Tweet
Commentary: Are We in for Another Deception?
Posted on March 30, 2012
by Editor
http://www.mirrorspectator.com/2012/03/30/commentary-are-we-in-for-another-deception/
*By Edmond Y. Azadian*
It is the time of year when Diaspora Armenians - especially in the US and
Europe - go through the motions, intensify lob- bying activities, raise
expectations and on April 24, suffer the anticlimactic results of their
fervor and political activism.
Lately, a few countries have discovered a convenient method of dangling the
issue of genocide recognition before their adver- saries. After gaining
some political mileage, they relegate the case into oblivion, until the
next opportune period.
The US has been among those countries; Israel is another one. For many
years, the Israeli government had flatly denied that the Armenian massacres
amounted to genocide. That shameful statement was made emphatically by
then-President Shimon Peres during a trip to Ankara, when relations between
Israel and Turkey were rock-solid. Recently, however, the Israeli Knesset
has held hearings about recognizing the Armenian Genocide, as a response to
Turkey's belligerence against that country. Also, the American-Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the US and other lobbying groups -
which march lockstep with the Israeli government - had indicated publicly
that they would stop their campaign against the passage of the Armenian
Genocide by the US Congress. Those quarters have raised hopes throughout
the Armenian world only to resort to their traditional oppositionist
tactics to justify their inaction. The excuse for some political pundits is
that `it is not the prop- er time to recognize the Genocide.' If relations
are tense with Turkey, the voices of wisdom in Washington and Tel Aviv say
`we do not wish to further aggravate relations with Turkey.' On the other
hand, when relations are smooth, there is all the rea- son `not to
jeopardize our relations with a trusted ally.' Therefore, this continuous
mantra always generates excuses that `it is not the right time to recognize
the Genocide.' One wonders when that elusive `right time' for the
recognition of the Genocide would be.
No one pinned too much hope on President George Bush when it came to the
issue of human rights but Bill Clinton and Barack Obama had gained
tremendous political mileage on sounding moralistic issues, only to fail
miserably. Bill Clinton's belated apology in Kigali to the Rwandans for his
inaction dur- ing that country's genocide, a decade after his tenure in the
White House, sounds hollow, disingenuous and insulting. The UN
headquarters, the White House and all the capitals of the world had ample
warning about the impending genocide in Rwanda, but no action was taken,
because someone somewhere had a vested interest in the murder of 800,000
Tutsis in less than 100 days.
Even the head of the UN military mission there had warned the headquarters.
He defied his superiors to take action, but was removed from his post to
facilitate the grisly task of the Hutus.
In the case of the Armenians, Bill Clinton demonstrated the same kind of
insensitivity by ordering the Republican Speaker of the House Dennis
Hastert not to bring the resolution to the floor, realizing that enough
votes were there for its passage. Mr. Hastert was later rewarded generously
by the Turks for his `ser- vices' in the US Congress.
Today, Hillary Clinton's dilly-dallying on Genocide recognition seems to
be
the continuing echo of her husband's policy. It is no wonder that Obama's
human rights advisor had labeled her as a `monster.'
However, that advisor, Samantha Power, is not without bag- gage herself.
Power rose to prominence through the publication of a masterful book, A
Problem from Hell, which delved into the Armenian Genocide and the
Holocaust.
In time, she gained the reputation of a principled human rights missionary,
until she joined President Obama's National Security Council as the senior
director of multilateral affairs. She was the front person of Obama's
election team who con- vinced Armenians that the Messiah's second coming
was around the corner and that upon election, Obama would recognize the
Armenian Genocide. After President Obama powerlessly surren-
dered to the unelected functionaries of the State Department dancing around
the `G' word, the White House once again resorted to the creative
inventions of Power who crafted the president's Martyr's Day statement
by
substituting the word `genocide' with the Armenian phrase `medz yeghern,'
borrow- ing that ruse from the late Pope John Paul II. The pope had sub-
stituted the Armenian term in a sermon in Armenia, when nobody expected him
to politicize the issue by playing with words.
Ever since her credibility was damaged, Power has kept a low profile.
However, unbelievably, she has played a hawkish role in Obama's Libya
policy by advocating the invasion of a sovereign country on the `human
rights' principle.
We may conclude without much hesitation that the Armenian Genocide, Libya's
murderous invasion and human rights are all marketing tools for Ms. Power
to promote her political career.
France is another country which has used, on and off, the Armenian Genocide
issue to block Turkey's accession to the European Union. Recently, both
candidates for president, the incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy and his Socialist
rival, Francois Hollande, found a useful political tool in the issue.
France has at least recognized the Armenian Genocide, but it has so far
failed in the criminalization of its denial.
This column was not party to the jubilation and the hype when the French
Senate passed the resolution to criminalize the Genocide denial. Instead,
we qualified it as a partial restitu- tion of France's betrayal of
Armenians in Cilicia.
When the Constitutional Court judged the resolution to be unconstitutional,
without touching the Gaysot Law which has the same legal framework for the
Holocaust, the entire process was shown to be a charade. When the French
arms industry was threatened by Turkey - similar to the US counterpart
- it
react- ed. And all those who know Sarkozy were sure that he would pull a
trick out of his sleeve - as he has always done in his polit- ical career -
and save face. And he did by refusing to pre-empt the action of the
Constitutional Court, which he knew was com- ing.
He did not sign the resolution into law, allowing time for Turkey and its
lobbyists to garner enough votes to take the case to the Constitutional
Court, where it was doomed. Even Sarkozy's UMP party members acted against
his will with impunity. No one to this day from Sarkozy's office and his
inner circle has come up with a plausible explanation as to why he did not
act when action was imperative.
Today, Sarkozy promises to draft a new resolution, after the May elections,
when he will be off the hook whether he wins or loses his bid for a second
term.
The Socialist Presidential candidate has offered the same deal to the
Armenians, which may start the game all over if he wins the Elysee Palace.
Once geared into the political process, we are not supposed to relent. We
have a new opportunity here in the US legislature as Sen. Robert Menendez
(D-NJ) and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) intro- duced a new resolution to the
Senate.
We cannot disappoint them by our inaction, because they have never
disappointed their Armenian constituents. Menendez's blocking of Matthew
Bryza's appointment to the embassy in Baku was an act of defiance of
historic magnitude.
The Senate Resolution is similar to the House Resolution.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi delayed bringing the resolution to the floor
arguing that there were not enough votes to pass the resolution.
Her delaying tactics offered ample time to the special interest groups and
the administration to twist arms until it really deci- mated the number of
the supporters.
We are not sure yet if the resolution has enough support in the Senate and
the House. We have to be thankful to its champions and supporters and work
on the remaining legis- lature to act. Win or lose, we are already
accustomed to dis- appointment. We can start the game all over next year
until the centennial of the Genocide. There are no promising signs yet of
meaningful action in Armenia and in the diaspora while Turkey has already
taken pre-emptive strikes to render our centennial drive irrelevant.
Posted on March 30, 2012
by Editor
http://www.mirrorspectator.com/2012/03/30/commentary-are-we-in-for-another-deception/
*By Edmond Y. Azadian*
It is the time of year when Diaspora Armenians - especially in the US and
Europe - go through the motions, intensify lob- bying activities, raise
expectations and on April 24, suffer the anticlimactic results of their
fervor and political activism.
Lately, a few countries have discovered a convenient method of dangling the
issue of genocide recognition before their adver- saries. After gaining
some political mileage, they relegate the case into oblivion, until the
next opportune period.
The US has been among those countries; Israel is another one. For many
years, the Israeli government had flatly denied that the Armenian massacres
amounted to genocide. That shameful statement was made emphatically by
then-President Shimon Peres during a trip to Ankara, when relations between
Israel and Turkey were rock-solid. Recently, however, the Israeli Knesset
has held hearings about recognizing the Armenian Genocide, as a response to
Turkey's belligerence against that country. Also, the American-Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in the US and other lobbying groups -
which march lockstep with the Israeli government - had indicated publicly
that they would stop their campaign against the passage of the Armenian
Genocide by the US Congress. Those quarters have raised hopes throughout
the Armenian world only to resort to their traditional oppositionist
tactics to justify their inaction. The excuse for some political pundits is
that `it is not the prop- er time to recognize the Genocide.' If relations
are tense with Turkey, the voices of wisdom in Washington and Tel Aviv say
`we do not wish to further aggravate relations with Turkey.' On the other
hand, when relations are smooth, there is all the rea- son `not to
jeopardize our relations with a trusted ally.' Therefore, this continuous
mantra always generates excuses that `it is not the right time to recognize
the Genocide.' One wonders when that elusive `right time' for the
recognition of the Genocide would be.
No one pinned too much hope on President George Bush when it came to the
issue of human rights but Bill Clinton and Barack Obama had gained
tremendous political mileage on sounding moralistic issues, only to fail
miserably. Bill Clinton's belated apology in Kigali to the Rwandans for his
inaction dur- ing that country's genocide, a decade after his tenure in the
White House, sounds hollow, disingenuous and insulting. The UN
headquarters, the White House and all the capitals of the world had ample
warning about the impending genocide in Rwanda, but no action was taken,
because someone somewhere had a vested interest in the murder of 800,000
Tutsis in less than 100 days.
Even the head of the UN military mission there had warned the headquarters.
He defied his superiors to take action, but was removed from his post to
facilitate the grisly task of the Hutus.
In the case of the Armenians, Bill Clinton demonstrated the same kind of
insensitivity by ordering the Republican Speaker of the House Dennis
Hastert not to bring the resolution to the floor, realizing that enough
votes were there for its passage. Mr. Hastert was later rewarded generously
by the Turks for his `ser- vices' in the US Congress.
Today, Hillary Clinton's dilly-dallying on Genocide recognition seems to
be
the continuing echo of her husband's policy. It is no wonder that Obama's
human rights advisor had labeled her as a `monster.'
However, that advisor, Samantha Power, is not without bag- gage herself.
Power rose to prominence through the publication of a masterful book, A
Problem from Hell, which delved into the Armenian Genocide and the
Holocaust.
In time, she gained the reputation of a principled human rights missionary,
until she joined President Obama's National Security Council as the senior
director of multilateral affairs. She was the front person of Obama's
election team who con- vinced Armenians that the Messiah's second coming
was around the corner and that upon election, Obama would recognize the
Armenian Genocide. After President Obama powerlessly surren-
dered to the unelected functionaries of the State Department dancing around
the `G' word, the White House once again resorted to the creative
inventions of Power who crafted the president's Martyr's Day statement
by
substituting the word `genocide' with the Armenian phrase `medz yeghern,'
borrow- ing that ruse from the late Pope John Paul II. The pope had sub-
stituted the Armenian term in a sermon in Armenia, when nobody expected him
to politicize the issue by playing with words.
Ever since her credibility was damaged, Power has kept a low profile.
However, unbelievably, she has played a hawkish role in Obama's Libya
policy by advocating the invasion of a sovereign country on the `human
rights' principle.
We may conclude without much hesitation that the Armenian Genocide, Libya's
murderous invasion and human rights are all marketing tools for Ms. Power
to promote her political career.
France is another country which has used, on and off, the Armenian Genocide
issue to block Turkey's accession to the European Union. Recently, both
candidates for president, the incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy and his Socialist
rival, Francois Hollande, found a useful political tool in the issue.
France has at least recognized the Armenian Genocide, but it has so far
failed in the criminalization of its denial.
This column was not party to the jubilation and the hype when the French
Senate passed the resolution to criminalize the Genocide denial. Instead,
we qualified it as a partial restitu- tion of France's betrayal of
Armenians in Cilicia.
When the Constitutional Court judged the resolution to be unconstitutional,
without touching the Gaysot Law which has the same legal framework for the
Holocaust, the entire process was shown to be a charade. When the French
arms industry was threatened by Turkey - similar to the US counterpart
- it
react- ed. And all those who know Sarkozy were sure that he would pull a
trick out of his sleeve - as he has always done in his polit- ical career -
and save face. And he did by refusing to pre-empt the action of the
Constitutional Court, which he knew was com- ing.
He did not sign the resolution into law, allowing time for Turkey and its
lobbyists to garner enough votes to take the case to the Constitutional
Court, where it was doomed. Even Sarkozy's UMP party members acted against
his will with impunity. No one to this day from Sarkozy's office and his
inner circle has come up with a plausible explanation as to why he did not
act when action was imperative.
Today, Sarkozy promises to draft a new resolution, after the May elections,
when he will be off the hook whether he wins or loses his bid for a second
term.
The Socialist Presidential candidate has offered the same deal to the
Armenians, which may start the game all over if he wins the Elysee Palace.
Once geared into the political process, we are not supposed to relent. We
have a new opportunity here in the US legislature as Sen. Robert Menendez
(D-NJ) and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) intro- duced a new resolution to the
Senate.
We cannot disappoint them by our inaction, because they have never
disappointed their Armenian constituents. Menendez's blocking of Matthew
Bryza's appointment to the embassy in Baku was an act of defiance of
historic magnitude.
The Senate Resolution is similar to the House Resolution.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi delayed bringing the resolution to the floor
arguing that there were not enough votes to pass the resolution.
Her delaying tactics offered ample time to the special interest groups and
the administration to twist arms until it really deci- mated the number of
the supporters.
We are not sure yet if the resolution has enough support in the Senate and
the House. We have to be thankful to its champions and supporters and work
on the remaining legis- lature to act. Win or lose, we are already
accustomed to dis- appointment. We can start the game all over next year
until the centennial of the Genocide. There are no promising signs yet of
meaningful action in Armenia and in the diaspora while Turkey has already
taken pre-emptive strikes to render our centennial drive irrelevant.