Tweet
INTERNAL DOCUMENTS REVEAL UK OFFICIALS MISLED PARLIAMENT ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
By Harut Sassounian
The California Courier
Nov 6, 2009
A prominent legal expert, Mr. Geoffrey Robertson, exposed this week
the false and inaccurate statements on the Armenian Genocide made by
the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). The international
jurist revealed that for many years the FCO (Foreign Ministry) had
misled the British Parliament on the facts of the Armenian Genocide
in order to curry favor with the Turkish government.
The 40-page meticulously-researched report, commissioned by the
Armenian Centre of London, is based on hitherto secret documents
obtained from the Foreign Office through the Freedom of Information
Act. Mr. Robertson, the author of a report titled, "Was there an
Armenian Genocide?" served as first President of the UN War Crimes
Court in Sierra Leone.
Mr. Robertson had to make repeated requests over several months to
the British government in order to obtain internal documents that
the Foreign Office was legally obligated to release. According to
the FCO, some of the documents were not released at all, while those
eventually made public were partially blacked out, in order not to
damage Britain's relations with Turkey.
In his report, Mr. Robertson explains that the Armenian Centre had
asked him "to consider the attitude of the British government in
refusing to accept that the massacres of Armenians in 1915-16 amounted
to genocide, and whether its reasons for taking this position are
valid and sustainable in international law."
Regrettably, today's British officials have forgotten their
government's declaration, issued jointly with France and Russia
on May 28, 1915, warning that "in view of the crimes of Turkey
against humanity and civilization," the three great powers would hold
responsible "all members of the Ottoman government" who are implicated
in the Armenian massacres.
The recently obtained internal documents reveal the Foreign Office's
misleading, false and sinister intent. In a 1999 memorandum, addressed
to Minister of State for Europe Joyce Quin and others, the FCO stated
that it is not the British government's obligation to decide what
constitutes genocide: "Investigating, analyzing and interpreting
history is a matter for historians." In contrast, Attorney Robertson
points out the government's "basic error" in relying "on historians
to decide a legal issue." He explains that "deciding what amounts to
genocide is a matter for judgment according to international law,
and not al all is a matter for historians. Historians establish
facts: lawyers must judge whether those facts amount to a breach of
international law."
In the same memorandum, the Foreign Office states that there is no
documentary evidence proving that the mass killings of Armenians
were a result of deliberate state policy. Mr. Robertson calls this
statement "another canard -- that appears routinely and repeatedly"
in internal FCO communications -- "the notion that there must be some
written document that records a government or leadership decision to
exterminate the Armenian people." Mr. Robertson points out that "no
such document, of course, exists in relation to the Nazi Holocaust."
Clearly, the Foreign Office is more concerned about the domestic and
overseas ramifications of acknowledging the Armenian Genocide than the
crime of genocide itself. Mr. Robertson points out: "the memorandum
goes on rather cynically to consider the clout of the campaign to
recognise the genocide and notes that 'the campaign does not appear at
this stage to have enough support or direction to seriously embarrass
HMG Her Majesty's Government.'"
The Foreign Office also places a higher premium on appeasing Turkey
than on the moral issues arising from the attempted extermination of
an entire nation. "HMG is open to criticism in terms of the ethical
dimension," the FCO readily admits. "But given the importance of our
relations (political, strategic and commercial) with Turkey, and that
recognising the genocide would provide no practical benefit to the UK
or the few survivors of the killings still alive today, nor would it
help a rapprochement between Armenia and Turkey, the current line is
the only feasible option." Mr. Robertson sarcastically, yet sadly,
remarks: "This particular genocide could not be recognised -- not
because it had not taken place, but because it was politically and
commercially inconvenient to do so."
Another false argument advanced by the Foreign Office in several
memoranda is the contention that the UN Genocide Convention of 1948 has
no retroactive effect and therefore, does not apply to the Armenian
Genocide. Mr. Robertson, a top expert in the field of international
law, quickly quashes this "bad point," because "the rule against
retroactivity applies to criminal charges, made against individuals,
of offences which were not against the law at the time they were
allegedly committed. Nobody is suggesting that criminal charges should
be brought now against long dead individuals -- the question is whether
the massacre of the Armenians is correctly described as 'genocide,'
according to the definition adopted by the UN Convention in 1948."
British Minister of State for Europe, Joyce Quin, was so incensed by
her government's extremism in "genocide denial," and its allegation
that there was no evidence of a Turkish intent to commit genocide
that, in an April 13, 1999 memorandum to the Foreign Office, she
pointed out that the issue of intent had never been examined by
government officials.
Mr. Robertson's report then relates the diplomatic scandal involving
Thorda Abott-Watt, the British Ambassador to Armenia, who shamelessly
questioned the veracity of the Armenian Genocide during a 2004
interview in Yerevan. She stated that the evidence regarding the
Armenian Genocide "was not sufficiently unequivocal" to be categorized
as genocide under the UN Genocide Convention. In response to several
columns I wrote at that time, thousands of readers worldwide inundated
the British Foreign Office and the Armenian Foreign Ministry with
letters of complaint. The Armenian government finally delivered a
"Note verbale" (protest note) to the British government. Mr. Robertson
uncovered an internal FCO memorandum written during that controversy,
suggesting that the British government maintain its denialist policy,
since Turkey "devotes major diplomatic resources to heading off any
possible recognition. Turkey would react very strongly indeed to any
suggestion of recognition by the UK."
In his examination of the hundreds of pages of recently released
documents, Mr. Robertson came across "only one obscure and dismissive
reference" by the Foreign Office to the "one credible international
inquiry" that classified the Armenian mass killings as Genocide. This
unique study was carried out in 1985 by the British Special Rapporteur,
Benjamin Whitaker, at the request of the UN Sub-Commission on the
Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. To his
chagrin, Mr. Robertson found out that the Foreign Office had issued
a memorandum advising government ministers to dismiss the UN 1985
report by stating that "since then, we are not aware of it being
mentioned in any UN document or forum."
Even after several European countries had recognized the Armenian
Genocide, the Foreign Office continued to stubbornly cling to its
denialist policy by advising Minister of State for Europe, Geoff Hoon,
that "Turkey is neuralgic and defensive about the charge of genocide
despite the fact that the events occurred at the time of the Ottoman
Empire as opposed to modern day Turkey. There were many Turks who lost
their lives in the war and there may also be an element of concern
over compensation claims should they accept the charge of genocide.
This defensiveness has meant that Turkey has historically stifled
debate at home and devoted considerable diplomatic effort to dissuading
any further recognition."
Finally, in October 2007, when the U.S. House Foreign Affairs
Committee adopted a resolution acknowledging the Armenian Genocide,
the Foreign Office wrote an alarming memorandum, expressing concern
that "the Armenian diaspora worldwide lobbying machine" would now
"go into overdrive!"
Mr. Robertson, based on his examination of the released internal
documents written over a 10-year period, concludes that the advice
given by the British Foreign Office to government ministers "reflects
neither the law of genocide nor the demonstrable facts of the
massacres in 1915-16, and has been calculated to mislead parliament
into believing that there has been an assessment of evidence and an
exercise of judgment on that evidence."
Mr. Robertson further establishes that the "parliament has been
routinely misinformed, by ministers who have recited FCO briefs
without questioning their accuracy. HMG's Her Majesty's Government
real and only policy has been to evade truthful answers to questions
about the Armenian genocide, because the truth would discomfort the
Turkish government!"
In view of revelations of such misconduct and misrepresentation,
the British Parliament should hold formal hearings and investigate
the conduct of all officials who provided false and misleading
information to Parliament members for well over a decade. Those found
to be either negligent in carrying out their duties or complicit in
providing outright falsehoods, should have charges filed against them
or dismissed from their governmental posts..
In addition, Mr. Robertson, a pre-eminent international jurist, should
be asked to file legal action against the Turkish government in British
courts, and more importantly, in the European Court of Human Rights.
This extremely valuable report should be translated into several
major languages and disseminated worldwide.
By Harut Sassounian
The California Courier
Nov 6, 2009
A prominent legal expert, Mr. Geoffrey Robertson, exposed this week
the false and inaccurate statements on the Armenian Genocide made by
the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO). The international
jurist revealed that for many years the FCO (Foreign Ministry) had
misled the British Parliament on the facts of the Armenian Genocide
in order to curry favor with the Turkish government.
The 40-page meticulously-researched report, commissioned by the
Armenian Centre of London, is based on hitherto secret documents
obtained from the Foreign Office through the Freedom of Information
Act. Mr. Robertson, the author of a report titled, "Was there an
Armenian Genocide?" served as first President of the UN War Crimes
Court in Sierra Leone.
Mr. Robertson had to make repeated requests over several months to
the British government in order to obtain internal documents that
the Foreign Office was legally obligated to release. According to
the FCO, some of the documents were not released at all, while those
eventually made public were partially blacked out, in order not to
damage Britain's relations with Turkey.
In his report, Mr. Robertson explains that the Armenian Centre had
asked him "to consider the attitude of the British government in
refusing to accept that the massacres of Armenians in 1915-16 amounted
to genocide, and whether its reasons for taking this position are
valid and sustainable in international law."
Regrettably, today's British officials have forgotten their
government's declaration, issued jointly with France and Russia
on May 28, 1915, warning that "in view of the crimes of Turkey
against humanity and civilization," the three great powers would hold
responsible "all members of the Ottoman government" who are implicated
in the Armenian massacres.
The recently obtained internal documents reveal the Foreign Office's
misleading, false and sinister intent. In a 1999 memorandum, addressed
to Minister of State for Europe Joyce Quin and others, the FCO stated
that it is not the British government's obligation to decide what
constitutes genocide: "Investigating, analyzing and interpreting
history is a matter for historians." In contrast, Attorney Robertson
points out the government's "basic error" in relying "on historians
to decide a legal issue." He explains that "deciding what amounts to
genocide is a matter for judgment according to international law,
and not al all is a matter for historians. Historians establish
facts: lawyers must judge whether those facts amount to a breach of
international law."
In the same memorandum, the Foreign Office states that there is no
documentary evidence proving that the mass killings of Armenians
were a result of deliberate state policy. Mr. Robertson calls this
statement "another canard -- that appears routinely and repeatedly"
in internal FCO communications -- "the notion that there must be some
written document that records a government or leadership decision to
exterminate the Armenian people." Mr. Robertson points out that "no
such document, of course, exists in relation to the Nazi Holocaust."
Clearly, the Foreign Office is more concerned about the domestic and
overseas ramifications of acknowledging the Armenian Genocide than the
crime of genocide itself. Mr. Robertson points out: "the memorandum
goes on rather cynically to consider the clout of the campaign to
recognise the genocide and notes that 'the campaign does not appear at
this stage to have enough support or direction to seriously embarrass
HMG Her Majesty's Government.'"
The Foreign Office also places a higher premium on appeasing Turkey
than on the moral issues arising from the attempted extermination of
an entire nation. "HMG is open to criticism in terms of the ethical
dimension," the FCO readily admits. "But given the importance of our
relations (political, strategic and commercial) with Turkey, and that
recognising the genocide would provide no practical benefit to the UK
or the few survivors of the killings still alive today, nor would it
help a rapprochement between Armenia and Turkey, the current line is
the only feasible option." Mr. Robertson sarcastically, yet sadly,
remarks: "This particular genocide could not be recognised -- not
because it had not taken place, but because it was politically and
commercially inconvenient to do so."
Another false argument advanced by the Foreign Office in several
memoranda is the contention that the UN Genocide Convention of 1948 has
no retroactive effect and therefore, does not apply to the Armenian
Genocide. Mr. Robertson, a top expert in the field of international
law, quickly quashes this "bad point," because "the rule against
retroactivity applies to criminal charges, made against individuals,
of offences which were not against the law at the time they were
allegedly committed. Nobody is suggesting that criminal charges should
be brought now against long dead individuals -- the question is whether
the massacre of the Armenians is correctly described as 'genocide,'
according to the definition adopted by the UN Convention in 1948."
British Minister of State for Europe, Joyce Quin, was so incensed by
her government's extremism in "genocide denial," and its allegation
that there was no evidence of a Turkish intent to commit genocide
that, in an April 13, 1999 memorandum to the Foreign Office, she
pointed out that the issue of intent had never been examined by
government officials.
Mr. Robertson's report then relates the diplomatic scandal involving
Thorda Abott-Watt, the British Ambassador to Armenia, who shamelessly
questioned the veracity of the Armenian Genocide during a 2004
interview in Yerevan. She stated that the evidence regarding the
Armenian Genocide "was not sufficiently unequivocal" to be categorized
as genocide under the UN Genocide Convention. In response to several
columns I wrote at that time, thousands of readers worldwide inundated
the British Foreign Office and the Armenian Foreign Ministry with
letters of complaint. The Armenian government finally delivered a
"Note verbale" (protest note) to the British government. Mr. Robertson
uncovered an internal FCO memorandum written during that controversy,
suggesting that the British government maintain its denialist policy,
since Turkey "devotes major diplomatic resources to heading off any
possible recognition. Turkey would react very strongly indeed to any
suggestion of recognition by the UK."
In his examination of the hundreds of pages of recently released
documents, Mr. Robertson came across "only one obscure and dismissive
reference" by the Foreign Office to the "one credible international
inquiry" that classified the Armenian mass killings as Genocide. This
unique study was carried out in 1985 by the British Special Rapporteur,
Benjamin Whitaker, at the request of the UN Sub-Commission on the
Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. To his
chagrin, Mr. Robertson found out that the Foreign Office had issued
a memorandum advising government ministers to dismiss the UN 1985
report by stating that "since then, we are not aware of it being
mentioned in any UN document or forum."
Even after several European countries had recognized the Armenian
Genocide, the Foreign Office continued to stubbornly cling to its
denialist policy by advising Minister of State for Europe, Geoff Hoon,
that "Turkey is neuralgic and defensive about the charge of genocide
despite the fact that the events occurred at the time of the Ottoman
Empire as opposed to modern day Turkey. There were many Turks who lost
their lives in the war and there may also be an element of concern
over compensation claims should they accept the charge of genocide.
This defensiveness has meant that Turkey has historically stifled
debate at home and devoted considerable diplomatic effort to dissuading
any further recognition."
Finally, in October 2007, when the U.S. House Foreign Affairs
Committee adopted a resolution acknowledging the Armenian Genocide,
the Foreign Office wrote an alarming memorandum, expressing concern
that "the Armenian diaspora worldwide lobbying machine" would now
"go into overdrive!"
Mr. Robertson, based on his examination of the released internal
documents written over a 10-year period, concludes that the advice
given by the British Foreign Office to government ministers "reflects
neither the law of genocide nor the demonstrable facts of the
massacres in 1915-16, and has been calculated to mislead parliament
into believing that there has been an assessment of evidence and an
exercise of judgment on that evidence."
Mr. Robertson further establishes that the "parliament has been
routinely misinformed, by ministers who have recited FCO briefs
without questioning their accuracy. HMG's Her Majesty's Government
real and only policy has been to evade truthful answers to questions
about the Armenian genocide, because the truth would discomfort the
Turkish government!"
In view of revelations of such misconduct and misrepresentation,
the British Parliament should hold formal hearings and investigate
the conduct of all officials who provided false and misleading
information to Parliament members for well over a decade. Those found
to be either negligent in carrying out their duties or complicit in
providing outright falsehoods, should have charges filed against them
or dismissed from their governmental posts..
In addition, Mr. Robertson, a pre-eminent international jurist, should
be asked to file legal action against the Turkish government in British
courts, and more importantly, in the European Court of Human Rights.
This extremely valuable report should be translated into several
major languages and disseminated worldwide.