Friday, October 12, 2007

Turkey "Baffled" by Lantos

The Turkish Daily News reports that Ankara is "baffled by [Democratic Congressman Tom] Lantos's vote" to approve the Armenian genocide resolution for a floor vote in the House. The source of the confusion? According to the newspaper's unnamed Washington sources, "Israel had been lobbying against the resolution's passage." Since the longtime House representative and chair of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs "is one of Israel's strongest supporters in Washington," he was, so the logic goes, expected to vote against the resolution. Ankara has continued to warn American Jewish groups that their support for recognition would damage Turkey's relationship with Israel.

Brian Ardouny of the Armenian Assembly of America expressed his gratitude to the House Foreign Affairs Committee for supporting the resolution in the face of pressure from the White House.

Aram Hamparian of the Armenian National Committee of America called the adoption of the resolution by the House Committee a "meaningful step toward reclaiming our right, as Americans, to speak openly and honestly about the first genocide of the 20th century."

At the risk of sounding pedantic: the Armenian Genocide was not the "first genocide" of the 20th century. This statement is unfortunately repeated unthinkingly by many people working toward the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. I don't really understand why it is necessary to claim any sort of primacy (does it make the tragedy worse?), but if one is going to do so, there is at least one earlier case - the genocide of the Herero and Nama in South-West Africa by German colonial troops between 1904 and 1907.

Thursday, October 11, 2007

European Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy hails vote on resolution

The European Armenian Federation for Justice and Democracy, the most prominent Armenian lobby in the European Parliament has just issued a press release (only in French for the moment) hailing the Foreign Affairs Committee vote. The Federation expresses gratitude to all forces that voiced support for the passing of the resolution:
hundreds of American activists, human rights organizations, from various religious backgrounds, representatives of various minority groups [...] Of particular importance is the support of Jewish organizations, that did not withdraw their support in spite of recent threats to the Turkish Jewish community by Mr Babacan, chief negotiator for Turkish accession to the European Union."
On the diplomatic front, Erdogan, in a bold but not unusual move, has just required from his AKP party, to vote the invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan by Turkish troops. Clearly, Turkey is blackmailing the United States and thus raises the pressure quite high.

Archbishop Aris Shirvanian: "The Road to the Recognition of our Catastrophe Starts in Jerusalem"

There is an interesting article by Anshel Pfeffer in Ha'aretz, so far only available in Hebrew, that features the Armenian Archbishop in Jerusalem, Aris Shirvanian. Subtitled, "The Armenians are close to a historic achievement," the article describes the efforts by Turkey as well as by Armenians to win the support of Israel and Jewish groups in their opposed efforts. The piece, which appeared with a big picture of Shirvanian on the frontpage of the online edition, comes in the wake of the vote by the Committee on Foreign Relations to put House resolution 106 before Congress, described by Taline below.

The archbishop is quoted as saying that,
Not only the Turks believe that the road to Washington goes through Jerusalem.
According to Shirvanian,
on the day when Israel changes its policy and recognizes the Armenian genocide, the US, too, will move." Pfeffer remarks dryly that "the belief in the almost mystical power of Israel and the Jewish lobby to determine votes in Washington is probably the only thing that the Turks and Armenians share in their historical fight over recognition of the Armenian Holocaust [ba-shoah ha-armenit].
According to Pfeffer, the Turks are doing their utmost to persuade the Israelis to exert more pressure on American Jewish organizations. Apparently, Turkey is afraid that Jewish and Armenian organizations are now cooperating to ensure that the resolution passes.

As I have argued previously, there is something very dangerous about the manner in which some Israeli statesmen are playing with the Turks. Yossi Sarid, of the leftist Meretz Party, who as a minister of education under Prime Minister Ehud Barak in 2000, promised that "he will do everything in order that Israeli children learn and know about the Armenian Genocide," points to President Shimon Peres as a prime culprit. Back in 2000, Peres, then Barak's Foreign Minister, flew to Ankara in the wake of Sarid's comments and assured the Turks of the standard lie, that "a tragedy" happened to the Armenians but not genocide. Today, Yossi Sarid says, Peres, among others, continues to support the "demonic image from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion that we [i.e., the Jews] rule the world and that if you want something from America, you should come to us."

According to Pfeffer, during his visit to Jerusalem, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan was able to obtain an assurance from Peres to support Turkey's goal of establishing a joint Turkish-Armenian historical commission to study "the issue." Prof. Yair Auron, long active in the recognition cause in Israel, points out the obvious: that such a commission is a deliberate attempt to obscure the truth. As Aram Hamparian, Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee told the Jerusalem Post, such a request
is about as sincere as the Iranian government saying they need to revisit the Holocaust.
Pfeffer's article also finally elucidated the connection of Israeli Meretz parliamentarian Haim Auron to Prof. Yair Auron; the two are brothers. If you recall, MK Haim Auron (also, Oron) appeared previously on this blog after he tried to place recognition of the Armenian genocide on the agenda of the Knesset.

Passera - passera pas?

Alors que le gouvernement américain continue à jouer au chat et à la souris avec le génocide arménien, la résolution a été adoptée à 27 voix contre 21 par le Comité des Affaires étrangères. Reste l'approbation du Congrès à obtenir. Ne nous réjouissons pas trop vite cependant, ce n'est pas la première fois qu'on arriverait près du but pour le voir se dérober sous nos pieds à la dernière minute. Et avec le Président Bush qui a exprimé deux fois dans ces derniers jours son opposition au texte, les craintes peuvent être fortes à bon droit.
A noter aussi l'écho journalistique rendu de l'événement: ce matin à 8h, France Info annonçait simplement qu' une résolution reconnaissant le génocide des Arméniens avait passé la première étape aux Etats-Unis et que les autorités turques qualifiaient le texte d'inacceptable. Une heure plus tard, l'annonce ciblait l'indignation des autorités turques face à la résolution. Et il y a une demi heure, le journaliste disait: "les relations turco-américaines mises en péril par un texte de loi". Cela en dit long sur la manière dont on veut présenter ce qui se passe. Et comme aucun courant d'opinion n'est mobilisé sur la question, il y a fort à parier que cela ne retiendra l'attention de personne.

A titre d'illustration de la conscience morale des peuples, je mets ici le lien vers le discours d'ouverture de Lantos au Comité des Affaires étrangères d'hier. http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/press_display.asp?id=430

Selon lui le dilemme moral se réduit à deux termes incompatibles: d'un côté "témoigner la solidarité envers le peuple arménien" en qualifiant de génocide ce qui s'est passé en 1915 et de l'autre mettre en péril la vie des citoyens américains qui servent aujourd'hui en Irak et qui courraient un danger bien plus important si les relations turco-américaines se dégradaient au point d'empêcher aux Américains l'usage de la base militaire turque. D'un côté un simple mot donc, et une accolade dans le dos en signe de solidarité, de l'autre des périls bien concrets, bien réels, d'ici et maintenant. C'est cela qu'il appelle "un vote de conscience".
Tout est bon pour rejeter la responsabilité que le gouvernement américain a d'avoir décidé d'envoyer et de maintenir ses soldats en Irak. Pour moi ce serait plutôt cela, le vote de conscience.