“The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught to Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory.”Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary
What really happened in 1915?. 1915 Article in National Geographic is quite a source. The article was written by a professor at the American College for Girls in Constantinople from 1900-1909.
https://archive.org/details/armeniaarmenians00newy
| Mavi Boncuk | ARMENIA AND THE ARMENIANS by Hester Donaldson Jenkins 1915 National Geographic article | PDF Download (1.6 MB) |
POINT OF VIEW
The frozen relations between Armenia and Turkey are now showing some signs of melting.
By Grenville Byford | NEWSWEEK Published Feb 28, 2009 From the magazine issue dated Mar 9, 2009
It’s almost April, so Washington is gearing up for another performance of the “Armenian Genocide Resolution Spectacular,” a regular event since 1984. Here’s the historical plotline: the Armenian-American lobby gets a few U.S. congressmen to sponsor a resolution recognizing the 1915 massacre of Armenians in what is now Eastern Turkey as a “genocide.” Then other members of the House are induced to support it. (Members of the House may not be history buffs, but they understand the importance of stroking a powerful domestic lobby.) Next, the Turkish government says Turkey is too important to be insulted like this. In response, the American administration, recognizing that Turkey is indeed a critical NATO ally whose Incirlik Air Base is vital to the Iraq mission, starts twisting congressional arms to abandon the resolution. Offstage, the Israeli lobby, generally keen to boost Turkish-Israeli relations (though less so this year), works against the resolution. Finally, the House leadership reluctantly shelves the whole thing and the curtain falls.
Before staging this year’s performance, however, Congress should note that hitherto frozen relations between Armenia and Turkey are now showing signs of melting, and that this may be the first step toward reconciling the Turkish and Armenian peoples. In September, Turkish President Abdullah Gül attended a Turkey-Armenia football match in Yerevan at the invitation of Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan, who recently met with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Davos. The two foreign ministers, Turkey’s Ali Babacan and Armenia’s Eduard Nalbandian have also been meeting. Both have made optimistic noises.
Progress has been possible because the Armenians have focused on the concrete issue of opening the Armenian-Turkish border-a vital matter to them since none of their other neighbors (Azerbaijan, Georgia and Iran) can offer a viable trade route to the West. Both sides have wisely avoided the genocide dispute, surely recognizing it will have to be dealt with eventually but that developing economic ties will make it easier to do so. Lingering in the background, however, is the Armenian diaspora’s passionate insistence that there was a genocide-and its mirror image in the fury of the Turkish people denying it. Right or wrong is not the point. No Turkish government could contemplate opening the Armenian border with this issue front and center, and Congress should recognize that a genocide resolution would put it there.
In all probability, Turkey and Armenia can only resolve the genocide dispute if they recognize that “was it a genocide?” may be the ultimate question, but it is not the most important one today. To those aiming for reconciliation, two questions outrank it: what common facts can Turks and Armenians be brought to accept, and is the common ground sufficient for both sides to start binding up the wounds? To this end, Erdogan’s proposal to establish a joint historical commission should be pursued. Though Armenia has rejected the idea so far-largely because it is winning its argument on the world stage-the government has softened its stance recently. If the aim is reconciliation, persuading the Turks to abandon the blanket denial they are taught as schoolchildren is what counts.
Progress is not as implausible as it sounds. In the early days of the Republic, Kemal Atatürk, who was not personally implicated, described the Armenian massacres as “shameful acts.” No ex-Ottoman officials were investigated, however, as Turkey needed the newly minted heroes of its War of Independence to have no stain on their characters. Today, Erdogan will accept an investigation. In return, Armenia must accept a reciprocal investigation into the Ottoman Armenians, who fought with the sultan’s Russian enemy, and their responsibility for massacres of Turks and Kurds. Weaving together these two violently opposed historical perspectives will take time and patience. As important as the final answer, however, is the development of empathy across the divide.
Congress can help keep the path to reconciliation open if it is willing to deny the Armenian-American lobby the instant gratification of a genocide resolution. Surely doing so would be far better than repeating the exercises of the last 25 years over and over again until a resolution finally passes and all the House’s leverage over Turkey evaporates, along with most of the good will in the Turkish-American alliance, and maybe even the alliance itself. For its part, the Armenian diaspora might even support reconciliation if only as its second choice. Finally, good relations between Turkey and Armenia would further U.S. objectives in the Caucasus. The proposed hydrocarbon corridor through the Caucasus from Central Asia looks much more secure in the context of Turkish-Armenian friendship, and it might give Armenia the confidence to break with the status quo in the longstanding Nagorno-Karabakh dispute with neighboring Azerbaijan. Congress and others should recognize that this year holds real promise for the beginning of reconciliation between the Turkish and Armenian peoples. If nothing comes of it, Congress can always return to a resolution.
Byford writes frequently on Turkish affairs and is a regular contributor to Newsweek.com.
© 2009
TURKISH FORUMS POINT OF VIEW
https://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2009/02/23/1915-truths-have-reached-president-obama-and-decision/
THE FOLLOWING LINKS WILL TAKE YOU TO THE DUES AND DONATIONS PAGE
https://www.turkishnews.com/tr/content/2009/02/14/2009-yili-uye-aidatlari-ve-bagislariniz/
Turkish Forum — Biz Kimiz? — Bize Ulaşın — Projelerimiz — Yardımlarınız
Comments
Posted By: vaspuragan @ 03/03/2009 11:44:49 AM
About what “argument” are you talking Turkish karabash all those distorted explenations or falsifications will never convince the world that there has not been a genocide against Armenian Nation.Thousand of German,Austurian,Italian,french,British,Russian,American archives prouve historical truth of Armenian genocide, the premeditated extermination of Armenian people from Edirne to whole Anatolia and Western ARMENIA(OCCUPIED)now.All those nonsense polemics will not contribute to resolve the problem.And it is not a secret that Turkey will be obliged to pay financial compensation and handed over all Armenian territories which keep occupied.Already 30000 turks expressed their pain about the genocide of 1915.Instead of barking as turkish karabash you had better to ask pardon to Armenians you torkish converted muhachir-devshirme.
*
Posted By: vaspuragan @ 03/03/2009 9:51:00 AM
“You go and kill more than a million Armenians,wipe the traces of Armenians from Anatolia, grab their property, and then show childeren videos about ‘ What the Armenians did to us’….We are cutting these childeren off from the rest of the world,”said Ahmet Altan, editor of independent newpaper Taraf.”There is a sick, abnormal tissue of Turkish society that poisoned by a nationalist, racist virus”, said Ufuk Uras, an independent MP.To that category belongs all those turkish deneyers who spread deniyelist poison in their comments.
o
Posted By: Lucrece @ 03/03/2009 10:02:08 AM
“Taraf” is an ultra-leftist newspapers, and like many other left-wing extermists, they their proper country. The stupidies of Mr. Altan are supported by no kind of evidence. The arguments for support the so-called “Armenian genocide” were crushed, here and eslewhere.
You do not use rational and scholar study of the past, but unwarranted assertions, for political purposes.
Posted By: Lucrece @ 03/03/2009 10:06:03 AM
Sorry : “they hate their proper country”.
*
Posted By: Lucrece @ 03/03/2009 3:49:45 AM
“If you believe in a conspiracy of thousands of Armenian grandparents and that marches through the desert were told by them as ‘propaganda’ then that it your choice. By probability theories, the chance that thousands of Armenian grandparents repeated the exact same story in the exact same time period as being a random event is zero.”
The Armenian witnesses did not say the same things. An Ottoman Armenian, who became an US citizen under the name of James K. Sutherland, praised, in his book “Adventures of an Armenian boy” (Ann Arbor Press, 1964) the policy of Jemal Pasha, governor of the Near East, vis-à-vis the Armenian displaced peoples. Yegisabeth Kasebian (born in 1900) corroborated, later the Sutherland’s testimony: http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/mahmut-granny.htm
Edward Tashji, son of an Ottoman Armenian and an Ottoman Assyrian, defended during all his life the Turkish side, and justified his position by what his parents said to him.
Hatchadurian Hatchik Abedi, an Armenian citizen, interviewed for “Sari Gelin” in front of the “Genocide” monument in Erevan (probably the last place in the World when you could imagine a pro-Turkish speech) said that the Turks were good for Armenians during the Ottoman period, including WWI; and that the killers of Armenians were Kurds. It is an exaggeration for the whole Anatolia (they were Turkish criminals and Kurdish brave peoples, for example in Mamuret-ül-Aziz), but correct for some regions.
By this way: around 100 old Turks produced testimonies about Armenian atrocities, from 1963 to the late 1980’s; several hundreds of other Muslims testified during the WWI, interviewed by Ottoman jandarma, General Kazim Karabekir and the US investigators Emory Niles and Arthur Sutherland, these testimonies were, for a great part, corroborated by material and archeological evidences, as I already explained here. Do you think really that they were wrong?
Posted By: artsakh @ 03/03/2009 5:15:45 AM
Denial is a weakness of the human condition. It takes strength to admit to the mistakes of your ancestors and is a primitive defense mechanism. Germany accepted the Holocaust and now has the strongest economy in Europe. Turkey, even with its great strategic location, is a laggard in comparison despite staying out of WW II. Denying the past keeps a country rooted in the past and the mentality of the past, preventing progression to a full potential economically and democratically. If a Turk loves his country, he or she should accept the past, reject government propaganda, and move forward into the new millenium.
+
PS: IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT PRESIDENT OBAMAS DECISION? AND HOW HE REACHED TO? .. PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING POSTING AFTERD THE MR. SASSUNIANS COLUMN
From: Harut Sassounian [mailto:sassoun@pacbell.net]
Sassounian’s column of March 5, 2009
| U.S. Prefers to Leave Iraq Through
Jordan and Kuwait, Rather than Turkey Ever since Pres. Obama declared that he would end Americaʼs military presence in Iraq, Turkish officials have been salivating at the opportunity of presenting the United States with a series of demands in return for allowing U.S. troops to leave through Turkey. As a NATO ally and staunch opponent of the war in Iraq, one would have expected that the Turkish government would extend all necessary logistical assistance to the United States to withdraw its troops from the region in a safe, orderly and expeditious manner. Instead, Turkeyʼs leaders are viewing the U.S. departure as a golden opportunity to exploit to the hilt for their own benefit. Even before anyone from the U.S. government mentioned about the possibility of American troops leaving Iraq through Turkey, Ankara officials volunteered to support such an idea, of course, subject to negotiations and eventual approval by the Turkish Parliament. In other words, if the price was right, and if all Turkish demands were met, Turkey would be more than happy to give its blessing. Turkish leaders are also pleased that Pres. Obama is going to increase the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, in addition to seeking soldiers from other countries. This is yet another opportunity for Turks to fleece the U.S. Todayʼs Zaman newspaper quoted unnamed Ankara officials as stating that Turkey is opposed to sending troops to Afghanistan, beyond its 800 non-combat soldiers already there. However, since the anniversary of the Armenian Genocide is approaching and both Pres. Obama and the Congress are expected to take a stand on this issue, Turkey may change its mind and decide to contribute troops to Afghanistan, after all! This is the same kind of horse-trading that went on in 2003, when Washington asked for permission to enter Northern Iraq through Turkey. After lengthy bargaining on how many billions of dollars the U.S. would offer Ankara to allow such passage, the Turkish Parliament voted down the American request. This rejection delayed the start of the war, forcing U.S. troops to travel from the Mediterranean to Iraq through the Persian Gulf, and resulted in more casualties among American troops who had to fight their way from Southern Iraq to the North. One wonders what demands the Turks would make this time around to allow U.S. troops to leave Iraq through Turkey and to send more Turkish soldiers to Afghanistan. How many billions of dollars would Turkish leaders ask for and which U.S. policies, in addition to genocide recognition, they would seek to influence? One would hope that Pres. Obama draws valuable lessons from the experience of previous administrations — that Turkey is not a reliable ally — a lesson also learned by Israel during the recent Gaza conflict. It appears that some U.S. military officials have already concluded that they cannot place the fate of American soldiers in the hands of capricious Turkish leaders. U.S. troops are expected to be evacuated from Iraq through neighboring Jordan and Kuwait, which have never put any conditions nor made any demands on the U.S. government! Given the attractiveness of the withdrawal route through these two friendly Arab countries, the American military may completely ignore the Turkish transit option. The traditional Turkish practice of making excessive demands may have finally backfired. The Associated Press (AP) released a report last week, disclosing that U.S. troops will “shift” to the South (Kuwaiti border) and “exit” through the desert, meaning Jordan. The AP quoted Terry Moores, deputy assistant chief of staff for logistics for Marine Corps Central Command, as stating: “The Marines have already tested exit routes through Jordan with plans for a full-scale exodus” in 2010. One would hope that at long last, U.S. appeasement of Turkey might be coming to an end. The mistake made by previous U.S. administrations as well as Israeli governments is that the more they cave in to Turkish blackmail, the more demanding the Turks become. Due to Turkeyʼs persistent use of bullying tactics in the past, U.S. commanders have good reason to be concerned with choosing the Turkish option out of Iraq. What would happen, if in the midst of the troop pullout, Turkish leaders object to a particular U.S. policy? What if the Turks threaten to block the transit of U.S. troops unless the State Department revises its latest human rights report which accuses Turkey of torture, unlawful killings, limited freedom of expression, and restrictions on minorities? The wisest approach is to eliminate all such demands and threats once and for all, by telling Turkey that unless it cooperates fully with the U.S., it will receive no further economic or military aid. After all, Turkey needs the United States much more than the U.S. needs Turkey. The tail should not be allowed to wag the dog! ——————– YORUM SS AYA TARAFINDAN —————- Harut Sassounian’s Weekly Commentary U.S. Prefers to Leave Iraq Through READER’S REPLY COMMENTS! Jordan and Kuwait, Rather than Turkey
By Harut Sassounian Ever since Pres. Obama declared that he would end America’s military presence in Iraq, Turkish officials have been salivating at the opportunity of presenting the United States with a series of demands in return for allowing U.S. troops to leave through Turkey. “…salivating? What level of literary newsman ship is this, insulting from the first line!
As a NATO ally and staunch opponent of the war in Iraq, one would have expected that the Turkish government would extend all necessary logistical assistance to the United States to withdraw its troops from the region in a safe, orderly and expeditious manner. Instead, Turkey’s leaders are viewing the U.S. departure as a golden opportunity to exploit to the hilt for their own benefit. Benefit of gold (!) over one million dead innocent Arabs plus PKK terror just next door, by aggressors who came 10.000 miles away for looting oil of the neighboring country, bringing calamities of all types instead of democracy and progress! Sir, is your logic normal?
Even before anyone from the U.S. government mentioned about the possibility of American troops leaving Iraq through Turkey, Ankara officials volunteered to support such an idea, of course, subject to negotiations and eventual approval by the Turkish Parliament. In other words, if the price was right, and if all Turkish demands were met, Turkey would be more than happy to give its blessing. That was a dirty agreement between two adventurous leaders, which was “shot dead by accident” thanks God!
Turkish leaders are also pleased that Pres. Obama is going to increase the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, in addition to seeking soldiers from other countries. This is yet another opportunity for Turks to fleece the U.S. Today’s Zaman newspaper quoted unnamed Ankara officials as stating that Turkey is opposed to sending troops to Afghanistan, beyond its 800 non-combat soldiers already there. However, since the anniversary of the Armenian Genocide is approaching and both Pres. Obama and the Congress are expected to take a stand on this issue, Turkey may change its mind and decide to contribute troops to Afghanistan, after all! “fleece USA (?) ! Is Armenia going to send troops to Afganistan or give bases to USA as she did to Russia?
This is the same kind of horse-trading that went on in 2003, when Washington asked for permission to enter Northern Iraq through Turkey. After lengthy bargaining on how many billions of dollars the U.S. would offer Ankara to allow such passage, the Turkish Parliament voted down the American request. This rejection delayed the start of the war, forcing U.S. troops to travel from the Mediterranean to Iraq through the Persian Gulf, and resulted in more casualties among American troops who had to fight their way from Southern Iraq to the North. Sir, a man of your standing and education should not be swept out of logic just by cause of nationalism! Would USA permit Turkey to “station 65.000 soldiers in Texas, use Houston, New Orleans as landing-transit harbor and go to war with Mexico using USA soil, passing an army and armor of about 100.000 and destroy neighborly relations?” Any answers?
One wonders what demands the Turks would make this time around to allow U.S. troops to leave Iraq through Turkey and to send more Turkish soldiers to Afghanistan. How many billions of dollars would Turkish leaders ask for and which U.S. policies, in addition to genocide recognition, they would seek to influence? The “genocide lie, is a dirty fly in the menu on the table, which has to be served and shared”! Did it ever occur to you how much economic loss and military cost did Turkey suffer because of this unfortunate “oil banditry”?
One would hope that Pres. Obama draws valuable lessons from the experience of previous administrations — that Turkey is not a reliable ally — a lesson also learned by Israel during the recent Gaza conflict. It appears that some U.S. military officials have already concluded that they cannot place the fate of American soldiers in the hands of capricious Turkish leaders. U.S. troops are expected to be evacuated from Iraq through neighboring Jordan and Kuwait, which have never put any conditions nor made any demands on the U.S. government! Given the attractiveness of the withdrawal route through these two friendly Arab countries, the American military may completely ignore the Turkish transit option. The traditional Turkish practice of making excessive demands may have finally backfired.
Sir, you are trying to guide USA, the country that sheltered you, into adventures and risks, just because of your “Great Armenian ego”! This error was done by your grand fathers a century ago, and it was the innocent well-doing Turkish Armenians that paid the bill, when all humpabets ran away leaving their compatriots in misery!
The Associated Press (AP) released a report last week, disclosing that U.S. troops will “shift” to the South (Kuwaiti border) and “exit” through the desert, meaning Jordan. The AP quoted Terry Moores, deputy assistant chief of staff for logistics for Marine Corps Central Command, as stating: “The Marines have already tested exit routes through Jordan with plans for a full-scale exodus” in 2010. One would hope that at long last, U.S. appeasement of Turkey might be coming to an end. The mistake made by previous U.S. administrations as well as Israeli governments is that the more they cave in to Turkish blackmail, the more demanding the Turks become. “Turkish blackmail ? Or Turkish surrender and tail waging? The diaspora Armenians have not done any good for the Armenians in Armenia, or Turkey or elsewhere. Empty words of rich, secure persons, do not solve hunger!
Due to Turkey’s persistent use of bullying tactics in the past, U.S. commanders have good reason to be concerned with choosing the Turkish option out of Iraq. What would happen, if in the midst of the troop pullout, Turkish leaders object to a particular U.S. policy? What if the Turks threaten to block the transit of U.S. troops unless the State Department revises its latest human rights report which accuses Turkey of torture, unlawful killings, limited freedom of expression, and restrictions on minorities? The wisest approach is to eliminate all such demands and threats once and for all, by telling Turkey that unless it cooperates fully with the U.S., it will receive no further economic or military aid. After all, Turkey needs the United States much more than the U.S. needs Turkey. The tail should not be allowed to wag the dog!
Human Rights? Of Turkey or Iraq or USA or Armenia? Sir, keep the scenarios and observations for your own self. Turks are not dogs and have no tails to wag, like few typical brainwashed fanatic writers, continuously fomenting nothing but GRUDGE and TROUBLE, which is the only product they are talented to market worldwide! For more historical facts advise Altan and read as suggested.
March 9, 09 Sukru S. Aya – Istanbul |
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
Senior Contributor, USA Armenian Life Magazine
Turkey’s two top leaders were elated that Pres. Obama called them last week. Pres. Gul and Prime Minister Erdogan used glowing terms to describe their talks with the President of the United States.
At a time when Turkey is facing a series of political setbacks — antagonizing Israel and American Jews by siding with Hamas in the Gaza conflict; failing in its self-appointed mediating role between Syria and Israel; and prompting Cyprus to threaten to veto Turkey’s application for European Union membership due to its continued occupation of Northern Cyprus — Gul and Erdogan are desperately trying to exploit every opportunity to prop up their country’s image and gain support from their constituency at home before next month’s crucial local elections.
The newspaper Sabah headlined its article on Pres. Obama’s Feb. 16 phone calls as “Double Praise for Ankara.” It claimed that the U.S. President told Gul: “We appreciate the leadership displayed by Turkey in the region. You are putting forth important efforts in Afghanistan and the Caucasus.” Obama then reportedly told Erdogan: “I want to state that your personal leadership is vital in the Middle East peace process.”
Moreover, Sabah reported that during the “25-30 minute” conversation, the two presidents discussed Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Caucasus, the Middle East and the European Union. Pres. Obama “emphasized the importance of Turkey’s strategic cooperation” and stated: “America will always approach Turkey’s concerns with understanding.” In response, Obama allegedly expressed the hope that his administration would “collaborate with Turkey in numerous issues, including achieving peace in the Middle East, bringing an end to the PKK terrorist organization, as well as relations with Armenia.”
According to the Anadolu news agency, Erdogan “highlighted Turkey’s sensitivities regarding Armenia and the Middle East, expressing the importance of fair and impartial stance of the United States to secure that the relations between the two countries were not damaged.”
The Hurriyet newspaper provided additional details of the phone calls by reporting that “the issue of the 1915 incidents was high on the agenda of Obama-Erdogan discussion.” Gul supposedly told Obama that an Armenian Genocide resolution “should not be put before Congress.” Erdogan was quoted as saying: “America’s fair and impartial approach is important in order to prevent any damage to bilateral relations.” According to Hurriyet, “the U.S. president welcomed the recently restored dialogue between Turkey and Armenia, signaling that under the existing circumstances he would refrain from taking any steps that would harm these efforts.”
There are two serious problems with the foregoing Turkish reports:
1. Given the Turkish leaders’ self-interest in making exaggerated claims, coupled with the tendency of the Turkish media to publish rumors, no one knows if the reports of what was discussed during these phone calls are accurate. Such suspicions are validated by the fact that the White House, in its official announcement, did not make any reference to Armenia or the Armenian Genocide.
2. The Turkish leaders probably misjudged Pres. Obama’s intent in making these phone calls as well the implications of his words. During his long presidential campaign, Pres. Obama repeatedly spoke about bringing a new approach to both domestic and foreign policy. Rather than threats or harsh language, Pres. Obama prefers to use polite and respectful words to win over foreign heads of state. The new American president’s approach is to find common ground with Democrats and Republicans at home, as well as friends and foes overseas!
After reading the self-serving Turkish reports, most Armenians were displeased as they too misjudged Pres. Obama’s intent in making these phone calls. In my opinion, cordial or even friendly relations with the leaders of Turkey do not in any way detract from Pres. Obama’s sympathy towards Armenians or his commitment to affirm the Armenian Genocide.
On the contrary, having a warm personal relationship with Turkish leaders would make it easier for Pres. Obama to use gentle persuasion when necessary. He could explain to them that commemorative congressional resolutions were adopted in 1975 and 1984 and a presidential statement was issued by Pres. Reagan without harming U.S.-Turkish relations. Consequently, acknowledging a genocide that took place almost a century ago should not detract from current friendly ties between the two countries. Indeed, opposing such an action is neither necessary nor wise!
International Scandal:
By Appo Jabarian Executive Publisher / Managing Editor USA Armenian Life Magazine
Friday, February 27, 2009
In recent years, Turkey has been fast at work to project the image of a regional power in the Middle East and distant Africa on the one hand; and on the other, to derail the U.S. re-affirmation of the Armenian Genocide by resorting to all sorts of diplomatic and public relations activities in Washington, DC, and the Caucasus. Ankara’s efforts to pursue these dual objectives range from rushing to the “rescue” of another genocidal state Sudan for economic gain to the over-amplification of recent telephone conversation of Turkish President Abdullah Gul and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo?an with U.S. President Barack Obama, to the continuation of “Football Diplomacy,” originally initiated in Sept. ’08 by Armenia’s President Serge Sargsyan; and of course, to the “good-old” misguiding and defrauding “dialogue” with Armenians; to the “joint historical commission.”
Most of these futile efforts also serve the denialist Turkish officialdom’s intention to gain time for Turkey and to sabotage the imminent passage of the Armenian Genocide resolution in the U.S. Congress; and to ultimately escape from making amends to Armenians in the form of Western Armenian territorial and personal compensation. And from all this, teach Sudan How To Escape Punishment For Crime Of Genocide – Lesson 101!
That’s why, it would be counter-productive for President Obama and the U.S. Congress to delay re-affirmation of America’s record on the genocide using the excuse that “no action should be taken that would jeopardize the amelioration of the diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey.”
The U.S. re-affirmation can send a strong international message against the crime of the crimes by openly condemning Turkey’s creation of axis of genocide with the criminal government of Sudan.
“The genocidal Ankara and Khartoum regimes have grown markedly closer over the past two years, driven by Turkey’s increasingly brazen efforts to undermine the international community’s efforts to isolate Sudan’s genocidal regime. The main three areas of cooperation between the two countries have been: 1) Turkey’s sale of lethal weaponry directly to Sudan; 2) Turkish diplomatic support for the Sudanese government’s genocide denials; 3) Turkey’s use of its UN Security Council seat to block anti-genocide efforts,” informed a recent news alert by the Armenian National Committee of America.
The Sudanese President’s first foreign visit after his indictment by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on crimes of genocide was to Turkey.
Commenting on the Sudanese President’s warm welcome in Ankara, in an article titled “Bashir in Turkey: The Unanswered Questions,” former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Morton Abramowitz, traditionally a reliable surrogate for Turkey’s interests in Washington, wrote in 2008 that, “One would think Turkey’s leaders would be a little more careful before laying down the red carpet for the likes of President Omar al Bashir of Sudan. … Turkey has been trying to persuade the world, not very successfully, that there was no Armenian genocide in 1915. The picture of President Abdullah Gül smiling at a joint press conference is hardly going to convince skeptics that Turkey even knows what genocide means, and it will certainly raise doubts in supporters of Turkey.”
In order not to disrespect the tens of millions of victims of the Armenian, Greek, Jewish, Cambodian, American Indian, and Darfur genocides among many others, America’s official response should be loud and clear. The United States shall not be satisfied by any “Football Diplomacy” between Armenia and Turkey; by any “dialogue” or by any “Joint Historical Commission” between Armenians and Turks.
Even if Turkey recognizes the Genocide and makes amends to Armenians, America and the civilized world still have the duty to re-affirm their record on — or pass resolutions affirming their recognition of — the Armenian Genocide for the specific purposes of 1) Stopping the current genocide in Darfur; and of 2) Being an effective deterrence against the occurrence of future genocides anywhere.
Istanbul. Mayis Alizadeh-APA. The delegation of Turkish Parliament left for Washington to impede discussion of draft law on so-called Armenian genocide in the Congress, APA Turkey bureau reports that four-member delegation led by MP Suat Kiniklioglu, Deputy AKP Chairman on Foreign Affairs includes MPs Murat Mercan, Turkish Parliament’s Commission Chairman of Foreign Relations, Shukru Elekdag and Mithan Melen.
The visit will last one week.