Tweet
IN DUSK OF MOTIVATIONS: US, SWEDISH VOTES ON GENOCIDE IN ARMENIA
by Didzis Melkis
Diena newspaper
March 16 2010
Latvia
The recent vote by a the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the US House
of Representatives to declare that the mass murder of Armenians in
Turkish territory during the latter days of the Ottoman Empire in 1915
was genocide led, a few hours later, to the recalling of the Turkish
ambassador. The reaction was identical a week later after the Swedish
parliament approved a resolution on genocide against Armenians.
The issue of genocide against Armenians has been a hot potato for
the grandees of the world for many years now, and it is by no means
a lack of political courage that has led many of them to refuse to
swallow it. Sadly, the issue has become a means for demonstrating,
in terms of relations with Turkey, which country is the main one at
any specific moment. Accordingly, the government officials who are
chewing on this hot political tidbit are, in a sense, interested
in making sure that it remains just as hot and not swallowed as it
has always been. This is an emotionally sensitive issue, and sadly
enough, it sometimes has nothing whatever to do with the remains of
the Armenians who were killed.
Processes in US, Sweden
The documents that were approved in the United States and Sweden were
based on different reasoning. The incident in Sweden was, to a certain
extent, simpler. Of decisive importance in approving the resolution
was an MP of Kurdish Origin, Gulan Avci, who ignored her faction's
thinking on the matter and joined leftists in Parliament to give the
resolution the deciding vote - 131 to 130. Swedish leftists used the
issue so as to cozy up to powerful America, while Avci decided that
the issue of the Armenians could be used to point to her own ethnic
group's hope for historical justice.
In America, too, the document was approved by a bare majority of 23
votes against 22, but the motivations there are less clear. The US
government has traditionally faced powerful lobbyists who work on
behalf of Israel's interests, and it is thanks to them that because
of good relations between Turkey and Israel, a similar document about
genocide against Armenians did not see the light of day in 2007.
Recently, however, a new government in Turkey has caused greater
tensions between Israel and Turkey, and no one can swear that the
change of attitudes in the United States vis-a-vis the Armenian
genocide is not, to one extent or another, linked to this fact.
The point is that there used to be a totalitarian form of governance -
on in which the centralized message was based on old Eastern legends
about "peace prevailing in the city of Baghdad." In recent years,
however, there have been new manifestations of a sense of freedom in
Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, New York and Washington - manifestations which
may cause suspicions about the rise of Islam in Turkey.
Context of Issue
The fact that this specific denunciation of genocide is not all that
easy to interpret in terms of subject and context can be seen in the
fact that US President Barack Obama and Swedish Foreign Minister Carl
Bildt have expressed their unhappiness with what happened. Both men
are trying to soften the effects. Bildt supports Turkish membership in
the EU, arguing that if the EU opens itself towards Turkey seriously,
that will in and of itself resolve many of the issues that have
been painful up until now. Obama's direct concern is about the need
for Turkey, as the second largest country in NATO, to continue to
support the alliance in the end game of the post-war situation in
Iraq, to support the mission in Afghanistan, and to put pressure on
Iran because of its nuclear programme.
The influential Armenian diaspora in the United States, as well as in
France, which is sceptical about Turkey, played a very significant
role in this matter. If we are to comprehend the complexity of this
issue, however, we must understand that the immediate reaction of the
Turks to the demand that the destruction of Armenians a century ago be
declared genocide is itself a counter-demand - Armenia must withdraw
its forces from Nagorno-Karabakh, which the majority of international
opinion believes to belong to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan, for its part,
is a Turkish ally. The Azeri diaspora, meanwhile, carries substantial
weight in Iran. In supporting rapprochement between Armenia and Turkey,
the EU is also interested in a good relationship with the resource-rich
Azerbaijan, not least so as to reduce dependency on Russian gas.
Turkey's Views
It must also be taken into account that Turkey does not deny the fact
of the murders which took place so long ago. It insists, however,
that the murders were not planned, and so they represented individual
crimes, but not genocide. Turkey and Armenia are encircled by
historically and currently delicate issues. Their presidents have met.
A joint document of friendship is being drafted. The two countries are
slowly but nevertheless moving towards a normalization in relations,
and international observers should respect the pace at which this
is happening.
Rapid democratization is occurring in Turkey. In 2006, the writer
Orhan Pamuk, who would go on to win the Nobel Prize in literature,
was sued in court just for mentioning the murder of Armenians. Today,
by contrast, this historical issue is being discussed in public -
so quickly that public opinion sometimes just cannot keep up.
by Didzis Melkis
Diena newspaper
March 16 2010
Latvia
The recent vote by a the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the US House
of Representatives to declare that the mass murder of Armenians in
Turkish territory during the latter days of the Ottoman Empire in 1915
was genocide led, a few hours later, to the recalling of the Turkish
ambassador. The reaction was identical a week later after the Swedish
parliament approved a resolution on genocide against Armenians.
The issue of genocide against Armenians has been a hot potato for
the grandees of the world for many years now, and it is by no means
a lack of political courage that has led many of them to refuse to
swallow it. Sadly, the issue has become a means for demonstrating,
in terms of relations with Turkey, which country is the main one at
any specific moment. Accordingly, the government officials who are
chewing on this hot political tidbit are, in a sense, interested
in making sure that it remains just as hot and not swallowed as it
has always been. This is an emotionally sensitive issue, and sadly
enough, it sometimes has nothing whatever to do with the remains of
the Armenians who were killed.
Processes in US, Sweden
The documents that were approved in the United States and Sweden were
based on different reasoning. The incident in Sweden was, to a certain
extent, simpler. Of decisive importance in approving the resolution
was an MP of Kurdish Origin, Gulan Avci, who ignored her faction's
thinking on the matter and joined leftists in Parliament to give the
resolution the deciding vote - 131 to 130. Swedish leftists used the
issue so as to cozy up to powerful America, while Avci decided that
the issue of the Armenians could be used to point to her own ethnic
group's hope for historical justice.
In America, too, the document was approved by a bare majority of 23
votes against 22, but the motivations there are less clear. The US
government has traditionally faced powerful lobbyists who work on
behalf of Israel's interests, and it is thanks to them that because
of good relations between Turkey and Israel, a similar document about
genocide against Armenians did not see the light of day in 2007.
Recently, however, a new government in Turkey has caused greater
tensions between Israel and Turkey, and no one can swear that the
change of attitudes in the United States vis-a-vis the Armenian
genocide is not, to one extent or another, linked to this fact.
The point is that there used to be a totalitarian form of governance -
on in which the centralized message was based on old Eastern legends
about "peace prevailing in the city of Baghdad." In recent years,
however, there have been new manifestations of a sense of freedom in
Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, New York and Washington - manifestations which
may cause suspicions about the rise of Islam in Turkey.
Context of Issue
The fact that this specific denunciation of genocide is not all that
easy to interpret in terms of subject and context can be seen in the
fact that US President Barack Obama and Swedish Foreign Minister Carl
Bildt have expressed their unhappiness with what happened. Both men
are trying to soften the effects. Bildt supports Turkish membership in
the EU, arguing that if the EU opens itself towards Turkey seriously,
that will in and of itself resolve many of the issues that have
been painful up until now. Obama's direct concern is about the need
for Turkey, as the second largest country in NATO, to continue to
support the alliance in the end game of the post-war situation in
Iraq, to support the mission in Afghanistan, and to put pressure on
Iran because of its nuclear programme.
The influential Armenian diaspora in the United States, as well as in
France, which is sceptical about Turkey, played a very significant
role in this matter. If we are to comprehend the complexity of this
issue, however, we must understand that the immediate reaction of the
Turks to the demand that the destruction of Armenians a century ago be
declared genocide is itself a counter-demand - Armenia must withdraw
its forces from Nagorno-Karabakh, which the majority of international
opinion believes to belong to Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan, for its part,
is a Turkish ally. The Azeri diaspora, meanwhile, carries substantial
weight in Iran. In supporting rapprochement between Armenia and Turkey,
the EU is also interested in a good relationship with the resource-rich
Azerbaijan, not least so as to reduce dependency on Russian gas.
Turkey's Views
It must also be taken into account that Turkey does not deny the fact
of the murders which took place so long ago. It insists, however,
that the murders were not planned, and so they represented individual
crimes, but not genocide. Turkey and Armenia are encircled by
historically and currently delicate issues. Their presidents have met.
A joint document of friendship is being drafted. The two countries are
slowly but nevertheless moving towards a normalization in relations,
and international observers should respect the pace at which this
is happening.
Rapid democratization is occurring in Turkey. In 2006, the writer
Orhan Pamuk, who would go on to win the Nobel Prize in literature,
was sued in court just for mentioning the murder of Armenians. Today,
by contrast, this historical issue is being discussed in public -
so quickly that public opinion sometimes just cannot keep up.