'Genocide' right name for Armenian deaths
October 14, 2007
MaineToday.com, ME
EditorialThe article below makes the case that Turkey needs tough love from Americans! "If genocide is a charge that can only be applied to our enemies, it loses all meaning. The United States must be willing, when appropriate, to use it against its friends if our country is to retain any moral authority in matters of international law.
The U.S. government cannot protect its NATO ally Turkey from the judgment of history.
It's easy to find a reason not to mark Turkey with the brand of genocide for the mass killings of 1.5 million Armenians during the waning days of the Ottoman Empire.
Modern Turkey is an important ally, a moderate Muslim country with a secular government in one of the most sensitive areas of the world.
It has a border with Iraq and its airspace and bases have been used to supply our forces in that country.
The timing of a proposed House resolution condemning Turkish crimes is bad. The crimes alleged were committed a lifetime ago, beginning in 1915, 33 years before the term genocide was coined and defined in international law.
The killers were agents of an ancient kingdom, long ago wiped off the map. Why should Congress act now, when it is clearly upsetting to the present Turkish government?
The answer is simple. We should call it genocide because that is the truth.
Between 1915 and 1923, Ottoman officials engaged in a systematic campaign to eliminate the Armenian minority from their homeland inside Turkey using forced expulsions and massacres.
Although most of the historical questions are settled, the United States has not officially described the Ottoman actions as genocide.
Resolutions to do just that have been introduced in the U.S. Congress before, but were defeated because of Turkey's strategic role in the Cold War. Again, the timing was bad.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee was right to pursue this issue now. Given Turkey's place on the globe, there will probably never be a good time.
If genocide is a charge that can only be applied to our enemies, it loses all meaning. The United States must be willing, when appropriate, to use it against its friends if our country is to retain any moral authority in matters of international law.
Too often allegations of crimes against humanity are seen as the price paid only by losers. The victors in war can keep their secrets, and their atrocities go unpunished.
That creates a problem. What will restrain the actions of a country that doesn't think it is going to end up on the losing side of a conflict?
Turkey should not be able to use its strategic position to keep hiding from its history. If international powers are going to prevent a future genocide, everyone should be ready to look squarely at the past.
MaineToday.com, ME
Editorial
The article below makes the case that Turkey needs tough love from Americans! "If genocide is a charge that can only be applied to our enemies, it loses all meaning. The United States must be willing, when appropriate, to use it against its friends if our country is to retain any moral authority in matters of international law.
[...]
Turkey should not be able to use its strategic position to keep hiding from its history. If international powers are going to prevent a future genocide, everyone should be ready to look squarely at the past. "
The U.S. government cannot protect its NATO ally Turkey from the judgment of history. It's easy to find a reason not to mark Turkey with the brand of genocide for the mass killings of 1.5 million Armenians during the waning days of the Ottoman Empire.
Modern Turkey is an important ally, a moderate Muslim country with a secular government in one of the most sensitive areas of the world.
It has a border with Iraq and its airspace and bases have been used to supply our forces in that country.
The timing of a proposed House resolution condemning Turkish crimes is bad. The crimes alleged were committed a lifetime ago, beginning in 1915, 33 years before the term genocide was coined and defined in international law.
The killers were agents of an ancient kingdom, long ago wiped off the map. Why should Congress act now, when it is clearly upsetting to the present Turkish government?
The answer is simple. We should call it genocide because that is the truth.
Between 1915 and 1923, Ottoman officials engaged in a systematic campaign to eliminate the Armenian minority from their homeland inside Turkey using forced expulsions and massacres.
Although most of the historical questions are settled, the United States has not officially described the Ottoman actions as genocide.
Resolutions to do just that have been introduced in the U.S. Congress before, but were defeated because of Turkey's strategic role in the Cold War. Again, the timing was bad.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee was right to pursue this issue now. Given Turkey's place on the globe, there will probably never be a good time.
If genocide is a charge that can only be applied to our enemies, it loses all meaning. The United States must be willing, when appropriate, to use it against its friends if our country is to retain any moral authority in matters of international law.
Too often allegations of crimes against humanity are seen as the price paid only by losers. The victors in war can keep their secrets, and their atrocities go unpunished.
That creates a problem. What will restrain the actions of a country that doesn't think it is going to end up on the losing side of a conflict?
Turkey should not be able to use its strategic position to keep hiding from its history. If international powers are going to prevent a future genocide, everyone should be ready to look squarely at the past.
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
posted by Vahe Balabanian at 12:55 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home