 The House Foreign Affairs Committee adopted a strongly-worded measure on July 20, pressing Turkey to return all Christian church properties “to their rightful owners.”
By an overwhelming 43-1 vote, the congressional panel adopted a sweeping amendment to the State Department’s Foreign Relations Authorization Act, urging “the Secretary of State in all official contacts with Turkish leaders and other Turkish officials to emphasize that Turkey should”:
1) end all religious discrimination;
2) allow the rightful church and lay owners of Christian church properties to perform religious and social services;
3) return to their rightful owners all Christian churches and other places of worship, monasteries, schools, hospitals, monuments, relics, holy sites, and other religious properties, including artwork, manuscripts, vestments, vessels, and other artifacts; and
4) allow the rightful church and lay owners of Christian church properties to repair all churches and other places of worship, monasteries, schools, hospitals, monuments, relics, holy sites, and other religious properties within Turkey.
Despite intensive efforts by Turkey’s Ambassador in Washington, Turkish and Azerbaijani organizations, and lobbying firms hired by Ankara, almost all members of the Committee, including Turkey’s staunchest supporters, voted in favor of the amendment, dealing Turkey a devastating defeat. The single negative vote was cast by Cong. Ron Paul (R-TX) because of his isolationist ideology and not his support for Turkey!
This near unanimous vote did not come as a surprise to me, as I had long advocated the passage of such a measure realizing that Members of Congress could not possibly vote against religious freedom. All fifteen Members of Congress who spoke during the hearing indicated their support for the amendment. Here are excerpts from some of their remarks:
— Cong. Howard Berman (D-CA), who offered the amendment jointly with Cong. David Cicilline (D-RI), stated: “We want Turkey to return confiscated property to Christian communities and at a minimum to provide compensation for properties that can’t be recovered…. In this particular area, their [Turks’] practices for many years…have been atrocious.”
— Cong. Brad Sherman (D-CA): “This amendment is urgently needed to address the vast destruction of Christian religious heritage as a result of the Turkish government’s theft, desecration, and disregard of ancient Christian holy sites and churches.”
— Cong. Dan Burton (R-IN), one of the staunchest supporters of Turkey: “I do support the amendment. I do support religious freedom, and I hope that this amendment does pass.”
— Cong. Gerald Connolly (D-VA), co-chair of the Turkish Congressional Caucus: “Religious freedom is a tenet of American philosophy and it is a cardinal of our American values. I look forward to supporting the language.”
— Cong. Ed Royce (R-CA), co-sponsor of House Resolution 306 which formed the basis for the proposed amendment: “Turkey is identified as a country among the world’s top violators of religious freedom…. So we urge Turkey to return all confiscated church properties taken from these religions that were frankly stolen.”
— Cong. Eliot Engel (D-NY): “Turkey is an ally in NATO, and we recognize that. I wish frankly that they would act more like an ally to the United States than they have lately. They really have gone astray…. Their Foreign Minister has set out a policy of Islamism and has moved away from the European Union, the West, and the United States, and has behaved very poorly frankly with the flotilla and Israel and the whole bit.”
Turkey’s Ambassador to the U.S., Namik Tan, disingenuously attributed the setback suffered by his country to the work of “radical Armenians.” He must have forgotten that the Turkish government is the one paying millions of dollars to lobbying firms each year to influence Members of Congress, and that 43 out of 44 Foreign Affairs Committee members, including Turkey’s staunchest supporters, could not possibly be in the pockets of a handful of “radical Armenians.”
Turkish leaders have not made a public statement after the adoption of the amendment, in order to hide this embarrassing episode. Surprisingly, Armenian government officials have not commented either on this issue. Obama administration officials have also remained silent and refrained from overt efforts to block the amendment in view of its overwhelming bipartisan support.
While Armenian, Assyrian and Greek-Americans have won the first skirmish, they have not yet won the final battle. The Authorization Bill along with this amendment will next go to the full House for approval. A similar Bill has to be adopted by the Senate. A joint committee of both houses will then attempt to reconcile the differences between the two versions. Turkish lobbyists and the Obama administration still have an opportunity to remove the amendment from the larger Bill. Supporters of the amendment must remain vigilant, urging their House and Senate representatives to vote in favor of keeping the church amendment in the Authorization Bill.
Even though the amendment has no legally binding effect, it is a moral victory for all those who cherish religious freedom, and a major political success for the Armenian-American community which went toe to toe against the mighty Turkish lobbying machine and dealt it a devastating blow. The amendment also exposes the alarming condition of Christian churches in Turkey, paving the way for other countries and international organizations, such as the Council of Europe and UNESCO, to support their restoration.
Yet, the most effective way of forcing Turkey to return the confiscated Christian churches to their rightful owners is by filing lawsuits in the European Court of Human Rights. The Turkish government has accepted the jurisdiction of that court and has readily complied with its verdicts.
|
Category: Harut Sassounian
Harut Sassounian is the Publisher of The California Courier, founded in 1958. His weekly editorials, translated into several languages, are reprinted in scores of U.S. and overseas publications and posted on countless websites.<p>
He is the author of “The Armenian Genocide: The World Speaks Out, 1915-2005, Documents and Declarations.”
As President of the Armenia Artsakh Fund, he has administered the procurement and delivery of $970 million of humanitarian assistance to Armenia and Artsakh during the past 34 years. As Senior Vice President of Kirk Kerkorian’s Lincy Foundation, he oversaw $240 million of infrastructure projects in Armenia.
From 1978 to 1982, Mr. Sassounian worked as an international marketing executive for Procter & Gamble in Geneva, Switzerland. He was a human rights delegate at the United Nations for 10 years. He played a leading role in the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the U.N. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities in 1985.
Mr. Sassounian has a Master’s Degree in International Affairs from Columbia University, and a Master’s in Business Administration from Pepperdine University.
-
Congressional Panel Urges Turkey to Return Church Properties to Christians
-
Armenians Must Counter UN Security Council Bids by Turkey and Azerbaijan
Diasporan political organizations and influential Armenians, in cooperation with the Armenian Foreign Ministry, should launch an international lobbying campaign to block Turkey and Azerbaijan from gaining coveted seats on the United Nations Security Council.Three years ago, I made a similar plea when Turkey was seeking a seat on the Security Council for the first time since 1961. I urged Armenians worldwide to contact government leaders of their respective countries, requesting that their UN representatives oppose Turkey’s Security Council bid. Regrettably, no such efforts were made and Turkey easily gained a seat on the powerful Security Council for a two-year term (2009 & 2010).One advantage Armenians have in being scattered throughout the world is their unique opportunity to lobby the governments of dozens of countries on upcoming issues at the UN. Such a strategy would considerably strengthen the Armenian Foreign Ministry’s UN activities. Diaspora’s political clout and contacts would counter the considerable financial resources Turkey and Azerbaijan provide to many countries to obtain their UN votes. As reported by the Eurasia Daily Monitor, Turkey bribed dozens of third world countries in its successful bid for a Security Council seat in 2009. The Turkish government went as far as contributing $20 million to a number of small nations to pay off their UN membership dues, so they won’t lose their voting rights!Encouraged by the results of its previous campaign, Turkey just announced its candidacy for yet another term on the Security Council in 2015-2016, competing with Spain and New Zealand for two open regional seats. Both of these countries are far more qualified than Turkey in terms of fulfilling Security Council’s objectives of contributing to international peace and security. Having just served for two years on the Security Council after the absence of a half-century, Turkey’s hegemonic appetite is now whetted to return to the Council in 5 years, much earlier than its turn!For those familiar with Turkey’s long record of human rights violations, repeated massacres of Kurds, denial of the Armenian Genocide, and occupation of the northern part of Cyprus, it is shocking to read the excuses of the Turkish Foreign Ministry for its new Security Council bid: “Turkey is determined to increase its contributions to international peace, security and prosperity, as well as to further its efforts towards strengthening fundamental principles and values such as human rights, democracy and rule of law.”Having a seat on the UN Security Council, however, may not always be advantageous for Turkey. Its hypocritical behavior of pretending to be everyone’s best friend risks being exposed, as was the case in 2009-2010 when Turkey was forced to take sides and vote on such thorny issues as the Arab-Israeli conflict and the controversial Iranian nuclear program, antagonizing many of its traditional allies.While Armenians have a five-year advance notice to effectively plan their lobbying activities against Turkey’s membership bid, they have only three months to obstruct Azerbaijan’s Security Council candidacy in elections to be held this October. According to knowledgeable sources, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov is globe-trotting to provide financial inducements to dozens of needy countries in return for votes. Mammadyarov urged the Foreign Ministers gathered at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation conference to support Azerbaijan’s first-ever bid for a seat on the Security Council, claiming that his country has a “strong commitment to goals and principles of the UN Charter.”Given Azerbaijan’s authoritarian regime as documented by the State Department and other human rights organizations, in particular its lack of democracy, flagrant violations of human rights, and constant threats to use force against the neighboring Republics of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabagh (Artsakh), it is hard to imagine a country less qualified to serve on the UN Security Council.Since Azerbaijan will be competing with Slovenia and Hungary for a Security Council seat, one would think that Baku’s chances are close to zero. However, given Azerbaijan’s lavish vote-buying spree funded by abundant petrodollars, Armenians and their supporters need to work hard in the next three months to channel the UN members’ votes towards either Slovenia or Hungary, and away from Azerbaijan.In countering Turkish and Azerbaijani efforts in international organizations, Armenians must be encouraged by the major political setback suffered by Turkey last week, when Armenia and Cyprus blocked the appointment of a Turkish diplomat to the prestigious position of Secretary General of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The top contenders for that job were Austria’s former Foreign Minister, Ursula Plassnik and Turkey’s Ambassador to Brazil, Ersin Ercin. By blocking Austria’s candidate, Turkey caused a serious diplomatic rift between the two countries. At the end, Ambassador Lamberto Zannier of Italy was unanimously chosen as OSCE’s new Secretary General.Armenia and Cyprus must be congratulated for not caving in to Turkish pressures and standing up in defense of their national interests. -
Sassounian’s column of July 14, 2011
Prof. Akcam Reveals Turkish Plan to PayScholars to Deny the Armenian Genocide
Prof. Taner Akcam dropped a bombshell during a lecture at the Glendale Public Library last month, when he revealed that a confidential source in Istanbul had informed him about the Turkish government’s scheme to bribe American scholars to deny the Armenian Genocide.Dr. Akcam, holder of the Kaloosdian/Mugar Chair in Armenian Genocide Studies at Clark University in Worcester, Mass., stated that “the Turkish government is following a very systematic and aggressive policy in the US,” by attempting to cast doubt on the veracity of the Armenian Genocide. Ankara’s grand scheme is to make Turkish denialist claims as widely acceptable as the belief that the events of 1915 constituted genocide. Moreover, through a series of lawsuits in US courts, Turkey and its proxies are trying to present any criticism of denialist scholars and exclusion of revisionist materials from university programs as suppression of “academic freedom.”Prof. Akcam, one of the first Turkish scholars to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, related to his audience that during his visit to Istanbul last December, he had a private conversation with a person who had “inside information” regarding the Turkish Foreign Ministry’s activities in the United States on subject of the Armenian Genocide. Dr. Akcam’s confidential source told him that sometime in 2004-2005, an American university professor had met with “authorities connected with the Turkish Foreign Ministry.” At that meeting, the professor told his Turkish hosts that “Turkey didn’t have a systematic program on the academic level with which to counter the claims of an Armenian Genocide,” and that “the genocide claim is well established at this point,” telling them that “there’s very little” they can do “by trying to confront it head on.”Dr. Akcam was privately informed that the American professor made the following recommendation to Turkish officials: “The thing you need to do is to dig a ditch in front of all the genocide claims; you need to create doubt by writing scholarly works which will awaken that doubt.” Dr. Akcam interpreted these words to mean that “by producing and encouraging new academic works,” American scholars could “normalize the idea that 1915 was not genocide, just as the belief that it was genocide has become accepted.”While it is commonly assumed that the Turkish government provides financial incentives to scholars worldwide to publish articles and books denying the Armenian Genocide, this is the first time that a knowledgeable Turkish insider has confirmed these assumptions. The confidential source told Dr. Akcam that the Turkish Foreign Ministry accepted the American scholar’s proposal and “transferred large sums of money to the US.” The informant revealed to Dr. Akcam the names of American academics who received funds to write books denying the Armenian Genocide, and disclosed that “there are documents signed by their own hand and that these receipts are now in the files of the Foreign Ministry’s records.”In his lecture, Dr. Akcam stated that he did not want “to put any academic under a cloud of suspicion.” However, when he connected the information received from his Istanbul source to some recent publications, “a disturbing picture emerges as far as Armenian Genocide research is concerned.”Dr. Akcam then referred to Michael Gunter’s recent book, “Armenian History and the Question of Genocide,” as a possible “example of this approach.” The website of the book’s publisher, Palgrave Macmillan, stated: “Although as many as 600,000 of them [Armenians] died during World War I, it was neither a premeditated policy perpetrated by the Ottoman Turkish government nor an event unilaterally implemented without cause. Of course, in no way does this excuse the horrible excesses that were committed.”Prof. Akcam further observed that the four academics — Hakan Yavuz of University of Utah, Guenter Lewy of University of Massachusetts, Jeremy Salt of Bilkent University, Ankara, and Edward J. Ericson of Marine Corps Command & Staff College, Virginia — who praised Gunter’s book, “are well known for their denialist position and works regarding the genocide of 1915.” Although Prof. Akcam did not wish to make “an accusation against the book’s writer,” he stated: “the strange similarities between what I was told in confidence in Istanbul and what appears on the jacket cover of that book gave me pause, that’s all.”While no one should accuse academics of receiving funds from the Turkish government or its proxies without solid evidence, it would be enlightening if any of them would voluntarily come forward and disclose whether they have been funded by Turkish sources! -
Armenians Must Counter UN Security Council Bids by Turkey and Azerbaijan
Diasporan political organizations and influential Armenians, in cooperation with the Armenian Foreign Ministry, should launch an international lobbying campaign to block Turkey and Azerbaijan from gaining coveted seats on the United Nations Security Council.Three years ago, I made a similar plea when Turkey was seeking a seat on the Security Council for the first time since 1961. I urged Armenians worldwide to contact government leaders of their respective countries, requesting that their UN representatives oppose Turkey’s Security Council bid. Regrettably, no such efforts were made and Turkey easily gained a seat on the powerful Security Council for a two-year term (2009 & 2010).One advantage Armenians have in being scattered throughout the world is their unique opportunity to lobby the governments of dozens of countries on upcoming issues at the UN. Such a strategy would considerably strengthen the Armenian Foreign Ministry’s UN activities. Diaspora’s political clout and contacts would counter the considerable financial resources Turkey and Azerbaijan provide to many countries to obtain their UN votes. As reported by the Eurasia Daily Monitor, Turkey bribed dozens of third world countries in its successful bid for a Security Council seat in 2009. The Turkish government went as far as contributing $20 million to a number of small nations to pay off their UN membership dues, so they won’t lose their voting rights!Encouraged by the results of its previous campaign, Turkey just announced its candidacy for yet another term on the Security Council in 2015-2016, competing with Spain and New Zealand for two open regional seats. Both of these countries are far more qualified than Turkey in terms of fulfilling Security Council’s objectives of contributing to international peace and security. Having just served for two years on the Security Council after the absence of a half-century, Turkey’s hegemonic appetite is now whetted to return to the Council in 5 years, much earlier than its turn!For those familiar with Turkey’s long record of human rights violations, repeated massacres of Kurds, denial of the Armenian Genocide, and occupation of the northern part of Cyprus, it is shocking to read the excuses of the Turkish Foreign Ministry for its new Security Council bid: “Turkey is determined to increase its contributions to international peace, security and prosperity, as well as to further its efforts towards strengthening fundamental principles and values such as human rights, democracy and rule of law.”Having a seat on the UN Security Council, however, may not always be advantageous for Turkey. Its hypocritical behavior of pretending to be everyone’s best friend risks being exposed, as was the case in 2009-2010 when Turkey was forced to take sides and vote on such thorny issues as the Arab-Israeli conflict and the controversial Iranian nuclear program, antagonizing many of its traditional allies.While Armenians have a five-year advance notice to effectively plan their lobbying activities against Turkey’s membership bid, they have only three months to obstruct Azerbaijan’s Security Council candidacy in elections to be held this October. According to knowledgeable sources, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov is globe-trotting to provide financial inducements to dozens of needy countries in return for votes. Mammadyarov urged the Foreign Ministers gathered at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation conference to support Azerbaijan’s first-ever bid for a seat on the Security Council, claiming that his country has a “strong commitment to goals and principles of the UN Charter.”Given Azerbaijan’s authoritarian regime as documented by the State Department and other human rights organizations, in particular its lack of democracy, flagrant violations of human rights, and constant threats to use force against the neighboring Republics of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabagh (Artsakh), it is hard to imagine a country less qualified to serve on the UN Security Council.Since Azerbaijan will be competing with Slovenia and Hungary for a Security Council seat, one would think that Baku’s chances are close to zero. However, given Azerbaijan’s lavish vote-buying spree funded by abundant petrodollars, Armenians and their supporters need to work hard in the next three months to channel the UN members’ votes towards either Slovenia or Hungary, and away from Azerbaijan.In countering Turkish and Azerbaijani efforts in international organizations, Armenians must be encouraged by the major political setback suffered by Turkey last week, when Armenia and Cyprus blocked the appointment of a Turkish diplomat to the prestigious position of Secretary General of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The top contenders for that job were Austria’s former Foreign Minister, Ursula Plassnik and Turkey’s Ambassador to Brazil, Ersin Ercin. By blocking Austria’s candidate, Turkey caused a serious diplomatic rift between the two countries. At the end, Ambassador Lamberto Zannier of Italy was unanimously chosen as OSCE’s new Secretary General.Armenia and Cyprus must be congratulated for not caving in to Turkish pressures and standing up in defense of their national interests. -
Hanging Armenia’s Dirty Laundry in Public
By Harut Sassounian 
President Serzh Sargsyan made an important appearance at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) in Strasbourg last week. In a whirlwind 30-minute speech, he covered Armenia’s internal and foreign affairs, presenting his country in the best possible light before a distinguished foreign audience.
On the domestic front, Pres. Sargsyan spoke about fighting corruption, holding “fair and transparent elections,” and overcoming “the consequences of the tragic events of March 2008.”
The President then reminded the European Parliamentarians about Armenia’s “shared historical and cultural legacy” with Europe and discussed the ongoing negotiations to resolve the Artsakh (Karabagh) conflict. He condemned “the extreme level of Armenophobia and racism” in Azerbaijan, and spoke of the difficulty of making “a concession to the side that is looking for a convenient excuse to shoot at us.”
Pres. Sargsyan went on to accuse the Turkish government of undermining the “normalizaton” of Armenia-Turkey relations “by setting preconditions and failing to honor its commitments, which rendered the ratification of the signed Protocols impossible.” He called on Turkey and Azerbaijan to end the “unlawful blockade imposed on Armenia” and accused Turkey of “not only failing to recognize, but also engaging in a policy of blunt denial of the Genocide of Armenians committed in the Ottoman Empire in 1915.” He pledged that Armenians and all those concerned with crimes against humanity “will henceforth remain focused on the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide.”
After his speech, Pres. Sargsyan spent another 30 minutes answering questions from PACE delegates representing Lithuania, France, Switzerland, Russia, Moldova, Holland, Armenia, and Ireland. Five Azerbaijanis had placed their names on the list of Parliamentarians to ask questions, but none of them did so. The delegates from Turkey had also made a unanimous decision not to question the Armenian President, as reported by Hurriyet Turkish newspaper.
The question that attracted most attention was the one asked by Parliamentarian Zaruhi Postanjyan from Armenia, a member of the opposition Heritage Party. She told Pres. Sargsyan: “Since an authoritarian regime has been established in Armenia and all elections from 1995 on have been rigged,” wouldn’t it be preferable if he organized special and fair elections and then “resigned”?
As the Turkish President of PACE, Mevlut Cavusoglu snickered at the question, Pres. Sargsyan calmly responded that he was well aware of Ms. Postanjyan’s views which she had freely expressed in the Armenian Parliament, on the street and in the media. He added that he was not prepared to hold special elections because it is neither necessary nor constitutionally feasible to organize such elections. He urged Ms. Postanjyan to participate in the next regularly-scheduled parliamentary elections.
Not surprisingly, Pres. Sargsyan’s PACE speech was welcomed by his supporters and criticized by his opponents at home. The most important issue for all concerned should have been whether the President’s impressive words would translate into action in the near future. However, the immediate controversy revolved around the appropriateness of Ms. Postanjyan’s criticism of the President, while on foreign soil.
Some Armenian politicians were of the opinion that it was improper for Ms. Postanjyan “to attack” Pres. Sargsyan in the chambers of the European Council. Others felt that her “harsh words” inadvertently made the President look good, because in a truly “authoritarian regime,” she would have been excluded from Armenia’s delegation, stripped of her parliamentary immunity and prosecuted. In fact, some European Parliamentarians wondered whether Turkish or Azeri delegates would dare to criticize their President at PACE?
American politicians use the expression “politics stops at the water’s edge” to indicate their willingness to set aside internal disputes for the sake of presenting a united front to outsiders. Applying that adage to Armenia, one could question the wisdom of making such disparaging comments before the Council of Europe, regardless of whether one agrees with the President or his policies. Since Armenia is routinely attacked by Turkish and Azerbaijani delegates in international forums, it is unwise to add one’s voice to those tarnishing Armenia’s reputation.
This issue also comes up when some Armenians try to pressure their authorities by taking their internal disputes to foreign governments and international courts. While their frustration is understandable, dragging a foreign entity into an internal dispute detracts from Armenia’s image overseas. In such cases, however, the blame must be shared by the Armenian government for failing to ensure the integrity of domestic courts, thereby forcing citizens to turn elsewhere for justice.
Before making critical comments about Armenia’s leadership outside the country, especially by Parliament members who have ample opportunity to express their views at home, one must weigh the benefits of pressuring the authorities to respect the people’s rights with the damage caused to the country’s international reputation.
-
From Genocide Recognition To Reclaiming Church Properties
The Armenian-American community took a major step last week to reverse the consequences of the Armenian Genocide and end the Turkish government’s long-standing policy of erasing all traces of Armenian civilization from present-day Turkey.
Going beyond mere acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide, some members of Congress have introduced a new resolution that urges “the Republic of Turkey to safeguard its Christian heritage and to return confiscated church properties.”
The sweeping House Resolution 306 calls on the Government of Turkey to:
“1) end all forms of religious discrimination;
2) allow the rightful church and lay owners of Christian church properties, without hindrance or restriction, to organize and administer prayer services, religious education, clerical training, appointments, and succession, religious community gatherings, social services, including ministry to the needs of the poor and infirm, and other religious activities;
3) return to their rightful owners all Christian churches and other places of worship, monasteries, schools, hospitals, monuments, relics, holy sites, and other religious properties, including movable properties, such as artwork, manuscripts, vestments, vessels, and other artifacts; and
4) allow the rightful Christian church and lay owners of Christian church properties, without hindrance or restriction, to preserve, reconstruct, and repair, as they see fit, all Christian churches and other places of worship, monasteries, schools, hospitals, monuments, relics, holy sites, and other religious properties within Turkey.”
This bipartisan resolution, sponsored by Cong. Ed Royce (R-CA) and Cong. Howard Berman (D-CA), was immediately endorsed by 30 of their House colleagues, 10 of them Republicans. This is a good start, as Republicans constitute the majority in the House and their support is crucial for the successful passage of the resolution. Significantly, Cong. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and a long-time opponent of the Armenian Genocide resolution, was one of the first supporters of the resolution regarding the return of church properties.
It is not surprising that this resolution has such broad support, as it is hard to imagine that any member of Congress, the State Department or the Obama administration would oppose returning a religious building back to its proper owners. By contemporary societal standards, no one would accept the conversion of a church into a mosque or vice versa. Turkey’s devout leaders, as good Muslims, would be the first to acknowledge and uphold the sanctity of houses of worship.
Beyond building a strong bipartisan coalition in Congress, practically all religious denominations in America, be they Evangelical, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish or Muslim, would support such a resolution. All ethnic groups, such as Latinos, Greek-Americans, Irish-Americans, Jewish-American, Arab-Americans, Afro-Americans, Asian-Americans, and Assyrian-Americans would also lend their support to this resolution.
The Armenian National Committee of America noted that the resolution intends “to highlight, confront, and eventually reverse decades of official Turkish policy of destroying Christian church properties, desecrating holy sites, discriminating against Christian communities, and denying of the right of Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Pontians, Arameans (Syriacs), and others to practice their faith in freedom.”
The right to religious freedom is not simply an internal Turkish issue. This right is protected by many international agreements, including the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne to which Turkey is a signatory. Turkey continues to violate Articles 41 and 42 of the Lausanne Treaty which obligate it to provide funding and facilities to non-Muslim minorities for educational, religious, and charitable purposes, and to protect their religious establishments. Regrettably, the House resolution makes no mention of these violations and Turkey’s obligations under the Lausanne Treaty.
The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, which issues an annual report documenting violations of religious rights around the world, has placed Turkey on its “Watch List,” for the third year in a row. The Commission has found that “the Turkish government continues to impose serious limitations on freedom of religion or belief, thereby threatening the continued vitality and survival of minority religious communities in Turkey.” The Turkish government also “continues to intervene in the internal governance and education of religious communities and to confiscate places of worship.”
In recent years, the House and Senate passed several resolutions calling on Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus, Lithuania, Romania, and Vietnam to protect houses of worship and return wrongfully confiscated properties belonging to religious minorities. In line with these resolutions, the House of Representatives should adopt Resolution 306, calling on the Turkish government to respect the right of worship for all Christian minorities and return to them their expropriated churches and other religious properties.