – 5,000 in
men. It is believed that the units in Armenia when fully staffed can
swell to 20,000. This is a sizable presence strategically located on
Turkey’s eastern flank, adjacent the Caspian Sea and Central Asian oil
and gas routes, and giving Russia overland access to neighboring Iran.

As Ribakoff sees it, Turkish recognition of the Armenian Genocide
would be a significant confidence-buildng gesture. It could reduce
tensions in a volatile region, eventually leading to the withdrawal of
the Russian troops from Armenia and protecting important oil and gas
deposits and pipelines from an increasingly aggressive Russia. (The
first step toward diplomatic recognition has already been taken:
Turkey won its wish to postpone the reckoning by having the genocide
issue investigated by a joint Turkish-Armenian committee.)

Turkey will react badly to being pressed on the Armenian Genocide. It
will threaten relations with Israel, with the U.S., it will threaten
cooperation on the war against Islamism, and who knows what else. We
have to understand that this is its key strategy for not dealing with
the issue. Like a child having a tantrum, Turkey raises the cost of
insisting on correct behavior. And as with a child, we need to endure
the short-term pain for the long-term benefit.