Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Starving Armenians

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Starving Armenians

    THE STARVING ARMENIANS

    Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (Little Rock)
    April 7, 2010 Wednesday

    They were the first victims of one genocide among so many in the 20th
    Century, but it's not diplomatic to say so. The Turkish government
    might be offended. So the Obama administration pulled out the usual
    stops the other day, urging the House Foreign Affairs Committee to
    shelve a resolution taking note of the Armenian massacres during the
    First World War.

    Yes, Barack Obama had promised to recognize the Armenian genocide when
    he was running for president, but he's president now. He's in power,
    and with great power come great responsibilities, prominent among
    them not speaking truth. Truth can be impolitic.

    The secretary of state dutifully echoed her boss. "Both President
    Obama and I have made clear, both last year and again this year," said
    Hillary Clinton, "that we do not believe any action by the Congress
    is appropriate, and we oppose it." What's fealty to history compared
    to the demands of Realpolitik?

    In the end, the House committee did decide to call genocide genocide.

    By one vote. The final tally was Truth 23, Silence in the Face of
    Evil, 22.

    The vote may say less about what happened in Turkey a century ago than
    about what has happened to the American spirit since. For there was
    a time when America did not hesitate to cry bloody murder. ("500,000
    Armenians said to have perished/ Washington asked to stop slaughter of
    Christians by Turks and Kurds."-New York Times, September 24, 1915.)
    It was a time when the mass deportation and annihilation of a whole
    people could still shock the world, and move even diplomats to
    protest. Our secretary of state at the time not only had convictions
    but dared expressed them. William Jennings Bryan protested the
    massacres "as a matter of humanity." How undiplomatic.

    The American ambassador to Turkey, Henry Morgenthau, did what he could
    to publicize the genocide even before there was such a word for a
    crime so immense. He was determined that the whole world would know
    what was happening in Turkey. To quote one of his public appeals:
    "More than 2 million persons were deported. The system was about
    the same everywhere. The Armenians, men, women, and children, would
    be assembled in the marketplace. Then the able-bodied men would be
    marched off and killed by being shot or clubbed in cold blood at some
    spot which did not necessitate the trouble of burial. . . . As a last
    step, those who remained, mothers, grandmothers, children were driven
    forth on their death pilgrimages across the desert of Aleppo, with
    no food, no water, no shelter, to be robbed and beaten at every halt."

    Ambassador Morgenthau's conclusion: "If America is going to condone
    these offenses . . . she is party to the crime." Teddy Roosevelt,
    who was always ready for a fight, was long out of the White House by
    then, but when the massacres came to light, he demanded a declaration
    of war against Turkey.

    The whole country rang with protests. The massacres even entered the
    American vernacular. When children wouldn't eat their vegetables,
    they might be told to remember "the starving Armenians." Old-timers
    may remember the phrase; it remains in the language even if the
    history behind it has been forgotten.

    Now, if the pundits and analysts note this congressional resolution
    at all, they seem more interested in the politics of it than the
    historical truth it expresses. Which is how politics loses its moral
    edge and becomes only a power game.

    The Turks responded to the passage of the resolution in committee
    by recalling their ambassador for "consultations"-a show of Ankara's
    displeasure.

    For official purposes, the Turkish government still claims the
    Armenians weren't victims of any organized massacre in the years
    1915-1918. It seems they just disappeared one day by the hundreds
    of thousands. Or they met with a series of unfortunate accidents in
    wartime. Or for their own reasons they chose to decamp for the deserts
    of Syria. Or they were wiped out in a series of spontaneous riots
    that the beleaguered authorities could do nothing to prevent. Or,
    to use a phrase from another genocide, they were resettled in the East.

    In short, when a single truth must be avoided, falsehoods multiply.

    And diplomats impose a discreet silence. Why offend?

    Over time the Armenian massacres faded from the world's memory, but
    some statesmen remembered, and drew the inevitable conclusion: that the
    world would scarcely notice a little genocide among friends. To quote
    one of them speaking to a group of his confidants: "It's a matter of
    indifference to me what a weak Western European civilization will say
    about me. I have issued the command-and I'll have anybody who utters
    but one word of criticism executed by a firing squad-that our war
    aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical
    destruction of the enemy. Accordingly, I have placed my death-head
    formations in readiness-for the present only in the East-with orders
    to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion men,
    women, and children. . . . Only thus shall we gain the living space
    we need. Who, after all, speaks today of the extermination of the
    Armenians?" -A. Hitler

    ------ :: ------

    Paul Greenberg is the Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial page editor
    of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.
Working...
X