Tweet
Today's Zaman, Turkey
March 7 2010
`Genocide' fatigue: newest hurdle in normalization process
Could this spring be one of discourage-ment, even though the season is
usually associated with feelings of hope?
This seems to be the case among the public in Turkey, as people
overwhelmingly feel exhausted from annually watching a foreign
legislative panel attempting to call their ancestors perpetrators of
genocide against Anatolian Armenians, with whom they lived for
centuries. Whether or not it is scientifically accepted, maybe it is a
kind of a `spring depression' that could be seen as linked to Seasonal
Affective Disorder (SAD). Yet, this year's public anxiety is different
than that of previous years, when similar resolutions recognizing
claims of genocide against Anatolian Armenians under Ottoman rule
during World War I were voted on in various US congressional
committees -- thus it can't be defined as a seasonal disorder.
This year's irritation stems from the fact that this year, for the
first time, there has been an ongoing process of normalization of ties
with estranged neighbor Armenia -- efforts which also include a
framework for contemplating historical facts and facing whatever the
reality was in Anatolia during World War I.
As an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal on Friday titled `But
Who Needs Allies? Congress poisons US-Turkey relations' summarized:
`The diplomats at the House Foreign Affairs Committee yesterday
[Thursday] adopted a view on the urgent matter of world events that
transpired 95 years ago. By a 23-22 margin, the committee declared
that the mass deportations and serial massacres of Armenians by
Ottoman forces during World War I ought to be called a genocide. The
vote has sparked a full-blown diplomatic spat with Turkey -- with
Ankara recalling its ambassador to Washington -- but that's really no
big deal, says Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard Berman (D., Calif.).'
Berman has a point in declaring that the vote's outcomes are `really
no big deal' vis-Ã-vis US-Turkey bilateral relations. Yet, `a big
deal' has apparently emerged regarding the future of the normalization
process between Armenia and Turkey, though Turkish Foreign Minister
Ahmet DavutoÄ?lu stated that Turkey would push on with efforts to
normalize ties with Armenia despite the US vote.
`We are determined to press ahead with the normalization of relations
with Armenia,' DavutoÄ?lu told a news conference, while also
emphasizing that the parliamentary ratification of the peace accords
with Armenia was at risk, referring to the two protocols signed by
Armenia and Turkey in Zurich on Oct. 10 -- the `Protocol on the
Establishment of Diplomatic Relations' and the `Protocol on the
Development of Bilateral Relations.'
The deals, seen as crucial to obtaining long-term peace in the
volatile Southern Caucasus, must be ratified by the parliaments in
Ankara and Yerevan.
Normalization is a process that will be carried out by a mutual
exchange of views between the two nations, DavutoÄ?lu said, adding,
`Further intervention by third parties will render this normalization
impossible.'
What about April 25?
The fatigue observed among the public is best summed up with commonly
encountered expressions -- the people are saying: `OK, what is the
point? Let them pass this resolution so we can get rid of this tension
forever.'
These feelings, nonetheless, also carry a tone that hints at a
tendency that victimizes the normalization process as well, since the
feeling of US pressure on Turkey is acceptable neither for the public
nor the government.
Leaving aside what Armenia has or hasn't done to advance the
normalization process, and given that the current issue seems to be an
urgent bilateral matter between Ankara and Washington, it may be
useful to examine what Turkey and the United States have and have not
done, or what they have been promising to do or not do.
Despite a strong expression of commitment from Ankara, it is still
unclear how the normalization process can be dealt with under these
circumstances, when Ankara will apparently have to exhaust much of its
energy -- at least until April 24 -- on preventing US President Barack
Obama from calling the Anatolian Armenians' killings `genocide' in an
annual White House statement on the day marking Armenian remembrance.
Ankara will also have to mount a significant campaign to keep the
resolution from being brought to the House floor for a vote.
As for April 25, Ankara hasn't given any clues about its plans for
moving forward with the normalization process if both a resolution on
the House floor and Obama's use of the g-word are avoided. The
normalization process has already been crippled by Turkey's insistence
on parallel progress on the Nagorno-Karabakh territorial dispute
between Armenia and Azerbaijan as well as by a ruling by the Armenian
Constitutional Court. In January, while upholding the legality of the
protocols, the court underlined that they could not contradict
Yerevan's official position that the alleged Armenian genocide must be
internationally recognized.
Now, Turkey is expecting a written document or assurance either by
Armenia or a third party that would be acceptable to both Armenian and
Turkish sides that would state that the protocols are valid.
The fact that neither the US nor Switzerland -- which mediated
closed-door talks between Armenia and Turkey that were held for more
than a year on ways to restore diplomatic relations and open their
mutual border before the two parties announced on April 22, 2009 that
they had reached an agreement on a road map to normalize their
relations -- are sympathetic to Ankara's demand for such assurance
poses further ambiguity regarding the future of the process.
And hypothetically assuming that such assurance is provided, how will
Ankara fulfill its promise to push for the ratification of the
protocols at the commission level when there is no improvement on the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue?
US `awareness'
It would be naïve to believe that the US administration really
reckoned that a last minute effort would be effective on the House
committee members.
While making clear that the Obama administration was against the
resolution and noting that they called Berman on Wednesday to try to
persuade him to shelve the vote, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
said on Thursday: `We think that [the protocols] is the appropriate
way to manage the problems that have stood in the way of normalization
between the two countries. Within the protocols, there was an
agreed-upon approach to establishing a historical commission to look
at events in the past.'
The `Protocol on the Development of Bilateral Relations' says the two
countries have agreed to `implement a dialogue on the historical
dimension with the aim of restoring mutual confidence between the two
nations, including an impartial scientific examination of historical
records and archives to define existing problems and formulate
recommendations.'
That brings to mind another question: Wasn't the US administration
aware of the content of the protocols when they let the US
congressional committee go ahead with their plans since Berman first
announced on Feb. 5 that he intended to call a committee vote on the
non-binding resolution on March 4?
It's hard to believe how the US administration failed to consider that
the adoption of the vote would be seen as pressure on Turkey -- both
on the public and the government -- over ratifying the protocols.
This is not the first time that hopes for a long-awaited new spring
coming to Turkey, this time freshened up by the normalization process,
have been crushed.
Back in October 2005, an Ä°stanbul court's conviction of
Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink for insulting `Turkishness' --
a conviction which indirectly led to his assassination in January 2007
-- led to the same kind of feelings.
Tens of thousands of people marched during his funeral with tears.
Those thousands and more in Turkey now need to be persuaded that
Dink's death will not be forgotten and that Turkey must continue its
efforts to not let this country turn into a wasteland. Otherwise,
bitterness among the public might yet turn into dangerous indifference
to ties with their Armenian siblings.
07 March 2010, Sunday
March 7 2010
`Genocide' fatigue: newest hurdle in normalization process
Could this spring be one of discourage-ment, even though the season is
usually associated with feelings of hope?
This seems to be the case among the public in Turkey, as people
overwhelmingly feel exhausted from annually watching a foreign
legislative panel attempting to call their ancestors perpetrators of
genocide against Anatolian Armenians, with whom they lived for
centuries. Whether or not it is scientifically accepted, maybe it is a
kind of a `spring depression' that could be seen as linked to Seasonal
Affective Disorder (SAD). Yet, this year's public anxiety is different
than that of previous years, when similar resolutions recognizing
claims of genocide against Anatolian Armenians under Ottoman rule
during World War I were voted on in various US congressional
committees -- thus it can't be defined as a seasonal disorder.
This year's irritation stems from the fact that this year, for the
first time, there has been an ongoing process of normalization of ties
with estranged neighbor Armenia -- efforts which also include a
framework for contemplating historical facts and facing whatever the
reality was in Anatolia during World War I.
As an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal on Friday titled `But
Who Needs Allies? Congress poisons US-Turkey relations' summarized:
`The diplomats at the House Foreign Affairs Committee yesterday
[Thursday] adopted a view on the urgent matter of world events that
transpired 95 years ago. By a 23-22 margin, the committee declared
that the mass deportations and serial massacres of Armenians by
Ottoman forces during World War I ought to be called a genocide. The
vote has sparked a full-blown diplomatic spat with Turkey -- with
Ankara recalling its ambassador to Washington -- but that's really no
big deal, says Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard Berman (D., Calif.).'
Berman has a point in declaring that the vote's outcomes are `really
no big deal' vis-Ã-vis US-Turkey bilateral relations. Yet, `a big
deal' has apparently emerged regarding the future of the normalization
process between Armenia and Turkey, though Turkish Foreign Minister
Ahmet DavutoÄ?lu stated that Turkey would push on with efforts to
normalize ties with Armenia despite the US vote.
`We are determined to press ahead with the normalization of relations
with Armenia,' DavutoÄ?lu told a news conference, while also
emphasizing that the parliamentary ratification of the peace accords
with Armenia was at risk, referring to the two protocols signed by
Armenia and Turkey in Zurich on Oct. 10 -- the `Protocol on the
Establishment of Diplomatic Relations' and the `Protocol on the
Development of Bilateral Relations.'
The deals, seen as crucial to obtaining long-term peace in the
volatile Southern Caucasus, must be ratified by the parliaments in
Ankara and Yerevan.
Normalization is a process that will be carried out by a mutual
exchange of views between the two nations, DavutoÄ?lu said, adding,
`Further intervention by third parties will render this normalization
impossible.'
What about April 25?
The fatigue observed among the public is best summed up with commonly
encountered expressions -- the people are saying: `OK, what is the
point? Let them pass this resolution so we can get rid of this tension
forever.'
These feelings, nonetheless, also carry a tone that hints at a
tendency that victimizes the normalization process as well, since the
feeling of US pressure on Turkey is acceptable neither for the public
nor the government.
Leaving aside what Armenia has or hasn't done to advance the
normalization process, and given that the current issue seems to be an
urgent bilateral matter between Ankara and Washington, it may be
useful to examine what Turkey and the United States have and have not
done, or what they have been promising to do or not do.
Despite a strong expression of commitment from Ankara, it is still
unclear how the normalization process can be dealt with under these
circumstances, when Ankara will apparently have to exhaust much of its
energy -- at least until April 24 -- on preventing US President Barack
Obama from calling the Anatolian Armenians' killings `genocide' in an
annual White House statement on the day marking Armenian remembrance.
Ankara will also have to mount a significant campaign to keep the
resolution from being brought to the House floor for a vote.
As for April 25, Ankara hasn't given any clues about its plans for
moving forward with the normalization process if both a resolution on
the House floor and Obama's use of the g-word are avoided. The
normalization process has already been crippled by Turkey's insistence
on parallel progress on the Nagorno-Karabakh territorial dispute
between Armenia and Azerbaijan as well as by a ruling by the Armenian
Constitutional Court. In January, while upholding the legality of the
protocols, the court underlined that they could not contradict
Yerevan's official position that the alleged Armenian genocide must be
internationally recognized.
Now, Turkey is expecting a written document or assurance either by
Armenia or a third party that would be acceptable to both Armenian and
Turkish sides that would state that the protocols are valid.
The fact that neither the US nor Switzerland -- which mediated
closed-door talks between Armenia and Turkey that were held for more
than a year on ways to restore diplomatic relations and open their
mutual border before the two parties announced on April 22, 2009 that
they had reached an agreement on a road map to normalize their
relations -- are sympathetic to Ankara's demand for such assurance
poses further ambiguity regarding the future of the process.
And hypothetically assuming that such assurance is provided, how will
Ankara fulfill its promise to push for the ratification of the
protocols at the commission level when there is no improvement on the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue?
US `awareness'
It would be naïve to believe that the US administration really
reckoned that a last minute effort would be effective on the House
committee members.
While making clear that the Obama administration was against the
resolution and noting that they called Berman on Wednesday to try to
persuade him to shelve the vote, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
said on Thursday: `We think that [the protocols] is the appropriate
way to manage the problems that have stood in the way of normalization
between the two countries. Within the protocols, there was an
agreed-upon approach to establishing a historical commission to look
at events in the past.'
The `Protocol on the Development of Bilateral Relations' says the two
countries have agreed to `implement a dialogue on the historical
dimension with the aim of restoring mutual confidence between the two
nations, including an impartial scientific examination of historical
records and archives to define existing problems and formulate
recommendations.'
That brings to mind another question: Wasn't the US administration
aware of the content of the protocols when they let the US
congressional committee go ahead with their plans since Berman first
announced on Feb. 5 that he intended to call a committee vote on the
non-binding resolution on March 4?
It's hard to believe how the US administration failed to consider that
the adoption of the vote would be seen as pressure on Turkey -- both
on the public and the government -- over ratifying the protocols.
This is not the first time that hopes for a long-awaited new spring
coming to Turkey, this time freshened up by the normalization process,
have been crushed.
Back in October 2005, an Ä°stanbul court's conviction of
Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink for insulting `Turkishness' --
a conviction which indirectly led to his assassination in January 2007
-- led to the same kind of feelings.
Tens of thousands of people marched during his funeral with tears.
Those thousands and more in Turkey now need to be persuaded that
Dink's death will not be forgotten and that Turkey must continue its
efforts to not let this country turn into a wasteland. Otherwise,
bitterness among the public might yet turn into dangerous indifference
to ties with their Armenian siblings.
07 March 2010, Sunday