Tweet
AUSTRALIA AND THE HISTORY WARS, ARMENIAN EDITION
Crikey, Australia
Nov 18 2013
Charles Richardson | Nov 18, 2013 12:17PM
Turkey, as always, resents any official reference to the Armenian
genocide. This time it's Australia in the firing line.
The Armenians should be good candidates for western sympathy. A small
Christian nation with Muslim enemies, they were also one of the first
victims of Soviet imperialism, which extinguished their short-lived
independence in 1920.
But affairs in the Middle East are rarely that simple. The Armenians
were actually less anti-Soviet than they might have been, because the
Russians, as fellow-Christians, were traditional allies. And their
main adversary, Turkey, became a key western ally and member of NATO,
which posed an obstacle to western recognition of Armenian grievances
- especially the genocide of 1915-17, in which more than a million
Armenians were systematically massacred by Ottoman Turkey.
So support for the Armenians has tended to be a marginal cause,
mostly found on the left (journalist Robert Fisk is a notable example).
Recognition of the genocide has been resisted by the political
establishment in both Britain and America. Even those who otherwise
have little time for Muslim countries often side with the Turkish
view - for example, neoconservative pundit Daniel Pipes, who favorably
reviewed a book by Justin McCarthy, one of the leading minimisers of
Turkish guilt for the massacres.
That's the background to the revelation last week by the ABC that
Parliament House in Canberra is to be the venue this Thursday for
a talk by the very same Justin McCarthy, arranged by the Australian
Turkish Advocacy Alliance and titled "What happened during 1915-1923?"
You can be sure that McCarthy's version of what happened will be
significantly at variance with that put by mainstream historians.
The ABC says that the venue was booked by Labor MP Laurie Ferguson. If
so, it suggests his foreign policy views are a bit all over the
place (although he's obviously not the only one in that category);
he previously attracted notice last year for defending the right of
Labor members to support self-determination for West Papua.
It may be coincidence or it may be part of the same Turkish propaganda
offensive, but the speaker of the Turkish parliament last week also
weighed into the debate, warning the Sydney Morning Herald that any
recognition by Australia of the Armenian genocide could jeopardise
relations with Turkey, and condemning New South Wales MPs for having
done just that back in May. He apparently maintained that reports of
genocide were, of all things, "still inconclusive".
Premier Barry O'Farrell, to his credit, fired back, saying "'It's
deplorable anyone associated with the Turkish government would try
and use next year's centenary of the Gallipoli landing for political
purposes."
April 2015 marks the centenary of the beginning of the genocide as
well as of the Gallipoli campaign; it would be the most obvious time
for Australia to offer some mark of recognition to the Armenians.
Strong statements of sympathy have been made in the past by, among
others, Joe Hockey (who has Armenian ancestry) and Malcolm Turnbull.
But Turkey's reaction to any official move would be entirely
predictable.
It's only fair to say that Turkey's case in relation to the Armenian
genocide is not quite so far beyond the pale as the denial of Hitler's
extermination of the Jews. There was at least some military logic
behind the extermination of the Armenians; as I said a few years ago,
"questions about the Armenian genocide are not confined to the sort
of lunatic fringe inhabited by the Holocaust-deniers." But that's
setting the bar very low.
Yet it looks as if that fig leaf of historical "controversy" will be
sufficient for the federal government to stay well away from the issue,
at least until the centenary is safely over.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/worldisnotenough/2013/11/18/australia-and-the-history-wars-armenian-edition/
Crikey, Australia
Nov 18 2013
Charles Richardson | Nov 18, 2013 12:17PM
Turkey, as always, resents any official reference to the Armenian
genocide. This time it's Australia in the firing line.
The Armenians should be good candidates for western sympathy. A small
Christian nation with Muslim enemies, they were also one of the first
victims of Soviet imperialism, which extinguished their short-lived
independence in 1920.
But affairs in the Middle East are rarely that simple. The Armenians
were actually less anti-Soviet than they might have been, because the
Russians, as fellow-Christians, were traditional allies. And their
main adversary, Turkey, became a key western ally and member of NATO,
which posed an obstacle to western recognition of Armenian grievances
- especially the genocide of 1915-17, in which more than a million
Armenians were systematically massacred by Ottoman Turkey.
So support for the Armenians has tended to be a marginal cause,
mostly found on the left (journalist Robert Fisk is a notable example).
Recognition of the genocide has been resisted by the political
establishment in both Britain and America. Even those who otherwise
have little time for Muslim countries often side with the Turkish
view - for example, neoconservative pundit Daniel Pipes, who favorably
reviewed a book by Justin McCarthy, one of the leading minimisers of
Turkish guilt for the massacres.
That's the background to the revelation last week by the ABC that
Parliament House in Canberra is to be the venue this Thursday for
a talk by the very same Justin McCarthy, arranged by the Australian
Turkish Advocacy Alliance and titled "What happened during 1915-1923?"
You can be sure that McCarthy's version of what happened will be
significantly at variance with that put by mainstream historians.
The ABC says that the venue was booked by Labor MP Laurie Ferguson. If
so, it suggests his foreign policy views are a bit all over the
place (although he's obviously not the only one in that category);
he previously attracted notice last year for defending the right of
Labor members to support self-determination for West Papua.
It may be coincidence or it may be part of the same Turkish propaganda
offensive, but the speaker of the Turkish parliament last week also
weighed into the debate, warning the Sydney Morning Herald that any
recognition by Australia of the Armenian genocide could jeopardise
relations with Turkey, and condemning New South Wales MPs for having
done just that back in May. He apparently maintained that reports of
genocide were, of all things, "still inconclusive".
Premier Barry O'Farrell, to his credit, fired back, saying "'It's
deplorable anyone associated with the Turkish government would try
and use next year's centenary of the Gallipoli landing for political
purposes."
April 2015 marks the centenary of the beginning of the genocide as
well as of the Gallipoli campaign; it would be the most obvious time
for Australia to offer some mark of recognition to the Armenians.
Strong statements of sympathy have been made in the past by, among
others, Joe Hockey (who has Armenian ancestry) and Malcolm Turnbull.
But Turkey's reaction to any official move would be entirely
predictable.
It's only fair to say that Turkey's case in relation to the Armenian
genocide is not quite so far beyond the pale as the denial of Hitler's
extermination of the Jews. There was at least some military logic
behind the extermination of the Armenians; as I said a few years ago,
"questions about the Armenian genocide are not confined to the sort
of lunatic fringe inhabited by the Holocaust-deniers." But that's
setting the bar very low.
Yet it looks as if that fig leaf of historical "controversy" will be
sufficient for the federal government to stay well away from the issue,
at least until the centenary is safely over.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/worldisnotenough/2013/11/18/australia-and-the-history-wars-armenian-edition/