Tweet
International Herald Tribune, France
Oct 19 2006
Mind your own business, France
Suat Kiniklioglu International Herald Tribune
Published: October 19, 2006
ANKARA Turkey is in an uproar. Turks are reacting bitterly to the
tactlessness of the French National Assembly in passing a bill that
would criminalize "denial" of the Armenian "genocide."
Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy of France is right: The vote
is seen as an unfriendly gesture by a vast majority of the Turkish
people. We are dismayed by the ease with which French lawmakers seem
willing to jeopardize relations between France and Turkey dating from
the 16th century.
What puzzles us even more is that of all countries, France - seen by
us as the symbol of civil liberties and free speech - would become
hostage to a small, if influential, lobby that exploits every electoral
opportunity to advance its narrow agenda.
Lawmakers are not historians and their attempt to establish facts about
an extremely sensitive and complicated historic event is misguided
at best. Further, the proposed bill represents a blow to freedom
of expression at a time when European Union member states regularly
lecture Ankara on legislation they view as curtailing free speech.
Both on grounds of substance and process, the National Assembly's
action is deeply offensive and counterproductive. That is why the EU
enlargement commissioner, Olli Rehn, and 16 prominent French historians
opposed the bill.
Many Turks interpret the National Assembly's action as not just an
attempt to appease an active lobby, but also as a populist appeal to
the majority of the French public opposed to Turkish membership in
the European Union.
In the run-up to what promises to be a very competitive presidential
race next spring, both the French left and right seem ill disposed
toward a predominantly Muslim country interested in EU membership.
Bound legally by the EU Council's decision to start accession
negotiations with Turkey, French lawmakers may hope to provoke an
already unsettled Turkey to quit the negotiations by touching a
sensitive nerve. Whether such irresponsible behavior hinders efforts
to heal the wounds of World War I and the tragedy of Ottoman Armenians
seems to be lost on them.
Ironically, this ill-considered action comes at a time when Turkey's
domestic debate on the Armenian issue is more open than at any time
in the past. Turks on both sides of the issue are intensely discussing
what happened in 1915-1916 and whether it can be defined as genocide.
Last year, in an unprecedented move, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan suggested that Turkey and Armenia set up a joint commission of
historians to determine whether the events of 1915-1916 constituted
genocide. The offer was rejected by Armenia. Turkey also organized
its first international conference on the Armenian issue with Armenian
historians last year. Furthermore, Turkey's determination to join the
EU provides ongoing impetus for this healthy process of reconciliation
to continue.
Turkish-Armenian reconciliation cannot be facilitated by laws passed
in foreign parliaments. Such moves only help those who thrive on the
continuation of the impasse between Turks and Armenians.
As tempting as gesture politics may be for French politicians, any
genuine effort at reconciliation must be based on the recognition
that both Armenians and Turks suffered immensely during the fateful
years of World War I. To move forward, the focus must be broadened
to include common losses and experiences during this period, rather
than limited to the question of whether the events of 1915-1916 can
be qualified as genocide. Context is critical.
Having Turkey as a member in the EU is both in Europe's and Armenia's
interest. Provoking Turkey on a sensitive issue only serves to further
alienate a country whose destiny will have a major impact on the
greater Europe of which Armenia is also part.
As the British Armenian historian Ara Sarafian eloquently noted,
the ultimate irony is that France, which has not faced up to its own
genocidal past, dares to pass legislation on Turkey's past.
Thankfully our lawmakers are unlikely to follow that path. After all,
we want to remain true to the ideals of Rousseau, Voltaire and the
French encyclopedists who inspired us and the European Enlightenment.
Suat Kiniklioglu is director of the Ankara office of the German
Marshall Fund of the United States.
ANKARA Turkey is in an uproar. Turks are reacting bitterly to the
tactlessness of the French National Assembly in passing a bill that
would criminalize "denial" of the Armenian "genocide."
Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy of France is right: The vote
is seen as an unfriendly gesture by a vast majority of the Turkish
people. We are dismayed by the ease with which French lawmakers seem
willing to jeopardize relations between France and Turkey dating from
the 16th century.
What puzzles us even more is that of all countries, France - seen by
us as the symbol of civil liberties and free speech - would become
hostage to a small, if influential, lobby that exploits every electoral
opportunity to advance its narrow agenda.
Lawmakers are not historians and their attempt to establish facts about
an extremely sensitive and complicated historic event is misguided
at best. Further, the proposed bill represents a blow to freedom
of expression at a time when European Union member states regularly
lecture Ankara on legislation they view as curtailing free speech.
Both on grounds of substance and process, the National Assembly's
action is deeply offensive and counterproductive. That is why the EU
enlargement commissioner, Olli Rehn, and 16 prominent French historians
opposed the bill.
Many Turks interpret the National Assembly's action as not just an
attempt to appease an active lobby, but also as a populist appeal to
the majority of the French public opposed to Turkish membership in
the European Union.
In the run-up to what promises to be a very competitive presidential
race next spring, both the French left and right seem ill disposed
toward a predominantly Muslim country interested in EU membership.
Bound legally by the EU Council's decision to start accession
negotiations with Turkey, French lawmakers may hope to provoke an
already unsettled Turkey to quit the negotiations by touching a
sensitive nerve. Whether such irresponsible behavior hinders efforts
to heal the wounds of World War I and the tragedy of Ottoman Armenians
seems to be lost on them.
Ironically, this ill-considered action comes at a time when Turkey's
domestic debate on the Armenian issue is more open than at any time
in the past. Turks on both sides of the issue are intensely discussing
what happened in 1915-1916 and whether it can be defined as genocide.
Last year, in an unprecedented move, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan suggested that Turkey and Armenia set up a joint commission of
historians to determine whether the events of 1915-1916 constituted
genocide. The offer was rejected by Armenia. Turkey also organized
its first international conference on the Armenian issue with Armenian
historians last year. Furthermore, Turkey's determination to join the
EU provides ongoing impetus for this healthy process of reconciliation
to continue.
Turkish-Armenian reconciliation cannot be facilitated by laws passed
in foreign parliaments. Such moves only help those who thrive on the
continuation of the impasse between Turks and Armenians.
As tempting as gesture politics may be for French politicians, any
genuine effort at reconciliation must be based on the recognition
that both Armenians and Turks suffered immensely during the fateful
years of World War I. To move forward, the focus must be broadened
to include common losses and experiences during this period, rather
than limited to the question of whether the events of 1915-1916 can
be qualified as genocide. Context is critical.
Having Turkey as a member in the EU is both in Europe's and Armenia's
interest. Provoking Turkey on a sensitive issue only serves to further
alienate a country whose destiny will have a major impact on the
greater Europe of which Armenia is also part.
As the British Armenian historian Ara Sarafian eloquently noted,
the ultimate irony is that France, which has not faced up to its own
genocidal past, dares to pass legislation on Turkey's past.
Thankfully our lawmakers are unlikely to follow that path. After all,
we want to remain true to the ideals of Rousseau, Voltaire and the
French encyclopedists who inspired us and the European Enlightenment.
Suat Kiniklioglu is director of the Ankara office of the German
Marshall Fund of the United States.
Oct 19 2006
Mind your own business, France
Suat Kiniklioglu International Herald Tribune
Published: October 19, 2006
ANKARA Turkey is in an uproar. Turks are reacting bitterly to the
tactlessness of the French National Assembly in passing a bill that
would criminalize "denial" of the Armenian "genocide."
Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy of France is right: The vote
is seen as an unfriendly gesture by a vast majority of the Turkish
people. We are dismayed by the ease with which French lawmakers seem
willing to jeopardize relations between France and Turkey dating from
the 16th century.
What puzzles us even more is that of all countries, France - seen by
us as the symbol of civil liberties and free speech - would become
hostage to a small, if influential, lobby that exploits every electoral
opportunity to advance its narrow agenda.
Lawmakers are not historians and their attempt to establish facts about
an extremely sensitive and complicated historic event is misguided
at best. Further, the proposed bill represents a blow to freedom
of expression at a time when European Union member states regularly
lecture Ankara on legislation they view as curtailing free speech.
Both on grounds of substance and process, the National Assembly's
action is deeply offensive and counterproductive. That is why the EU
enlargement commissioner, Olli Rehn, and 16 prominent French historians
opposed the bill.
Many Turks interpret the National Assembly's action as not just an
attempt to appease an active lobby, but also as a populist appeal to
the majority of the French public opposed to Turkish membership in
the European Union.
In the run-up to what promises to be a very competitive presidential
race next spring, both the French left and right seem ill disposed
toward a predominantly Muslim country interested in EU membership.
Bound legally by the EU Council's decision to start accession
negotiations with Turkey, French lawmakers may hope to provoke an
already unsettled Turkey to quit the negotiations by touching a
sensitive nerve. Whether such irresponsible behavior hinders efforts
to heal the wounds of World War I and the tragedy of Ottoman Armenians
seems to be lost on them.
Ironically, this ill-considered action comes at a time when Turkey's
domestic debate on the Armenian issue is more open than at any time
in the past. Turks on both sides of the issue are intensely discussing
what happened in 1915-1916 and whether it can be defined as genocide.
Last year, in an unprecedented move, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan suggested that Turkey and Armenia set up a joint commission of
historians to determine whether the events of 1915-1916 constituted
genocide. The offer was rejected by Armenia. Turkey also organized
its first international conference on the Armenian issue with Armenian
historians last year. Furthermore, Turkey's determination to join the
EU provides ongoing impetus for this healthy process of reconciliation
to continue.
Turkish-Armenian reconciliation cannot be facilitated by laws passed
in foreign parliaments. Such moves only help those who thrive on the
continuation of the impasse between Turks and Armenians.
As tempting as gesture politics may be for French politicians, any
genuine effort at reconciliation must be based on the recognition
that both Armenians and Turks suffered immensely during the fateful
years of World War I. To move forward, the focus must be broadened
to include common losses and experiences during this period, rather
than limited to the question of whether the events of 1915-1916 can
be qualified as genocide. Context is critical.
Having Turkey as a member in the EU is both in Europe's and Armenia's
interest. Provoking Turkey on a sensitive issue only serves to further
alienate a country whose destiny will have a major impact on the
greater Europe of which Armenia is also part.
As the British Armenian historian Ara Sarafian eloquently noted,
the ultimate irony is that France, which has not faced up to its own
genocidal past, dares to pass legislation on Turkey's past.
Thankfully our lawmakers are unlikely to follow that path. After all,
we want to remain true to the ideals of Rousseau, Voltaire and the
French encyclopedists who inspired us and the European Enlightenment.
Suat Kiniklioglu is director of the Ankara office of the German
Marshall Fund of the United States.
ANKARA Turkey is in an uproar. Turks are reacting bitterly to the
tactlessness of the French National Assembly in passing a bill that
would criminalize "denial" of the Armenian "genocide."
Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy of France is right: The vote
is seen as an unfriendly gesture by a vast majority of the Turkish
people. We are dismayed by the ease with which French lawmakers seem
willing to jeopardize relations between France and Turkey dating from
the 16th century.
What puzzles us even more is that of all countries, France - seen by
us as the symbol of civil liberties and free speech - would become
hostage to a small, if influential, lobby that exploits every electoral
opportunity to advance its narrow agenda.
Lawmakers are not historians and their attempt to establish facts about
an extremely sensitive and complicated historic event is misguided
at best. Further, the proposed bill represents a blow to freedom
of expression at a time when European Union member states regularly
lecture Ankara on legislation they view as curtailing free speech.
Both on grounds of substance and process, the National Assembly's
action is deeply offensive and counterproductive. That is why the EU
enlargement commissioner, Olli Rehn, and 16 prominent French historians
opposed the bill.
Many Turks interpret the National Assembly's action as not just an
attempt to appease an active lobby, but also as a populist appeal to
the majority of the French public opposed to Turkish membership in
the European Union.
In the run-up to what promises to be a very competitive presidential
race next spring, both the French left and right seem ill disposed
toward a predominantly Muslim country interested in EU membership.
Bound legally by the EU Council's decision to start accession
negotiations with Turkey, French lawmakers may hope to provoke an
already unsettled Turkey to quit the negotiations by touching a
sensitive nerve. Whether such irresponsible behavior hinders efforts
to heal the wounds of World War I and the tragedy of Ottoman Armenians
seems to be lost on them.
Ironically, this ill-considered action comes at a time when Turkey's
domestic debate on the Armenian issue is more open than at any time
in the past. Turks on both sides of the issue are intensely discussing
what happened in 1915-1916 and whether it can be defined as genocide.
Last year, in an unprecedented move, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan suggested that Turkey and Armenia set up a joint commission of
historians to determine whether the events of 1915-1916 constituted
genocide. The offer was rejected by Armenia. Turkey also organized
its first international conference on the Armenian issue with Armenian
historians last year. Furthermore, Turkey's determination to join the
EU provides ongoing impetus for this healthy process of reconciliation
to continue.
Turkish-Armenian reconciliation cannot be facilitated by laws passed
in foreign parliaments. Such moves only help those who thrive on the
continuation of the impasse between Turks and Armenians.
As tempting as gesture politics may be for French politicians, any
genuine effort at reconciliation must be based on the recognition
that both Armenians and Turks suffered immensely during the fateful
years of World War I. To move forward, the focus must be broadened
to include common losses and experiences during this period, rather
than limited to the question of whether the events of 1915-1916 can
be qualified as genocide. Context is critical.
Having Turkey as a member in the EU is both in Europe's and Armenia's
interest. Provoking Turkey on a sensitive issue only serves to further
alienate a country whose destiny will have a major impact on the
greater Europe of which Armenia is also part.
As the British Armenian historian Ara Sarafian eloquently noted,
the ultimate irony is that France, which has not faced up to its own
genocidal past, dares to pass legislation on Turkey's past.
Thankfully our lawmakers are unlikely to follow that path. After all,
we want to remain true to the ideals of Rousseau, Voltaire and the
French encyclopedists who inspired us and the European Enlightenment.
Suat Kiniklioglu is director of the Ankara office of the German
Marshall Fund of the United States.