Author: Harut Sassounian

For over a century, successive Turkish governments have tried various tricks to deny the veracity of the Armenian Genocide. All of their attempts have miserably failed. Turkey exerted diplomatic pressure around the globe and spent tens of millions of dollars hiring high-priced lobbying firms to deny the undeniable. Contrary to post-war Germany which admitted its guilt in the Holocaust and made amends, the Turkish government, by continuing its denials, is labelled around the world as an unrepentant criminal regime. Turkey would have been better off coming clean by acknowledging and making restitution for the mass crimes of 1915 rather than perpetuating the disgraceful legacy of its barbaric past.

The latest ridiculous Turkish denialist tactic is claiming that Pres. Joe Biden, by acknowledging the Armenian Genocide, “violated four articles of the U.S. Constitution.” If genocide was not a gruesome subject, such an accusation would have been amusing. However, the comedy does not stop there. In an interview with Turkish journalist Ugur Dundar, published in several Turkish media outlets, former Turkish Ambassador to the United States, Sukru Elekdag, suggested that Turkish groups try to impeach Biden after he leaves the White House, even though a president cannot be impeached after he is no longer in office.

Amb. Elekdag is not a constitutional law expert. He studied economics in college and later became a diplomat. He knows nothing about the U.S. Constitution.

When the Turkish journalist asked Elekdag how can Turks sue Biden since he referred to the Ottoman Empire as the perpetrator of the Genocide, not the Republic of Turkey, the Ambassador foolishly pointed out that “there is no ethnicity called Ottoman. Ottoman is the name of a dynasty. Those who founded the Ottoman state are Turks and they are our ancestors and we are their descendants.” So, Elekdag is suggesting that Turks sue Biden for accusing the Ottoman Empire of genocide. However, since Elekdag is associating the Republic of Turkey with the Ottoman Empire, then Turkey is naturally liable for the Ottoman crimes.

Elekdag’s falsely alleged that Pres. Biden violated Article VI, the Fifth Amendment, Article 1 (Section 9), and the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

Elekdag suggested that Pres. Erdogan of Turkey announce to the world that “Pres. Biden has committed a crime by violating the U.S. Constitution with his 24 April statements.” This is the most ridiculous part of the whole interview. Pres. Erdogan, who has committed massive crimes against hundreds of thousands of Turkish citizens, is the last person on earth to accuse anyone of committing a crime.

At the end of his interview, Elekdag stated that he had contacted the leaders of the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (ATAA) who told him that they will consider his accusations of Pres. Biden.

Elekdag suggested that an academic research be conducted on “whether or not to impeach and prosecute a former U.S. president” for his “constitutional offenses.” The ATAA is now planning to hold a symposium at an American university “with the participation of historians and lawyers.”

I received a copy of ATAA’s letter to Pres. Biden dated April 18, 2023, telling him that his previous two years’ April 24 statements “disregarded at least four articles and amendments of the U.S. Constitution.” Nevertheless, a week after receiving ATAA’s letter, Pres. Biden once again issued an Armenian Genocide statement on April 24, 2023, ignoring the Turkish warnings. The ATAA told Pres. Biden that his April 24 statements were “motivated solely to gain political popularity among the strong Armenian diaspora.”

At the end of its letter, the ATAA falsely claimed that there was an “initiative by the republics of Türkiye and Armenia to establish a Joint Historical Commission, composed of historians and legal scholars to be selected by Ankara and Erivan.”

I would like to add a few thoughts to this Turkish onslaught of misrepresentations:

I will be greatly pleased if the ATAA takes legal action against Pres. Biden which will result in publicizing worldwide the crime of Genocide committed by Ottoman Turkey. The ATAA’s lawyers will be happy to enrich themselves by getting paid to file such a frivolous lawsuit.

If Elekdag was really a constitutional law expert, why didn’t he sue Pres. Ronald Reagan in 1981 and the U.S. House of Representatives in 1984, when they recognized the Armenian Genocide, while he was Ambassador in Washington, D.C.? Why didn’t the ATAA file lawsuits for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the House of Representatives in 1975, the Senate and House of Representatives in 2019, and all 50 U.S. states?

The ATAA can save a lot of money and effort by simply asking Google’s Artificial Intelligence website if Turks can sue Pres. Biden for acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. Here is AI’s answer:

“No, Biden did not violate the Constitution by recognizing the Armenian genocide. The Constitution does not explicitly prohibit the President from making such a declaration, and there is no precedent to suggest that it would be considered unconstitutional…. The Armenian genocide was the systematic extermination of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire during World War I. It is estimated that between 1.5 and 2 million Armenians were killed during the genocide. The Turkish government has long denied that the genocide took place, but there is overwhelming evidence to support the fact that it did. Biden’s recognition of the Armenian genocide was a long-overdue step in acknowledging one of the darkest chapters in human history. It is a powerful statement of America’s commitment to human rights and justice.”

The UK-based Legatum Institute published its comprehensive 2023 Prosperity Index for 167 countries, including Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey. The index covers 12 separate spheres or ‘pillars’ which are composed of 67 sub-sections.

The Institute defined prosperity as people having “the opportunity to thrive by fulfilling their unique potential and playing their part in strengthening their communities and nations. Ultimately, prosperity is not just about what we have; it is also about who we become. Prosperity is underpinned by an inclusive society, with a strong social contract that protects the fundamental liberties and security of every individual.”

Overall, Armenia is ranked in the Prosperity Index much higher than Azerbaijan and Turkey. Armenia is 61st place in 2023, slightly down from 59th in 2022, but considerably up from 76th in 2013. Meanwhile, Azerbaijan is ranked much lower at 92nd in 2023, the same as in 2012 — somewhat higher than 104th in 2013. Turkey is ranked even lower at 95th in 2023, the same as in 2012 — substantially down from 68th in 2013.

The Legatum Institute described Azerbaijan as “the least prosperous country in the region,” despite its vast income from billions of petrodollars.” This means that the country’s wealth is not trickling down to the population.

Here is how Legatum Institute described Turkey’s dismal Prosperity Index. “Turkey has seen its governance deteriorate significantly over the last 10 years, falling 60 places to 128th, with political accountability deteriorating at the greatest rate globally. Constitutional reforms in 2017 concentrated more power in the hands of the executive, removing key checks and balances. Personal Freedom has also deteriorated at the second greatest rate globally, with the government consistently suppressing dissent…. The current government has ruled Turkey since 2002. As noted by Freedom House, after initially passing some liberalizing reforms, the government has pursued a wide-ranging crackdown on critics and opponents since 2016. For example, Amnesty International points out that hundreds of people, including journalists, social media users and protesters, have been detained in Turkey in 2019 due to their criticism of Turkey’s military offensive in Syria.”

Here are the rankings of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey on each of the 12 pillars of the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index:

1) “The Safety and Security pillar (War & Civil Conflict, Terrorism, Politically Related Terror & Violence, Violent Crime, and Property Crime) measures the degree to which war, conflict, and crime have destabilized the security of individuals, both immediately and through longer-lasting effects”: Armenia (75th), Azerbaijan (111th), and Turkey (147th).

2) “The Personal Freedom pillar (Agency, Freedom of Assembly & Association, Freedom of Speech & Access to Information, and Absence of Legal Discrimination) measures progress towards basic legal rights, and individual liberties”: Armenia (70th), Azerbaijan (144th), and Turkey (152nd).

3) “The Governance pillar (Executive Constraints, Political Accountability, Rule of Law, Government Integrity, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, and Institutional Trust) measures the extent to which there are checks and restraints on power and whether governments operate effectively and without corruption”: Armenia (64th), Azerbaijan (113th), and Turkey (128th).

4) “The Social Capital pillar (Personal & Family Relationships, Social Networks, Interpersonal Trust, Social Tolerance, and Civic & Social Participation) measures the strength of personal and social relationships, social norms, civic participation in a country, and social tolerance”: Armenia (125th), Azerbaijan (132nd), and Turkey (137th).

5) “The Investment Environment pillar (Property Rights, Investor Protection, Contract Enforcement, Financing Ecosystem, and Restrictions on International Investment) measures the extent to which investments are adequately protected and are readily accessible”: Armenia (75th), Azerbaijan (54th), and Turkey (68th).

6) “The Enterprise Conditions pillar (Domestic Market Contestability, Environment for Business Creation, Burden of Regulation, Labor Market Flexibility, and Price Distortions) measures the degree to which regulations enable businesses to start, compete, and expand”: Armenia (44th), Azerbaijan (47th), and Turkey (65th).

7) “The Infrastructure and Market Access pillar (Communication, Energy, Water, Transport, Border Administration, Open Market Scale, Import Tariff Barriers, and Market Distortions) measures the quality of the infrastructure that enables trade and distortions in the market for goods and services”: Armenia (71st), Azerbaijan (72nd), and Turkey (50th).

8) “The Economic Quality pillar (Fiscal Sustainability, Macroeconomic Stability, Productivity & Competitiveness, Dynamism, and Labor Force Engagement) measures how well an economy is equipped to generate wealth sustainably and with the full engagement of the workforce”: Armenia (83rd), Azerbaijan (65th), and Turkey (71st).

9) “The Living Conditions pillar (Material Resources, Nutrition, Basic Services, Shelter, Connectedness, and Protection from Harm) measures the degree to which a reasonable quality of life is experienced by all, including material resources, shelter, basic services, and connectivity”: Armenia (76th), Azerbaijan (65th), and Turkey (59th).

10) “The Health pillar (Behavioral Risk Factors, Preventative Interventions, Care Systems, Mental Health, Physical Health, and Longevity) measures the extent to which people are healthy and have access to the necessary services to maintain good health, including health outcomes, health systems, illness and risk factors, and mortality rates”: Armenia (68th), Azerbaijan (85th), and Turkey (63rd).

11) “The Education pillar (Adult Skills, Tertiary Education, Secondary Education, Primary Education, and Pre-primary Education) measures enrolment, outcomes, and quality across four stages of education as well as the skills in the adult population”: Armenia (59th), Azerbaijan (79th), and Turkey (74th).

12) “The Natural Environment pillar (Preservation Efforts, Oceans, Freshwater, Forest, Land and Soil, Exposure to Air Pollution, and Emissions) measures the aspects of the physical environment that have a direct effect on people in their daily lives and changes that might impact the prosperity of future generations”: Armenia (99th), Azerbaijan (149th), and Turkey (86th).

In addition to Armenia’s better ranking than Azerbaijan and Turkey in the overall Prosperity Index, Armenia exceeds its two neighboring countries in six categories. It is worse than both of them only in three categories, but better than Azerbaijan and worse than Turkey in three other categories.

I wrote an article in January 2016, titled: “Turkey was first country to recognize the Armenian Genocide in 1918.” However, most people are still unaware that ‘the Armenian Massacres’ were discussed and acknowledged by the Ottoman Parliament and Senate in 1918.

More recently, two Armenian members of the Turkish Parliament, Selina Dogan and Garo Paylan, raised the issue of the Armenian Genocide in the Parliament on January 14, 2016. Earlier, in November 2014, Parliament member Sebahat Tuncel submitted a resolution on the Armenian Genocide to the Turkish Parliament, asking Erdogan to issue an apology, declare April 24 as an official Day of Mourning, make public the documents in the Turkish archives about this mass crime, and pay material and moral restitution to the descendants of the victims. The proposed resolution was ignored by the Turkish Parliament.

Since writing my 2016 article, I came across a detailed analysis written by Prof. Ayhan Aktar in the History Workshop Journal, titled: “Debating the Armenian Massacres in the Last Ottoman Parliament, November – December 1918.” That debate took place following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in WWI and occupation of Constantinople (Istanbul) by the victorious allied countries.

In the last two months of 1918, the Ottoman Parliament discussed over several days the Armenian Genocide, described at the time as massacres. A motion was presented which stated: “A population of 1 million people guilty of nothing except belonging to the Armenian nation were massacred and exterminated, including even women and children.” In response, Interior Minister Ali Fethi Okyar declared: “It is the intention of the government to cure every single injustice done up until now, as far as the means allow, to make possible the return to their homes of those sent into exile, and to compensate for their material loss as far as possible…. Yes, Gentlemen, I also say that our officials butchered many Armenians, including women and children and that their properties were plundered.”

A Parliamentary Investigative Committee was set up to collect all relevant documents showing the actions of those responsible for the ‘Armenian deportations and massacres.’ The evidence was turned over to the Turkish Military Tribunal, and those found guilty were hanged or given lengthy prison sentences.

Here are some excerpts from Aktar’s article: “Discussion of the Armenian massacres in the Ottoman Parliament began with motions calling the Union and Progress governments to account. When on November 4, 1918 the Ottoman Parliament convened in Istanbul the political attempts to find the perpetrators started with the first motion, tabled by Baghdat-Divaniye Deputy Fuat Bey a few days earlier. This demanded that members of the Sait Halim Pasha and Talaat Pasha cabinets be tried by the High Court…. Clause 10 [of the motion] made direct reference to the Armenian deportations and to the Teshkilat-i Mahsusa (the Special Organization), an irregular military force organized by the CUP [Committee of Union and Progress] leadership that had carried out deportations and massacres.”

Some of the parliamentarians who belonged to the old guard of Unionists, which were the majority in the parliament, without denying the Armenian massacres, made excuses similar to today’s Turkish Government, stating that Turks were also killed during this period.

Six Armenian deputies of the parliament submitted a motion demanding that “the deportation decision of May 27, 1915 and the decree of September 27, 1915 concerning expropriation of abandoned properties and real estate should be revoked, and that those deported from their native land be permitted to return. It further asserted that the administrative measures facilitating the sharing out among local notables of properties which had belonged to deported Armenians went absolutely against the spirit of the Ottoman Constitution of 1876.”

In response to accusations that some Armenians on the Eastern front had rebelled against the Ottoman Empire, Armenian Deputy Matyos Nalbandian responded: Even if some Armenians had committed illegal acts, does that justify “the removal and extermination of all Armenians” and “the confiscation and plunder of their properties?” Nalbandian also made a distinction between the Turks killed at the warfront and the innocent Armenian civilians who were massacred.

A similar discussion took place in the Ottoman Senate on Nov. 21, 1918. Ahmet Riza Bey made a motion demanding that “‘the atrocities committed under the name of deportation’ be investigated; that the negative impact throughout the country be determined; and that those involved in these affairs be prosecuted.”

Former Governor and Minister of Interior, Reshit Akif Pasha, stated that his investigation indicated that “these orders of deportation had been given by the well-known Minister of Interior [Talaat Pasha] and officially communicated to [governors in] the provinces.”

On December 9, 1918, Minister of Justice Haydar Molla told the Ottoman Senate that the crimes against Armenians were committed by state officials, politicians and ordinary Turks.

Importantly, none of the deputies, regardless of their party affiliation or background, denied the occurrence of the deportation and massacres of Armenians.

On December 21, 1918, the Ottoman Parliament was dissolved by Mehmed Vahdettin, the last Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. “When the Parliament finally reconvened with the newly-elected deputies on January 12, 1920, it was dominated by supporters of the resistance movement which had developed in Anatolia, under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Pasha (later Ataturk),” wrote Aktar.

The Turkish Military Tribunals in 1919–20 tried and sentenced to death in absentia the masterminds of the Armenian massacres, Enver, Djemal and Talaat, the Young Turk leaders who had fled the country.

The U.S. State Department issued on March 20, 2023 its annual Country Reports on Human Rights for the year 2022. The report covered 198 countries and territories, including Armenia.

The Executive Summary of the report described the Parliamentary elections of 2021: “the elections were generally well managed, and contestants were able to campaign freely. The elections, however, were also characterized by intense polarization and marred by increasingly inflammatory rhetoric. The observation mission noted that ‘high levels of harsh, intolerant, inflammatory and discriminatory rhetoric in the period leading up to election day tainted the debate.’ Other shortcomings included incidents of pressure to attend campaign events, allegations of vote buying, blurring of the line between the ruling party and state, alleged misuse of administrative resources, inadequate campaign finance provisions, and the narrow standing allowed for submitting electoral complaints.”

Regarding various human rights abuses in Armenia, the State Dept. wrote that there were “credible reports of torture by members of the security forces; harsh prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention; serious problems with judicial independence; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; restrictions on freedom of expression; crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting civil society figures and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex persons; and the worst forms of child labor. The government took only limited steps to investigate and punish alleged abuses by former and current government officials and law enforcement authorities. There was no reported progress on government investigations of alleged abuses committed by Armenian armed forces or individuals during the 2020 hostilities.”

Regarding the 2022 attack by Azerbaijan on Armenia, the State Dept. wrote: “there were reports that Azerbaijani forces engaged in unlawful killings, and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment of Armenian forces in September.”

Under the subtitle, “arbitrary deprivation of life and other unlawful or politically motivated killings,” the State Dept. expressed concerns “regarding noncombat deaths in the army and the failure of law enforcement bodies to conduct credible investigations into those deaths.”

The State Dept. then detailed further problems with elections: “Reports of arbitrary arrests that appeared election-related continued. Law enforcement officials arrested two municipal employees affiliated with the opposition coalition, ‘Strong Community,’ in the Tavush region, on election day, September 25. These arrests followed the detention of four opposition-linked mayors in the Syunik region during and following the June 2021 parliamentary elections.”

There were also serious problems with the courts: “the judiciary was not viewed as independent or impartial due to its history of corruption and political influence, resistance to reform, and recent high-profile scandals. There were unconfirmed reports of attempts by the government to influence judges. The high case load, lack of public trust, and allegations of government pressure discouraged professionals from applying to judgeships. During the year, NGOs continued to report on judges who had acquired significant amounts of property and assets that were disproportionate to their salaries and continued to note that the absence of vetting of all standing judges based on objective criteria — particularly of those in the Supreme Judicial Council and Constitutional Court — undermined the integrity of the judiciary. They further noted that the annual asset declaration checks of sitting judges were limited in scope and did not help to remove corrupt judges.”

Section 2 of the State Dept. report covered: “Respect for Civil Liberties.” Under the subtitle, “Freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media,” the report stated that “the government generally respected this right, albeit with some restrictions.”

On the topic: “Violence and Harassment,” the report stated: “the local NGO Committee to Protect Freedom of Expression reported 14 cases of violence against 16 journalists during the year, most of which were at the hands of law enforcement and took place when the journalists were covering opposition protests.”

Regarding “Freedom of Peaceful Assembly,” the report stated: “while the government generally respected freedom of assembly, there were some restrictions, particularly disproportionate use of force by police against protesters, police brutality against protesters and journalists, and arbitrary detention of demonstrators…. On June 2, the Coalition to Stop Violence Against Women issued a statement condemning violence by police officers against protesters, violent apprehensions, beatings, and humiliating treatment of protesters, including women…. On the morning of September 21, special police used force and detained 37 relatives of deceased service members, mostly women, who had gathered at the entrance of the military pantheon and were waiting for the arrival of the prime minister and other officials.”

The State Department’s lengthy report on Armenia critically, but accurately, described the various human rights abuses in great detail.

While the State Department does not rank countries on a scale, the U.S.-based Freedom House rated Armenia on its Freedom Score as “Partly Free.” It is disappointing that five years after Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan came to power under the guise of establishing democratic rule, Armenia is still classified as “Transitional Hybrid Regime.”The only consolation for Armenia is that its two hostile neighbors, Azerbaijan and Turkey, have much lower scores. Both Azerbaijan and Turkey are ranked by Freedom House on its Freedom Score as “Not Free.” In terms of democratic rule, Azerbaijan is classified as a “Consolidated Authoritarian Regime,” while the report on Turkey is still pending.