Tweet
USE THE GOOD ARGUMENTS
Hurriyet
March 2 2010
Turkey
Spring is approaching and that means that all Turkish and Armenian
eyes are again focused on Washington D.C. The question is the same
every year: will the U.S. Congress adopt a resolution labeling the
1915 killings of Armenians as genocide and will, if that happens,
the American president use the G-word in his traditional speech on
April 24, the day the world commemorates the tragic events? Until now,
the outcome of all the excitement has also been the same each year. It
does not happen.
In the past, a resolution was adopted on the committee level several
times but never made it to the floor of the House. Turkey lobbied
frantically against the adoption of such a statement and in the end,
the U.S. president used his influence on the deputies to take the issue
off the agenda. The most important argument used by both governments
is that the U.S. needs Turkey strategically and cannot afford to
create a major incident between the two countries that would put
American policy in Iraq or Afghanistan in danger. It is one of the
most blatant examples of successful arm-twisting that always leaves
a bad taste with many who feel the blackmailing is not the best way
to deal with this historic legacy.
This year probably won't be much different. Having spent some days
in Washington last week, it seems clear the U.S. House Committee on
Foreign Affairs tomorrow will vote in favor of a resolution. There is
some speculation whether or not the Barack Obama administration will
use its leverage to stop it from being adopted by the Congress. Most
probably, it will because, indeed, the U.S. desperately needs Turkey's
help in getting its soldiers out of Iraq.
On top of that, Turkey has already threatened that the rapprochement
between Turkey and Armenia of last year could suffer a fatal
blow. The protocols between the two countries are one of the few
foreign policy successes of the Obama government. So why put even
that meager result in danger? Nothing new, it seems. Turkey, again,
will manage to bulldozer its way out of this problem.
Still, I propose a different strategy this time around. First, why not
use, for a change, the good arguments against such a resolution? Why
should politicians, who overall have no expertise on the history of
the 1915 tragedy, speak out on an issue that is still hotly disputed by
historians? Leave it to the latter. Even more importantly, Obama taking
sides on this highly controversial issue for Turkey will undoubtedly
be counterproductive. The growing number of Turks who are willing to
openly discuss the events of that era will be silenced once again. The
ones who keep on denying any wrongdoing will be strengthened by what
will be seen by many as an unfortunate outside intervention in a
debate that should be held between and among Turks.
After years of discussing this issue in Europe, I am convinced that
these arguments could potentially convince many politicians, also in
the U.S., not to interfere in what should basically be a domestic
argument. It is the single most important reason why the European
Parliament since 2006 has refrained from using the G-word.
Next to these arguments, there is another positive step that the
Turkish government could make to persuade American legislators. That
would be to stop blaming the Armenians for slowing down the process
of ratification of the protocols.
Let's be fair: it was Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan who,
immediately after signing, made the adoption dependant on Armenia
giving in to Azeri demands on Karabakh. No one else put up this
formidable hurdle. If the Justice and Development Party, or AKP,
really wants zero problems with its eastern neighbor, it should stop
making this link that, anyway, has not worked since 1993 and that
clearly goes against the spirit of the protocols.
If you have the choice, why not use good arguments instead of threats
that, one day, will come back to haunt you.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Hurriyet
March 2 2010
Turkey
Spring is approaching and that means that all Turkish and Armenian
eyes are again focused on Washington D.C. The question is the same
every year: will the U.S. Congress adopt a resolution labeling the
1915 killings of Armenians as genocide and will, if that happens,
the American president use the G-word in his traditional speech on
April 24, the day the world commemorates the tragic events? Until now,
the outcome of all the excitement has also been the same each year. It
does not happen.
In the past, a resolution was adopted on the committee level several
times but never made it to the floor of the House. Turkey lobbied
frantically against the adoption of such a statement and in the end,
the U.S. president used his influence on the deputies to take the issue
off the agenda. The most important argument used by both governments
is that the U.S. needs Turkey strategically and cannot afford to
create a major incident between the two countries that would put
American policy in Iraq or Afghanistan in danger. It is one of the
most blatant examples of successful arm-twisting that always leaves
a bad taste with many who feel the blackmailing is not the best way
to deal with this historic legacy.
This year probably won't be much different. Having spent some days
in Washington last week, it seems clear the U.S. House Committee on
Foreign Affairs tomorrow will vote in favor of a resolution. There is
some speculation whether or not the Barack Obama administration will
use its leverage to stop it from being adopted by the Congress. Most
probably, it will because, indeed, the U.S. desperately needs Turkey's
help in getting its soldiers out of Iraq.
On top of that, Turkey has already threatened that the rapprochement
between Turkey and Armenia of last year could suffer a fatal
blow. The protocols between the two countries are one of the few
foreign policy successes of the Obama government. So why put even
that meager result in danger? Nothing new, it seems. Turkey, again,
will manage to bulldozer its way out of this problem.
Still, I propose a different strategy this time around. First, why not
use, for a change, the good arguments against such a resolution? Why
should politicians, who overall have no expertise on the history of
the 1915 tragedy, speak out on an issue that is still hotly disputed by
historians? Leave it to the latter. Even more importantly, Obama taking
sides on this highly controversial issue for Turkey will undoubtedly
be counterproductive. The growing number of Turks who are willing to
openly discuss the events of that era will be silenced once again. The
ones who keep on denying any wrongdoing will be strengthened by what
will be seen by many as an unfortunate outside intervention in a
debate that should be held between and among Turks.
After years of discussing this issue in Europe, I am convinced that
these arguments could potentially convince many politicians, also in
the U.S., not to interfere in what should basically be a domestic
argument. It is the single most important reason why the European
Parliament since 2006 has refrained from using the G-word.
Next to these arguments, there is another positive step that the
Turkish government could make to persuade American legislators. That
would be to stop blaming the Armenians for slowing down the process
of ratification of the protocols.
Let's be fair: it was Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan who,
immediately after signing, made the adoption dependant on Armenia
giving in to Azeri demands on Karabakh. No one else put up this
formidable hurdle. If the Justice and Development Party, or AKP,
really wants zero problems with its eastern neighbor, it should stop
making this link that, anyway, has not worked since 1993 and that
clearly goes against the spirit of the protocols.
If you have the choice, why not use good arguments instead of threats
that, one day, will come back to haunt you.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress