Niyazi Capa ("No Jews or Armenians") May Face Prosecution

The Armenian office of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty has posted an article today, reporting that the author of "No Jews or Armenians are allowed through this door. Dogs are free to enter" may be charged for discrimination (not for racism, as should be noted).

Armenia Wins Gold; Israel Silver

Armenia placed first in the Chess Olympiad held in Dresden, Germany this past week, and Israel scooped up a silver medal, finishing one point behind the winner. While Armenia was favored to win the tournament, the Israeli team was not expected to perform this well.

Movement in Armenian-Jewish Relations

The fallout from the August 2007 Watertown-ADL controversy (see #1, #2) is slowly changing Armenian-Jewish relations - perhaps for the better. As a result of the uproar by Watertown's Armenian community over the Anti-Defamation League's stance on recognition,  the heads of both the ADL and the American Jewish Committee (AJC), Abe Foxman and David Harris respectively, issued statements recognizing the 1915 killings of Armenians in the Ottoman empire as genocide.

Now, the AJC reports in an October 9, 2008 press release, "The Armenian Church has presented the American Jewish Committee (AJC) with a gold Kiddish cup, a Jewish ceremonial goblet, in appreciation of the long, positive history of close ties between the Armenian and Jewish peoples."

Although the press release quotes the Archbishop of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), Turkish-born Vicken Aykazian, speaking at an AJC Board of Governors Meeting in New York, the cup was actually first presented to an AJC delegation in the Republic of Armenia back in May 2008. That AJC delegation included Barry Jacobs, the organization's D.C.-based Director of Strategic Studies, and Ambassador Peter Rosenblatt, who received the cup from His Holiness Karekin II, Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of All Armenians. Jacobs and Rosenblatt also met with the prime minister of Armenia, Tigran Sargsyan

The kiddush cup theatrics and the AJC press release suggest a warming of relations between American Jewish organizations and American Armenians as well as the current government of Armenia. But the visit was not without its detractors in the American Armenian community, some of whom regard the AJC and Barry Jacobs in particular as chief antagonists in the struggle for U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide. In a somewhat allusive and occasionally confusing article denouncing the entire visit as a "machination," Jirair Haratunian claims that

Jacobs circulates articles from various sources supporting not only Israeli positions but pro Turkish and pro Azerbaijani policies as well. Jacobs’s bias against Armenia is palpable. A New York Times photograph taken at the session of the House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Committee showed Jacobs seated among a group of Turkish protesters wearing badges saying “NO” to the pending Genocide resolution.

Jacobs was a long-time Department of State employee before beginning work for the AJC. He is a classic realpolitiker with little patience for history when it gets in the way of the interests of the United States and the Jewish community as he (and many other foreign policy analysts) perceive them.  But two factors may be compelling him and others to sing a different tune as of late.

For one, American Jews like most other Americans, once informed of the issues, tend to support recognition of the Armenian Genocide. More importantly, however, there are real developments afoot in the South Caucasus and in Turkey that may call for a revision of entrenched positions. 

First, the current regime in Yerevan may be headed for rapprochement with Turkey. Second, the Georgian crisis along with a host of other factors that have been stewing since the American invasion of Iraq are contributing to geopolitical uncertainty in the Caucasus. 

All the players in the South Caucasus, including the Russians, are trying to balance their long-term interests with their current alliances. With Georgia and the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan pipeline facing an uncertain future, Armenia, currently Russia's most stable ally in the region, may reap benefits (though, to be sure, it will also endure significant economic costs). The U.S. may lose the most if it does not act fast. Certainly, Armenia has improved its strategic worth since the Georgian war. 

In a catastrophically-translated press release about the AJC visit, the Republic of Armenia expressed some hope that the Jewish organization may help to improve Armenian ties with the U.S. and Armenia's relations with its neighbors:

During the meeting, the Prime Minister of Armenia and the head of the Jewish Committee of America touched upon the possibilities for improvement of the Armenian-Turkish and Armenian-Azerbaijani relations, the furtherance and expansion of cooperation with the United States [...] as well as the outlook for [...] strengthening the Armenian-Israeli political ties based on the historical and many other affinities between the Armenian and Jewish peoples. The parties said to be convinced that this might be instrumental in the betterment of Armenia's relations with the countries of our region. Peter Rosenblatt emphasized the need for raising awareness about Armenia in Israel which is susceptible to be ensured through active implementation of [...] cultural, educational and other programs.

Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan reiterated our country's position with regard to the settlement of its relations with Turkey by stressing Armenia's readiness to establish relations without pre-conditions.

Un point sur l'actualité arménienne: la descente aux enfers continue

Les élections présidentielles qui ont eu lieu le 19 février ont vu la victoire au premier tour du Premier ministre actuel et favori du Président sortant, Serge Sargsian. Le candidat qui était son principal opposant, Levon Ter Petrossian est l’ancien Président (1991-1998) et l’homme qui a conduit le pays à l’indépendance entre 1988 et 1991. La campagne a été virulente et très suivie par les citoyens, et les résultats le jour du scrutin ont donné une avance telle à Sargsian qu’elle a donné à tous (sauf aux observateurs de l’OSCE apparemment) le sentiment que les résultats étaient gonflés par des irrégularités surtout au moment du comptage : après plusieurs estimations qui donnaient 57% à Sargsian et 19% à Ter Petrossian les résultats définitifs sont redescendus à 52% contre 25%. Dès le lendemain, 20 février, Ter Petrossian a réunit une manifestation de plusieurs dizaines de milliers de personnes et organisé un campement de tentes sur la place de la liberté. Aucun débordement n’a eu lieu ni ce jour là, ni les jours suivants qui ont vu les manifestations se poursuivre dans le calme. Ter Petrossian se prétend le vainqueur des élections et appelle au mieux à une démission immédiate du gouvernement qu’il qualifie de « cleptocratie» et au moins à la tenue de nouvelles élections. L’OSCE dans son compte-rendu provisoire a noté des irrégularités pendant le décompte mais a malgré tout validé le scrutin le disant en règle avec les critères internationaux et les engagements de l’Arménie. Notons que dans les trois jours qui ont suivi l’annonce des résultats 10 fonctionnaires du MAE dont certains en poste à l’étranger ont démissionné par protestation, et le procureur général adjoint, Gagik Jahangirian a rejoint l’opposition. Il est maintenant en détention. Kotcharian a dès le 23 février précisé que les forces de maintien de l’ordre étaient prêtes à intervenir pour assurer le calme et l’ordre public si un coup d’Etat se profilait. A cette date les arrestations politiques ont commencé, sur des personnalités en vue dans l’équipe de campagne de Ter Petrossian. Sur le plan politique, Sargsian a lancé une manœuvre de ralliement de la troisième et quatrième force politique de cette campagne, en engageant des négociations sur les postes à pourvoir.
Le 28 l’ex-KGB admet avoir envoyé deux hommes de son administration dans la manifestation de Ter Petrossian, que celui-ci avait accusé de pousser à la violence. Le lendemain, nouvelle mise en garde de Kotcharian, plus sévère.

Le 1er mars, le campement de tentes est dispersé brutalement par la police, Ter Petrossian ramené à son domicile par le chef de la sécurité personnelle de Kotcharian où il est place en résidence forcée. Quelques heures après, 10000 personnes se rassemblent entre la mairie et l’ambassade de France, et se barricadent derrière des bus. Ter Petrossian entame un dialogue avec les autorités leur demandant de l’autoriser à revenir auprès des manifestants pour les appeler au calme et éviter de nouveaux incidents. Le dialogue échoue. Dans la soirée le Président déclare l’état d’urgence, le rassemblement est dispersé après des affrontements entre les policiers et les manifestants qui font 8 morts (dont un du côté des policiers) et 230 blessés des deux côtés. On ignore tout des circonstances dans lesquelles ces 8 personnes ont été tuées. Les forces de l’ordre diront qu’ils ont dû sévir à cause de rapports qui indiquaient la présence d’hommes armés parmi les manifestants. La preuve de l’existence de ces armes aurait été faite quand les manifestants avaient repoussé les policiers avec des barres de fer. Une division blindée est envoyée quadriller la zone de l’affrontement à 4h du matin dans la nuit du 1er au 2. Deux députés proches de Ter Petrossian, Miasnik Malkhassian et Hakob Hakopian viennent grossir le nombre des détenus politiques, à 30 le 02 mars. Deux autres sont en fuite : Khatchatour Sukiassian et Sasun Mikaelian. Les auditions préliminaires ont déjà commencé pour ces deux députés, qui ont perdu leur immunité parlementaire après un vote du Parlement le 04 mars. Le 03 mars un décret du président suspend la liberté de la presse pendant la durée de l’état d’urgence, jusqu’au 20 mars, cependant que la Cour Constitutionnelle commence les auditions par rapport aux plaintes sur les irrégularités des élections. La communauté internationale, par la voix des Etats-Unis, de l’ONU et de l’OSCE, a appelé à l’abréviation de l’état d’urgence et au dialogue entre les parties.


Le 04 mars parvient également la nouvelle d’une rupture du cessez-le-feu au Karabakh. Chacune des parties rejette la faute sur l’autre. Le nombre de victimes irait de 02 à 10 selon les sources, en majorité des soldats azerbaïdjanais. La communauté internationale appelle au respect du cessez-le-feu par toutes les parties. Ce matin 08 mars, des rapports de presse azérie, turque et macédonienne parlent d’une alliance militaire entre la Turquie et l’Azerbaïdjan pour lancer une opération de débusquement de terroristes du PKK réfugiés au Haut-Karabakh.

Les autorités continuent à durcir leur position et à condamner toutes les voix dissidentes sur leur gestion de la crise, celle du médiateur de la République (ombudsman), Armen Harutiunian par exemple, et parlent de la possibilité d’arrêter Levon Ter Petrossian et de le faire passer en jugement si les auditions de ces camarades laissent penser qu’un coup d’Etat s’organisait. Ce matin (08 mars), le procureur général Aghvan Hovsepian, a exposé « l’hypnose de masse » dont Ter Petrossian a fait usage pour parvenir à rassembler autant de monde dans les rues ; il envisage par conséquent de faire appel à l’expertise de psychiatres et de psychologues au cours des procès qui doivent s’ouvrir le plus vite possible.


Le 06 mars, Matthew Bryza, assistant adjoint au secrétariat d’Etat aux affaires européennes et eurasiennes, a rencontré le Président Kotcharian. Il s’est gardé de condamner la proclamation de l’état d’urgence souhaitant qu’il soit levé au plus vite, a appelé au calme et au dialogue, et à ne pas faire la chasse aux opposants politiques, alors que les chiffres du gouvernement donnent ce matin le chiffre de 68 détenus. L’Union Européenne a, elle, demandé à ce que toutes les personnes arrêtées pour avoir participé aux manifestations soient relâchées. Bryza a aussi rencontré Ter Petrossian et Raffi Hovannissian, dont le parti est le seul parti d’opposition représenté au Parlement. Dans un article paru le 05 mars dans Washington Post, Ter Petrossian demandait à la communauté internationale de condamner fermement les actes du gouvernement arménien, précisant que l’absence de réactions énergiques des pays occidentaux et des organisations internationales amèneraient « les Arméniens à tirer deux conclusions indésirables : que les moyens pacifiques et légaux sont inutiles dans une lutte politique, et que l’Ouest se soucie de démocratie uniquement quand ça l’arrange politiquement. »

Je résume : les Etats-Unis et l’OSCE très prudents, et de toute façon pour ne pas troubler les choses et que les conflits ne reprennent pas dans le Caucase, et surtout que le BTC ne souffre pas de tout ça. Poutine satisfait de la gestion de la crise par les autorités. L’Azerbaïdjan qui en profite pour faire monter la sauce. Les media silence radio. 8 morts, plus de 100 prisonniers politiques, à la date du 28 mars 2008. Un procès qui promet de nous rejouer les meilleures scènes juridiques de l’époque brejnevienne.

Israeli Parliament to Consider Recognition of Armenian Genocide

Invitation to this year's commemoration ceremony at the Hebrew University

Yesterday, the Knesset approved by a 12-point margin a proposal to have a parliamentary committee hold a hearing on recognizing the WWI killings of Armenians by the Ottoman empire as genocide (Ha'aretz). The Knesset House Committee will now decide whether recognition of the Armenian Genocide ought to be sent for review to the Knesset Education Committee or to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. Unlike last year, the government did not oppose the proposal.

The person behind the initiative is MK Haim Oron (Meretz), mentioned previously in this blog. Oron recently won the leadership race of the small left-wing party and is the brother of Yair Auron, who has written two books, one on Israel's position on the Armenian Genocide, and other about the Genocide's reception in the pre-state Jewish community in Palestine.

Backers of recognition in Israel would prefer to have the issue debated in the open Knesset Education Committee, while its opponents, led by MK Yosef Shagal (Yisrael Beitenu), previously described here, would like to see it delegated to the closed-door Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

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.

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.

Welcome to Turkey

Here is a poster you can see in some Turkish airports (this one is at the Bodrum airport) . So that one knows the "truth" on arriving, or does not forget it on leaving...

The famous academic authority invoked in the poster, Turkaya Atayov, holds a large record in denial, having authored numerous books presenting the various Turkish explanations of 1915 (as it evolved over time between the 1970's and the 1990's) and sponsored by Turkish state universities.

No further comment needed.

Outgoing Israeli Ambassador to Turkey Denies Genocide

Pinhas Avivi, the outgoing Israeli ambassador to Turkey, told the Turkish Daily News that while "a lot of people see what happened during the events of 1915 as a tragedy," "there is a great difference accepting it as genocide." According to Avivi, "genocide is a decision by a government to destroy a people" and “never ever has anybody proved that this was the situation in 1915.”

Given Israeli policy on the issue, there is nothing surprising about the substance of this proclamation. The frankness with which the ambassador distorts history, however, is rather embarrassing. American diplomats at least use circumlocutions (if they don't, they get fired) when they deny that "the events of 1915" constituted genocide.

It is clear that the Israelis are doing their utmost to reassure Ankara of their friendship. The Turks, on the other hand, continue to show signs of frustration and disappointment, blaming Israel for the momentous shift in policy on Armenian Genocide recognition by the ADL. At the same time, they are eager to hear some approval for their position. In the background loom the nearly $10 billion in bilateral trade and joint economic ventures between the countries, the entrenchment of the Islamist AKP in power with the recent election of Abdullah Gul to the presidency, and Israel's concerns about Turkey's Iran-policy. It is perhaps with these factors in mind, that we should read Avivi's responses to the Turkish journalist's query about the ADL controversy.

Clearly, Israeli diplomats are playing a complicated game with the Turks. While Ankara plays the rejected lover, the Israelis claim that they are being faithful. As part of this charade, Israeli officials up to President Shimon Peres are promising the Turks to "keep an eye on it" - in order to make sure that other Jewish organizations do not announce similar shifts in policy. Avivi even claims that "the impression we got from different Jewish organizations in Washington is that, the ADL's approach is not seen as the right approach." Given that the American Jewish Committee followed the ADL's shift in policy, I am not sure where this impression is coming from. Are the Turks buying the bull that Israel is feeding them?

I have to wonder, too, whether Avivi's efforts to kiss up to the Turkish public were entirely successful. Asked by Barçın YİNANÇ about antisemitism in Turkey, the ambassador says that he believes it is "weak" in Turkey:

On the governmental level, and as far as 90 percent of the newspapers are concerned, apart from the newspaper Vakit and one or two journalists, I never felt it (Turkish Daily News).

Reassured, the journalist notes that, "For some countries, it's such an issue that it requires the Israeli government to step in. Avivi tells him that “Anti-Semitism has never been an issue for us to be taken up on official level." The journalist, however, reminds Avivi of "false news report that Israel was reportedly buying land in Turkey" and "that conspiracy theories based on Zionism are quiet widespread." Aviv acknowledges that the embassy could have done more to reach out to ordinary people.

I have a hard time believing that there is less antisemitism in Turkey than in France or Germany, where Israeli government officials do not shy away from expressing fears about resurgent anti-Jewish expressions by the public.

Turkey Demands ADL Retract Position Shift

The Turkish ambassador to Israel, Namik Tan, announced last Sunday that Turkey expects Israel to compel American Jewish organizations to retract their recent public recognition of the Armenian Genocide:

Israel should not let the [US] Jewish community change its position. This is our expectation and this is highly important, highly important" (Jerusalem Post).

According to the Jerusalem Post, the ambassador refused to accept protests by Israeli government officials that they do not control the policy of American Jewish organizations.

In the meantime, the Turkish Daily News claims that Israeli President Shimon Peres has pledged to ask the ADL to reverse its position. I would not put too much stock in this. Any promises that Israeli officials make on this matter are worthless. Neither Peres nor anyone else can effect a reversal by the ADL at this point.

The question is whether the Turks know this and merely want to force Israel not to follow suit (it will not), or whether they truly believe that Israel can "deliver" American Jewish organizations. I realize that the latter is a popular belief, including among some Armenian activists who have long criticized the role of American Jewish organizations in thwarting Congressional recognition resolutions. But anyone who thinks that this is how things work has a very flawed understanding of the American political system of which Jewish organizations are an integral part.

Neither the Anti-Defamation League nor the American Jewish Committee take orders from Israel. As hard as it is to persuade otherwise those convinced that these groups are part of an international "Zionist cabal," I think that this latest episode demonstrates just how costly it can be to believe the yarns about Jewish power and conspiracies. I would maintain that diplomats would do better to understand that American Jewish organizations pursue what they perceive to be the interests of America and the Jewish community (in the U.S., Israel, and elsewhere in the world), all as part of a universalist commitment to defending human rights and combating discrimination. Inevitably, there are conflicts about the balance to be struck between these various aims.

Turkey Expresses "Anger and Disappointment"

Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül (Photo: Wikipedia)

Citing sources in the Israeli Foreign Ministry, Ha'aretz reports that Turkey is pressuring Israel to compel American Jewish organizations to reverse their recognition of the Armenian Genocide. So far, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee, perhaps the two most recognizable Jewish political organizations in the U.S., have publicly declared that the events of 1915 constituted genocide. Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül expressed disappointment that Israel had not done anything to prevent these declarations, and talks between the Pinhas Avivi, the Israeli ambassador in Ankara, and Gül escalated to "unpleasant tones" [טונים צורמים] (Ha'aretz Hebrew).

The report is rather incredible, and reveals the bizarre spell that the phenomenon of Jewish diplomacy continues to exert on supposedly rational actors in the international state system. It appears that the Turkish Foreign Ministry truly believes in the existence of a cabal that initiates and enforces policies for all of world Jewry. The State of Israel now plays the role once attributed to the Rothschilds. I have always thought of Turkish diplomacy with respect to the denial of the Armenian Genocide as rather clever. Now it turns out that one of its guiding assumptions seems to have been the belief that American Jewish organizations take their marching orders from Jerusalem. I know that this thesis is popular among certain groups in the U.S. and elsewhere as well; the believers will hardly be persuaded by evidence to the contrary. The Turkish Foreign Ministry would do well to study the role played by Jewish groups in the American political system as well as the views of U.S. Jews on foreign and domestic policy, without the blinders of stereotypes about Jewish conspiracies.

The impact that the recognition decision of the ADL as well as the (characteristically) quieter AJC has made is astounding. In Turkey, government officials apparently "admitted that the ADL's shift in position was a setback for Ankara" (Turkish Daily News). Somehow, vast powers have been attributed to these Jewish organizations in the fight for and against House resolution 106, which would have the U.S. officially recognize the Armenian Genocide.

Cross-posted from Kishkushim.

AJC Executive Director David Harris Recognizes Armenian Genocide

After Foxman's statement, the American Jewish Committee, arguably the most prestigious organization representing U.S. Jewry on the national as well as international stage, for the first time recognized the killings of Armenians during WWI as genocide:

At the same time, I cannot escape the events of 1915 and the conclusions reached by credible voices, from Ambassador Morgenthau to Harvard professor Samantha Power, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of A Problem from Hell: American and the Age of Genocide, to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, about the nature of what took place: it was a genocide, they determined, albeit one that occurred more than thirty years before the term was coined (see full press release).

This is a huge development whose significance cannot be overstated. It marks a major policy shift for the organization. To think that all this started from the controversy in Watertown is actually deeply inspiring. Truth and justice have triumphed over realpolitik.

It remains to be seen what the fallout will be for relations between American Jewish organizations and Turkey. To be sure, Turkish diplomacy has been dealt a serious blow. With the issue having taken center stage, neither the ADL nor AJC could any longer afford to take a "neutral" or strategic position.

Thanks to R. for the link.

Foxman Recognizes Armenian Genocide

Perhaps my cautious optimism below was not unfounded. Today, the ADL released a press statement, in which Abe Foxman called the massacres of Armenians perpetrated by the Ottoman empire "genocide":

We have never negated but have always described the painful events of 1915-1918 perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians as massacres and atrocities. On reflection, we have come to share the view of Henry Morgenthau, Sr. that the consequences of those actions were indeed tantamount to genocide. If the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it genocide.

The ADL did, however, maintain its line that a Congressional resolution is "counterproductive."
Nevertheless, this is a very welcome development. I dare say that the whole affair has vindicated the recognition cause and that the prospects for a resolution passing are now better than ever.

Thanks to Peggy for the link.

ADL Continues to Stumble

Throughout this week, an "Open Letter to the New England Community" will appear as a paid advertisement in various newspapers in the region. The advertisement is an attempt by the national ADL to justify its ongoing position of "neutrality" on U.S. House resolution 106. As R., who brought this to my attention, points out, the document smacks of inconsistency and poor logic. I was flabbergasted, for example, upon reading this paragraph:

We believe that legislative efforts outside of Turkey are counterproductive to the goal of having Turkey itself come to grips with its past. We take no position on what action Congress should take on House Resolution 106. The Jewish community in Turkey has clearly expressed to us and other major American Jewish organizations its concerns about the impact of Congressional action on them, and we cannot ignore those concerns. We are also keenly aware that Turkey is a key strategic ally and friend of the United States and a staunch friend of Israel, and that in the struggle between Islamic extremists and moderate Islam, Turkey is the most critical country in the world.

The first sentence is a staple of those who oppose the recognition of the Armenian Genocide as genocide by foreign governments. I'm not at all convinced by this claim.

Yes, recognition resolutions may make large sectors of the Turkish population more intransigent on this issue, but how has inaction on this front helped matters? If anything, we have ample evidence from the past 9 decades proving that neutrality by foreign powers on this question has actually increased the strength of the denialist camp. Several generations of Turks have grown up reared on textbooks and popular mythologies that deny not just the genocide but massacres of Armenians in toto.

Furthermore, it seems rather unfair to extend this kind of courtesy to Turkey, while frustrating the aims of Armenians and non-Armenians who want recognition of this genocide. Isn't the continued frustration of attempts to achieve recognition also counter-productive to these people's attempts to come to terms with their past?

The second sentence of this paragraph, which claims that the ADL "takes no position" on H.R. 106 strikes me, with all due respect, as a blatant lie. If the ADL is indeed "neutral" on this matter, why does the same paragraph invoke fears about the safety of Turkey's Jewish community, as well as Turkey's importance as a strategic ally?

I sympathize with the fears of the Turkey's Jews as much as I sympathize with the anxieties of some Armenians living in Turkey, who have also expressed opposition to genocide recognition resolutions abroad. But the kind of argument that is being made here is extortion pure and simple. It reminds me of some of the claims made by early-19th-century German legislators who refused to grant civic emancipation to Jews in their territories because they believed this would lead to attacks against Jewish people by the hostile population. Turkey is responsible for the safety of its citizens - it is a modern state with all the powers of an advanced security apparatus at its disposal.

I do agree with the ADL that it

is regrettable that such an important program as ADL’s No Place for Hate® Program, which provides a framework for fighting hatred and bigotry while increasing diversity awareness and fostering respect, has been mired in a controversy having nothing to do with the program.

But the ADL knows very well that if an educational program had been launched by a group that it perceived as hurtful, it would do everything possible to shut it down, no matter how beneficial it may have been to the community. If large segments of the population in New England find the position taken by a sponsor of a program on a certain issue to be objectionable, they have the right to oppose the program too. NGOs do not have immunity from public pressure.

I do have a question for my perpetually pessimistic friends. Is there not some grounds for optimism when one reads the following line?

We will continue to work to convince Turkey to pursue recognition and reconciliation, and we will seek ways to encourage this process [emphasis added].

Anti-Defamation League in Hot Water over Armenian Genocide

A Jewcy Banner in a petition that calls on the ADL to recognize the Armenian Genocide

The municipal council of Watertown, Massachusetts, which together with Glendale, California is one of the major Armenian centers in the U.S., last Tuesday voted unanimously to pull out of the "No Place for Hate" tolerance-education program. The reason? The program is funded by the Anti-Defamation League, whose national board, the council alleges, has not been forthright in recognizing the Armenian Genocide.

Among other developments, the controversy has led to the firing of the New England Regional Director of the ADL, Andrew Tarsy, after he defied the national leadership of the organization and called on it to refer to the killing of 1.5 million Ottoman Armenians in 1915 as genocide. Now, some people are hoping that the scandal will lead to the "implosion" of the Anti-Defamation League and the sacking of its controversial leader, Abe Foxman.

One of the people who has been leading the campaign against the ADL is Joey Kurtzman over at Jewcy, who in a July post, Fire Foxman, "broke the news" of a February 2007 meeting between Turkish foreign minister Abdullah Gul and American-Jewish organizations, at which the latter allegedly agreed to oppose a House bill that would recognize the Armenian Genocide. For some thoughts on this meeting, see my post, "Recognizing the Armenian Genocide: Another Round."

I have very little sympathy for some of Kurtzman's other aims, which apparently include "the end of the Jewish people." Unlike Kurtzman, I hardly think the ADL is redundant. And while I can imagine how gratifying it is for a spunky, young Heeb to bash someone like Abe Foxman, I wish Kurtzman could have spared us the self-righteous universalist moralizing. Furthermore, Kurtzman's polemics against the ADL's anti-Mel Gibson campaign are a scandal, as is his pooh-pooing of antisemitism.

Nevertheless, I say mabrouk to the man for his spirited coverage of the Watertown-ADL controversy. To me, the whole episode illustrates something that I have repeated like a broken record on this blog: the American Jewish grassroots overwhelmingly support U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide. It's too bad that an excellent program, the ADL's "No Place for Hate," ended up being cut to send a message.

It is clear that there is a split between the grassroots and local leaders on one hand and the diplomatic activity of the larger organizations on the other. The directors are thinking geopolitics. When the Turkish foreign minister invites them to make a pitch for action against an Armenian Genocide resolution by Congress, they are not going to tell him "no" to his face, especially when he joins his plea to the status of the Jewish community in Turkey and to Turkish-Israeli as well as Turkish-American relations. The foreign policy departments of the premier American Jewish diplomatic organizations, such as the American Jewish Committee, are focused on the Middle East today; they are doing everything they can to keep Turkey on America's side, and at least somewhat close to Israel. The question is whether historical truth, moral integrity, and diaspora Armenians should all suffer for the pursuit of these interests.

Second Armenian Church to be Turned into a Museum in Turkey, Or How to Keep Falsifying History with European Funding and Approval

According to PanArmenianNet, an Armenian church in the Edremir district of Van is being reconstructed with European funding. As for the Holy Cross Church on Akhtamar Island a few months ago, this church should be turned into a museum. No doubt, like for the Holy Cross, there will be no mention whatsoever of how this church came to be deserted, when and why. Nor why the church was left abandoned for so many decades. As a perfectly politically healthy place in Turkey, the museum will show the Turkish account of Armenian's presence in Van.

How Not to Help the Cause of Recognition

Apparently, some people in Glendale thought it was a good idea to invite a conspiracy theorist, who calls himself a historian and claims "Jewish descent," to give a lecture on the "Jewish Genocide of Armenian Christians." Christopher Jon Bjerknes (interesting first name for a Jew), whose previous contributions to historical scholarship include a work alleging that Albert Einstein plagiarized some of his most important discoveries, now accuses "doenmeh" (crypto-Jews living in Turkey) and Zionists of having been behind the 1915 genocide.

Could anyone tell me who Rev. Bedroj Hajian is and why he would honor this certified antisemite with an interview?

I'm sure that the appeal for these ideas is rather limited, but it does worry me that some people are going one step further with the notion that Jews especially have been behind blocking recognition efforts.

Warning: the above link to this lunatic's book contains racist slander.

Donald Bloxham Winner of the Lemkin Award for his Book on the Armenian Genocide

Donald Bloxham has received the 2007 Raphael Lemkin Award for his book The Great Game of Genocide Imperialism, Nationalism, and the Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians. I got acquainted with this work back in Berkeley last year, by my friend Amos. Bloxham's study adds an important piece to the historical inquiry about the Armenian genocide, with rich insights on European and American interests in the Ottoman Empire from the end of the 19th century until after the war.

Raphael Lemkin was an international lawyer who coined the word "genocide."