Turkish Forum English

Tag: Recep Tayyip Erdogan

12th president of Turkey

  • Israel Lobby Gets Congress to Stick It to Turkey

    Israel Lobby Gets Congress to Stick It to Turkey

    The Israelis are trying to teach the Turks a lesson…….This was simply an act of punishment for Turkey for not being nice to Israel and for courting Iran.

    MJ Rosenberg
    Senior Fellow Media Matters Action Network
    Posted: March 5, 2010 11:42 AM

    That battle is now being carried to Washington. The Israelis are trying to teach the Turks a lesson. If the Armenian resolution passes both houses and goes into effect, it will not be out of some newfound compassion for the victims of the Armenian genocide and their descendants, but to send a message to Turkey: if you mess with Israel, its lobby will make Turkey pay a price in Washington.

    ==========================================================

    MJ Rosenberg

    M.J. Rosenberg is the former Director of Policy Analysis for Israel Policy Forum (IPF).

    In this position, MJ heads IPF’s Washington, D.C. office and writes IPF Friday, a weekly  opinion column on the Arab-Israeli conflict which is widely circulated throughout the United States and the Middle East. In addition, MJ has published numerous op-eds, in the national and Jewish press.

    MJ spent eighteen years within the United States government, fourteen on Capitol Hill as an aide to Representatives Jonathan Bingham (D-New York), Edward Feighan (D-Ohio) and Nita Lowey (D-New York) and Senator Carl Levin (D-Michigan).  Immediately prior to coming to IPF, he was a political appointee to USAID, where he served as Chief of Staff for Thomas Dine, the head of the Eastern Europe/NIS Bureau of USAID.

    From 1982 to 1986, MJ was editor of Near East Report, the American Israel Public Affair Committee’s (AIPAC’s) biweekly publication on Middle East Policy.

    =================================================================

    Israel Lobby Gets Congress to Stick It to Turkey

    Yesterday the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed the Armenian genocide resolution. That is the bill, kicking around for years, that recognizes the Armenian genocide as precisely that – genocide. The Turkish government has always strongly opposed the resolution, arguing – unconvincingly, in my opinion – that the slaughter of the Armenians occurred in the context of war and was not an attempt at their intentional eradication.
    I never understood why the Turks care so much. The current democratic Turkish Republic was not even in existence during the Armenian slaughter. It is the successor state to the Ottoman Empire under which the killing took place. The current Turkish government is no more responsible for the Armenian genocide than the current German government is responsible for the Holocaust.
    Nonetheless, the Turks vehemently oppose using the term “genocide” to describe the events of 1915.
    And successive American administrations have deferred to the Turks by opposing Congressional bills “commemorating” the “Armenian genocide.”
    It is no different this year. The Obama administration lobbied against the resolution because it believed that enacting it would disrupt our relations with Turkey, a fellow NATO member and our largest ally in the Middle East. It also argued that passing the bill now would disrupt negotiations now underway between Turkey and Armenia.
    It passed anyway and the Turks immediately called its ambassador home.
    But here is where it gets really interesting. The following comes from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, the Associated Press of the Jewish world. JTA writes:
    In the past, the pro-Israel community [i.e. the Israel lobby] , has lobbied hard against previous attempts to pass similar resolutions, citing warnings from Turkish officials that it could harm the
    alliance not only with the United States but with Israel — although Israel has always tried to avoid mentioning the World War I-era genocide.
    In the last year or so, however, officials of American pro-Israel groups have said that while they will not support new resolutions, they will no longer oppose them, citing Turkey’s heightened rhetorical attacks on Israel and a flourishing of outright anti-Semitism the government has done little to stem.
    That has lifted the fetters for lawmakers like Berman (Chairman Howard Berman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee) , who had been loath to abet in the denial of a genocide; Berman and a host of other members of the House’s unofficial Jewish caucus have signed on as co-sponsors.
    Get that. The lobby has always opposed deeming the Armenian slaughter a genocide largely because Turkey has (or had) good relations with Israel. And the lobby, and its Congressional acolytes, did not want to harm those relations.
    But, since the Gaza war, Turkish-Israeli relations have deteriorated. The Turks, like pretty much every other nation on the planet, were appalled by the Israeli onslaught against the Gazans. And said so.
    Ever since, the Netanyahu government has made a point to stick it to the Turks. Most famously, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon seated the Turkish ambassador in a kindergarten chair during a meeting, and “forgot” to put a Turkish flag on the table alongside the Israeli flag. He then called the Israeli photographers in and said to them in Hebrew – so the Turkish ambassador wouldn’t understand, “The important thing is that they see he’s sitting lower and we’re up high and that there’s only one flag, and you see we’re not smiling.”
    News of that episode so enraged the Turks and humiliated the Israelis that Ayalon had to apologize three times, in progressively more abject terms, or face a rupture in Israeli-Turkish relations.
    That battle is now being carried to Washington. The Israelis are trying to teach the Turks a lesson. If the Armenian resolution passes both houses and goes into effect, it will not be out of some newfound compassion for the victims of the Armenian genocide and their descendants, but to send a message to Turkey: if you mess with Israel, its lobby will make Turkey pay a price in Washington.
    And, just maybe, the United States will pay it too.
    Follow MJ Rosenberg on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mjmediamatters

    Huffington Post

    686 words posted in Zionist provocation, Af-Pak war, , Israel • Leave a comment

    COMMENTS
    Dnlmsstch I’m a Fan of Dnlmsstch 17 fans permalink
    The reason that the Turks have a problem admiting the genocide is becasue Mustafa Kamal and other founders of the Modern Secular Turkish Republic were involved – if not directly at least peripheraly – to admit that is like admiting that George Washington and other founder were complicit with the genocide of Native Americans.
    Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:46 PM on 3/05/2010
    – lightningbolt I’m a Fan of lightningbolt 142 fans permalink
    As usual, everything will be blamed on Israel. The Jewish people are the eternal scapegoat.
    Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 04:36 PM on 3/05/2010
    – joeinvt I’m a Fan of joeinvt 13 fans permalink
    Are you denying or defending the Armenian genocide? And are you opposed to lobbying generally or simply effective lobbying done by Jews?
    Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:48 PM on 3/05/2010
    – mok10501 permalink
    This comment is pending approval and won’t be displayed until it is approved.
    Henry Kissinger was lobbying for the Turks, isn’t he the biggest Jew in the nation? What happened, didn’t the Turks paid enough? Oo, I see, that penny pincher doesn’t count ha?.
    Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:10 PM on 3/05/2010
    – lbsaltzman I’m a Fan of lbsaltzman 92 fans permalink
    Excellent post. I am reminded of the shifting alliances in the novel 1984. Ironically Israel had better be careful or one day it may be that Congress will no longer be afraid to discuss the truth about Israel.
    Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 3/05/2010
    – Annoula I’m a Fan of Annoula 21 fans permalink “That battle is now being carried to Washington. The Israelis are trying to teach the Turks a lesson. If the Armenian resolution passes both houses and goes into effect, it will not be out of some newfound compassion for the victims of the Armenian genocide and their descendants, but to send a message to Turkey: if you mess with Israel, its lobby will make Turkey pay a price in Washington. And, just maybe, the United States will pay it too. ”
    Precisely that’s the core of the issue right now. That the US reserves the right to label war atrocities and crimes against humanity depending on how it fits its agenda and/or Israel’s. For as long as the relations between Israel and Turkey continued to be good, that resolution would never had made it out of Comittee. This was simply an act of punishment for Turkey for not being nice to Israel and for courting Iran. In my book, that’s called HYPOCRISY. The sad truth is the US has become a tool of the Likud party. And the attacks on 9/11 were a response to that. How much more is the US willing to sacrifice for the sake of the Zionists zealots?
    Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 03:06 PM on 3/05/2010

  • Turkey threatens ‘serious consequences’

    Turkey threatens ‘serious consequences’

    after US vote on Armenian genocide

    Strategic partnership at risk despite Barack Obama’s attempts to stop Congress resolution

    • Robert Tait in Istanbul and Ewen MacAskill in Washington
    • guardian.co.uk, Friday 5 March 2010 21.34 GMT
    Ahmet DavutogluForeign minister Ahmet Davutoglu says describing the 1915 Armenian killings as genocide is an insult to Turkey’s ‘honour’. Photograph: Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images

    Turkey has threatened to downgrade its strategic relationship with the US amid nationalist anger over a vote in the US Congress that defined the mass killings of Armenians during the first world war as genocide.

    Barack Obama‘s administration, which regards Turkey as an important ally, was today desperately seeking to defuse the row. It expressed its frustration with the House of Representatives’ foreign affairs committee, which voted 23-22 yesterday in favour of a resolution labelling the 1915 massacre of up to 1.5 million Armenians a “genocide”.

    A furious Turkey may now deny the US access to the Incirlik air base, a staging post for Iraq, as it did at the time of the 2003 invasion, or withdraw its sizeable troop contribution to the coalition forces in Afghanistan.

    On the diplomatic front, the US needs the support of Turkey, which has a seat on the UN security council, in the push for sanctions against Iran over its nuclear programme. Turkey is also helpful to the US on a host of other diplomatic issues in the Middle East and central Asia.

    The White House and state department began work today to try to prevent the controversial issue making its way to the floor of the house for a full vote.

    In Turkey, Suat Kiniklioglu, the influential deputy chairman for external affairs in the ruling Justice and Development party (AKP), warned of “major consequences” if the resolution was accepted by the full House of Representatives.

    “If they choose to bring this to the floor they will have to face the fact that the consequences would be serious – the relationship would be downgraded at every level,” he said. “Everything from Afghanistan to Pakistan to Iraq to the Middle East process would be affected.

    “There would be major disruption to the relationship between Turkey and the US.”

    His comments reflected deep-seated anger throughout Turkish society, as well as an official determination to press the Obama administration into making sure the resolution progresses no further.

    Turkey withdrew its ambassador to Washington for urgent “consultations” immediately after the vote, which was screened live on nationwide television.

    Its foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, appeared to blame the outcome on the White House, and said that describing the 1915 Armenian killings as genocide was an insult to Turkey’s “honour”. France and Canada have both classified the killings as genocide, unlike Britain.

    “The picture shows that the US administration did not put enough weight behind the issue,” Davutoglu told a news conference. “We are seriously disturbed by the result.”

    The mass killing of up to 1.5 million Armenians has long been a highly sensitive subject in Turkey. While the issue is now more openly debated than in the past, Turkish officials insist that to describe it as genocide equates it with the Nazi Holocaust.

    Turkey admits that hundreds of thousands of Armenians died, but disputes suggestions that it was part of a programme to eliminate the population, insisting instead that many died of disease. It has also suggested that the numbers have been inflated, and pointed out that many Turks died at the hands of Armenians.

    Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, who is on a visit to South America, stressed that both she and Obama opposed the house vote and wanted to see it go no further. She said any action by Congress was not appropriate. “We do not believe that the full Congress will, or should, act upon that resolution, and we have made that clear to all the parties involved.”

    Asked how she squared her support for the Armenian campaign on the election campaign trail with her new position, she said circumstances had changed, with the Turkish and Armenian governments engaged in talks on normalisation and a historical commission established to look at past events.

    “I do not think it is for any other country to determine how two countries resolve matters between them, to the extent that actions that the United States might take could disrupt this process,” she said.

    The chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America, Ken Hachikian, who led the lobbying campaign to get the house committee to back the resolution, today dismissed the Turkish threat of reprisals. “This is part of a Turkish pattern or huffing and puffing. With the other 20 countries that have passed similar resolutions, they made similar threats and then it was business as usual,” he said.

    Hachikian, who is based in Washington, said he hoped the vote would go to the full house before 24 April, Armenian genocide commemoration day. He accused Obama and Clinton of hypocrisy in trying to block a vote, saying they had supported the Armenian campaign during the presidential election.

    He said the Turkish government had spent $1m during the past few months lobbying members of Congress. His committee had spent only $75,000, which included adverts in media outlets read by members of Congress and their staff.

    Although Hachikian claimed to have the votes needed, and 215 members of the 435-member house have publicly backed the resolution, the chances of a full vote are small, given the opposition from the White House and state department.

    The vote came as attempts at rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia – which have no diplomatic ties – had already run aground. A protocol signed in Geneva last October promising to restore relations has yet to be ratified by the parliament of either country.

    Both Turkish and Armenian analysts voiced fears that the protocols may now be doomed.

  • GRIM HISTORY OF ARMENIANS IN TURKEY THAT LED TO ACCUSATIONS OF GENOCIDE

    GRIM HISTORY OF ARMENIANS IN TURKEY THAT LED TO ACCUSATIONS OF GENOCIDE

    Mark Tran

    guardian.co.uk

    Friday 5 March 2010 12.11 GMT

    Repression of 2.5 million people in Ottoman empire dates back to
    autonomy movement in late 19th century
    Ottoman soldiers pose with hanged Armenians
    Ottoman soldiers posing in front of hanged Armenians in 1915. A US
    congressional committee yesterday voted to label the Ottoman empire’s
    actions as genocide. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

    Armenia believes Turkey committed genocide in the deaths of at least
    1 million Armenians when they were deported from Turkish Armenia in
    1915, and welcomes the non-binding resolution passed by the US house
    foreign affairs committee.

    Repression of the 2.5 million Armenians in the Ottoman empire dates
    back to 1894-96 under Sultan Abdulhamid, when Armenians in the eastern
    provinces, encouraged by Russia, began agitating for autonomy.

    Abdulhamid cracked down on separatist sentiment by encouraging
    nationalistic feelings against Armenians among neighbouring Kurdish
    tribesmen.

    A combination of Kurdish persecution and a rise in taxes led to an
    Armenian uprising that was brutally suppressed by Turkish troops
    and Kurdish tribesmen in 1894. Thousands of Armenians were killed
    and their villages burned. Two years later, another revolt broke
    out when Armenian rebels seized the Ottoman bank in Istanbul. More
    than 50,000 Armenians were killed by mobs apparently co-ordinated by
    government troops.

    Those death tolls were dwarfed by the killings during the first world
    war, when Armenians from the Caucasus formed volunteer battalions
    to help the Russian army against the Turks. Early in 1915, these
    battalions organised the recruiting of Turkish Armenians from behind
    Turkish lines.

    The Young Turk government reacted by ordering the deportation of the
    Armenian population to Syria and Palestine. About 1 million died from
    starvation or were killed by Arab or Kurdish tribes along the route.

    Many survivors fled to Russian Armenia where, in 1918, an independent
    Armenian republic was established. Armenia won independence when the
    Soviet Union fractured in 1991.

    Turkey accepts that atrocities took place but argues that there was
    no systematic attempt to destroy the Christian Armenians. It puts the
    number of deaths during 1915 at around 300,000 and says many innocent
    Muslim Turks also died in the turmoil of war.

    The legal definition of genocide is found in the 1948 UN convention
    on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide.

    Article two of this convention defines genocide as “any of the
    following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part,
    a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing
    members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members
    of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life
    calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in
    part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
    [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

    Henri Barkey, a Turkey scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for
    International Peace in Washington DC, said that “the overwhelming
    historical evidence demonstrates that what took place in 1915 was
    genocide”. He nevertheless opposes the US ruling as a needless
    political manoeuvre.

    Argentina, Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, Russia and Uruguay are among
    more than 20 countries which have formally recognised genocide against
    the Armenians. The European parliament and the UN sub-commission on
    prevention of discrimination and protection of minorities have also
    done so.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/mar/05/history-armenia-turkey-genocide

    __,_._,___

  • Economic crisis appears to be over

    Economic crisis appears to be over

    March 06, 2010

    The Coming of “The Ten”

    Ten economies are becoming the new locomotive for the global economy

    By Martin Walker Senior Director of A.T. Kearney’s Global Business Policy Council

    The economic crisis of 2008-2009 appears to be over, but along the way it has transformed the shape and dynamics of the global economy. This unexpected and dramatic development has not been due to the vigor of the Chinese economy or the BRIC economies as a whole, but the emergence of a major new force in the global economy—the 10 middle-income emergent countries.

    These emergent economies are becoming, with remarkable speed, a whole new motor for the global economy. The 10 biggest of these—Mexico, South Korea, Turkey, Poland, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Iran, Argentina and Thailand—had a collective nominal GDP of $5.6 trillion in 2008, according to the IMF, larger than the GDPs of Japan or China. In purchasing power parity (PPP), their collective GDP was $8.8 trillion, larger than the economies of Japan and Germany combined. Indeed, these 10 non-BRIC countries constitute the world’s third largest economic group, after the European Union and the United States.

    Considered in this light, the global economy takes on an interesting new shape with five dominant components:

    Trade among emergent nations, sometimes called South-South trade, is now the most dynamic component of the global economy. This is NOT simply a factor of the BRIC countries; Brazil, India and Russia accounted for just 5.8 percent of China’s trade. The most striking development is China’s impact on the other emergent markets. Indeed, these other emergent markets helped rescue the Chinese economy from its 2008 nosedive. Taking the year-on-year export figures for November 2009, while Chinese exports to the European Union fell by 8 percent, and its exports to the United States fell by 1.7 percent, China’s exports to the ASEAN nations rose by a dramatic 20.8 percent, and China’s imports rose 45 percent.

    Within this decade, current trading trends suggest that South-South trade could overtake trade among the G7 nations, and should also exceed North-South trade. Fueled by rising populations and increased amounts of foreign direct investment, the non-G7 economies are likely to produce more than half of the world’s GDP. (Currently, the G7 economies account for 57 percent of nominal global GDP.)

    A Host of New Competitors
    Of course, the G7 nations will remain far richer, both as countries and individually, and are likely to continue to enjoy the fruits of their traditional dominance of higher education and technological innovation, among other things. But the large advantage the G7 nations long enjoyed—of comprising the world’s biggest, richest and most attractive consumer market—is being eroded with remarkable and unexpected speed. That means that their consumer tastes and habits will no longer be the global norm. New products are less likely to be developed and launched with Western consumers in mind. Research funds and projects are less likely to be predicated on a Western consumer base. The long tradition of Western cultural dominance, and the political influence and soft power that it generated, is likely to face increasing challenges.

    The new world order in the wake of the recession is going to be much less predictable, much more culturally eclectic and even chaotic.

    The significance of the growth of “The Ten” as a new locomotive force for the global economy is that there will be no single rival to Western culture, but a host of competitors. Brazilian music, Mexican singers, Turkish literature, Argentine dance, Thai sports, Polish architecture, Saudi calligraphy and Indonesian design will all jostle together in the vast new marketplace, alongside Bollywood movies, Russian space tourism and Chinese manufacturers. The new world order in the wake of the recession is going to be much less predictable, much more culturally eclectic and even chaotic. Some will find it an uncomfortable Babel; others will thrill to the rich excitements of choice and diversity.

    Most should be relieved that some gloomy recent suggestions of an inevitable clash of civilizations between China and the West are likely to give way to something more confused. The really good news is that when China’s growth rate slows, as it is likely to do this decade as the labor force peaks and the number of retirees soars, there are now new candidates for future growth ready to take China’s place and maintain global demand.

    Martin Walker is senior director of A.T. Kearney’s Global Business Policy Council. He is based in Washington, D.C.

    For more information, please contact the author.

    The views expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of A.T. Kearney or the Global Business Policy Council. The views are not meant to suggest specific inducement to make a particular investment or follow a particular strategy, but only as an expression of opinion.

    ==========================================

    a summary from mavi boncuk

    The coming of Ten

    Walker Figure1Walker Figure2Ten economies are becoming the new locomotive for the global economy By Martin Walker Senior Director of A.T. Kearney’s Global Business Policy Council.
    Mavi Boncuk |

    The economic crisis of 2008-2009 appears to be over, but along the way it has transformed the shape and dynamics of the global economy. This unexpected and dramatic development has not been due to the vigor of the Chinese economy or the BRIC economies as a whole, but the emergence of a major new force in the global economy—the 10 middle-income emergent countries.

    These emergent economies are becoming, with remarkable speed, a whole new motor for the global economy. The 10 biggest of these—Mexico, South Korea, Turkey, Poland, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan, Iran, Argentina and Thailand—had a collective nominal GDP of $5.6 trillion in 2008, according to the IMF, larger than the GDPs of Japan or China. In purchasing power parity (PPP), their collective GDP was $8.8 trillion, larger than the economies of Japan and Germany combined. Indeed, these 10 non-BRIC countries constitute the world’s third largest economic group, after the European Union and the United States.

    Considered in this light, the global economy takes on an interesting new shape with five dominant components:

    ==================================

    Martin Walker
    Senior Director of the Global Business Policy Council



    Martin Walker

    Martin Walker is the Senior Director of the Global Business Policy Council, a private think-tank for CEOs founded by the A T Kearney business consultancy. He is also a syndicated columnist and Editor-in-Chief Emeritus of United Press International.

    Previously, in his 25 years as a journalist with The Guardian newspaper, he served as bureau chief in Moscow and the United States, as well as European editor and assistant editor.

    A regular broadcaster on the BBC, National Public Radio and CNN, and panelist on Inside Washington and The McLaughlin Show, he is also a senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington DC, a senior fellow of the World Policy Institute at the New School for Social Research in New York, and a contributing editor of the Los Angeles Times’s Opinion section and of Europe magazine.

    His books include “Waking Giant: Gorbachev and Perestroika,” “The Cold War: A History,” “Clinton: The President They Deserve” and “America Reborn,” published in May 2000 by Knopf. His latest novel “Bruno, Chief of Police” will be published in the U.S. in 2009 by Knopf and in Germany by Diogenes.

    ==============================================================

    Martin Walker Appointed Head of Global Business Policy Council

    Renowned Author and Commentator Martin Walker Appointed Head of A.T. Kearney’s Global Business Policy Council

    WASHINGTON, D.C. (January 25, 2007)—Global management consulting firm A.T. Kearney today announced the appointment of Martin Walker as senior director of the Global Business Policy Council (GBPC), a forum of CEOs and thought leaders focused on assessing global strategic opportunities and risk management. Since 1992, the GBPC has provided A.T. Kearney with a unique platform for delivering global business environment insights to its clients.

    Walker, 59, was most recently editor-in-chief emeritus of United Press International and also served as international correspondent and editor-in-chief since joining UPI in 2000.  Prior to UPI he spent more than 25 years as a reporter, columnist, foreign correspondent and assistant editor of Britain’s The Guardian newspaper. He will be based in Washington, D.C.

    Walker’s insights on economics, politics and current affairs have been featured in some of the world’s most prominent publications including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Times of London, Die Zeit of Germany and El Mundo of Spain.  He also is a regular guest on CNN and Fox News, on CNN’s Crossfire and Capital Gang; The McLaughlin Group; PBS-TV Washington Week in Review; NPR’s Diane Rehm Show and On the Media; and public affairs shows on the BBC, ABC (Australia) and in Canada.

    “Martin’s keen intellect and broad perspective on economics and world affairs uniquely position him to lead the direction and strategic initiatives of the Global Business Policy Council,” said Paul Laudicina, managing officer and chairman of A.T. Kearney.  “A.T. Kearney clients have come to rely on the Council for the insights they need to meet today’s leadership challenges.  Martin’s appointment ensures the Council will continue to play an essential role in helping business and government leaders monitor and understand global macroeconomic, geopolitical, socio-demographic and technological changes.”

    Walker has been on the faculty of the Global Business Policy Council since 1997.  He is the author of more than a dozen books including “The Cold War: A History” (1993) and “Europe in the New Century: Visions of an Emerging Superpower”.  He also is a senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington and a senior fellow of the New School University in New York.

    Walker regularly chairs Council on Foreign Relations events in New York and Washington, and has been a guest lecturer at Chatham House, London; Harvard’s Kennedy school; the universities of Columbia, Pittsburgh, Edinburgh, Toronto, Sussex (UK); UCLA, Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International studies and MGU (Moscow State University).

    Walker was educated at Balliol College, Oxford, where he was the Brackenbury scholar and took a first-class honors degree in modern history, and at Harvard, where he was a Harkness Fellow and a resident tutor at Kirkland House.  He was also a Congressional Fellow of the American Political Science Association, and served as an aide to U.S. Senator Edmund Muskie.

    About A.T. Kearney
    A.T. Kearney is one of the world’s largest management consulting firms. With a global presence spanning major and emerging markets, A.T. Kearney provides strategic, operational, organizational and technology consulting services to the world’s leading companies.

    A.T. Kearney’s Global Business Policy Council is among the consulting industries longest-standing strategic services for CEOs.  The GPBC helps senior business executives and government leaders monitor and capitalize on macroeconomic, geopolitical, socio-demographic and technological change worldwide. Council membership is limited to a select group of corporate leaders and their companies. The Council’s core program includes periodic meetings in strategically important parts of the world, tailored analytical products, regular member briefings, and other services.

  • Armenia Resolution Won’t Get Full U.S. House Vote, Aide Says

    Armenia Resolution Won’t Get Full U.S. House Vote, Aide Says

    March 06, 2010, 12:01 AM EST

    By Peter S. Green and James Rowley

    March 6 (Bloomberg) — Democratic lawmakers bowed to concerns expressed by the Obama administration and agreed not to schedule a full House vote on a resolution that labels as genocide the killing of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey, a congressional aide said.

    House leaders have no plans at this time for a chamber vote on the measure, which a House committee approved on March 4, the House Democratic leadership aide said yesterday. The aide spoke on the condition of anonymity.

    The resolution passed the House Foreign Affairs Committee on a 23-22 vote. Turkey responded by recalling its ambassador in Washington, Namik Tan, for consultations.

    U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had spoken out against a full House vote on March 4 while attending a conference in Costa Rica. She reiterated yesterday that President Barack Obama’s administration “strongly opposes the resolution.”

    A full House vote would “impede the normalization process between Turkey and Armenia,” State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said in Washington yesterday before word surfaced of the leadership’s decision. “The best way for Turkey and Armenia to address their shared past is through ongoing negotiations,” he said.

    The measure says the Ottoman Empire, the predecessor of modern-day Turkey, killed 1.5 million ethnic Armenians from 1915 to 1923. It asks the president to ensure that U.S. foreign policy reflects “appropriate understanding” of the atrocity and “the consequences of the failure to realize a just resolution.”

    Similar Recall

    Turkey, a U.S. ally and NATO member, had recalled its U.S. ambassador for a brief period in protest to a similar resolution passed by a House committee in 2007. That measure never came up for a full House vote.

    Turkish President Abdullah Gul said on his Web site that the March 4 committee vote was “one-sided and remote from historical realities,” and would hurt talks with Armenia.

    “We’ve worked at every level with the American administration on a variety of issues and we’ve always supported Mr. Obama’s vision of peace,” Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said in Ankara yesterday. “We don’t expect this contribution of ours to be sacrificed to a few local political games.”

    The resolution showed a lack of “strategic vision” on the part of U.S. lawmakers who supported it, Davutoglu said.

    Iranian Trade

    Turkey has been expanding trade with Iran and Obama in December called the country an “important player” in efforts to curb Iran’s nuclear program.

    Turkey’s border and its trade relationship with Iran makes Turkish support vital for U.S. efforts to use sanctions to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, said Bulent Aliriza, Director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

    While the Armenia-related resolution came from Congress and not the administration, Turkey may not see any difference, further hampering U.S. efforts to impose sanctions on Iran, said Henri Barkey, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

    “What is clearly very likely is that on Iran we are going to get less cooperation from them,” Barkey said before the aide disclosed that the resolution won’t get a full House vote.

    Turkey asserts that the resolution hurts Turkish and Armenian efforts to renew diplomatic relations that were broken over Armenia’s military intervention in Azerbaijan’s Nagorno- Karabakh region following the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union.

    Clinton’s Intervention

    Turkey and Armenia agreed in October to renew relations after Clinton helped the countries overcome a last-minute dispute before a signing ceremony in Zurich. Under the accords, which are waiting to be approved by Turkey’s parliament, a historical commission would investigate the killings.

    After the French parliament in 2006 approved legislation making it criminal to deny that a genocide took place, Turkey said France had done “irreparable damage” to relations between the two countries.

    The chairman of the Armenian National Committee of America, a lobbying group in Washington, praised the House committee shortly after it passed its genocide resolution. “You cannot have a relationship or a reconciliation based upon lies,” Kenneth Hachikian said in an interview after the vote. “Turkey can’t come to the table and say let’s reconcile but we deny what the rest of the world acknowledges.”

    The House resolution noted that England, France and Russia called the killings a crime against humanity at the time, and that Turkey’s own government indicted the leaders of the massacres after World War I.

    –With assistance from Hans Nichols in Washington and Steve Bryant in Ankara. Editors: Don Frederick, Mike Millard.

    -0- Mar/06/2010 05:00 GMT

    To contact the reporters on this story: Peter S. Green in Washington at psgreen@bloomberg.net; James Rowley in Washington at jarowley@bloomberg.net

    To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jim Kirk at jkirk12@bloomberg.net

    ==========================


    https://www.economist.com/united-states/2010/03/05/past-imperfect-present-tense

    The Armenian genocide


    Past imperfect, present tense

    Mar 5th 2010 | NEW YORK
    From Economist.com

    Congress reconsiders America’s official position on the Armenian genocide
    201010NAP060
    TWO questions faced an American congressional panel on Thursday March 5th as it considered the mass killings of Armenians during and after the first world war by forces of the Ottoman Empire. First, was it genocide? The historical debate is as hot, and unsettled, as ever. Armenians continue to insist that it was the first genocide of the twentieth century, while Turks call the killings merely part of the chaos of the break-up of empire.
    But the second question on the minds of congressmen in the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives was more urgent. What is more important, fidelity to history or concern for the present? The vote took place as warming relations between Turkey and Armenia have cooled again and those between Turkey and America are under increasing strain over Iran, Israel and other affairs in the region. Turkish diplomats and politicians gave warning before the vote that the consequences would be felt across the range of issues of shared concern to the two countries. In the end the panel narrowly decided against pragmatism and chose to set straight the historical records. A resolution recognising the killings as genocide was sent to the House by a vote of 23 to 22.
    When the same House committee passed a “genocide” resolution in 2007 the White House urged that the vote be scrapped. But this year, it had come with a twist; Barack Obama had promised during his election campaign to recognise the event as genocide. But before the vote his advisers said that while he acknowledges a genocide personally, he urged unsuccessfully that official interpretation be left to the parties involved. Congress is far more sensitive to lobbying than the president and to small but highly motivated groups of voters. Lobbyists working for both Armenians and Turks had been active before the vote and Armenians are concentrated in several Californian districts.
    But no fashioner of foreign policy–among whom the president is by far the most important–can ignore the strategic importance of Turkey. It is a vital American ally and has the second-biggest army in NATO. The country is home to an important American air base and is a crucial supply route for America’s forces in Iraq. Relations were difficult even before the beginning of the war in Iraq in 2003. The mildly Islamist government denied the Americans the ability to open a second front in Iraq through Turkey. Turkey’s relationship with Israel has deteriorated too. Israel’s two recent wars, in Lebanon and Gaza, have outraged Turkish public opinion. Mr Obama’s more even-handed approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict has improved America’s reputation in Turkey, but not by much.
    201010NAM970
    Turkey itself is caught between forces that make the Armenia issue potentially dangerous. The country’s secular, Western-oriented politicians, among others, have been discouraged by the strict terms offered by the European Union for eventual Turkish membership. In part as a result there has been a gradual realignment in Turkish foreign policy towards its more immediate neighbours. Turkey’s government seeks peaceful relations with countries at its borders, which has meant some cosying up to Iran, despite the fact that most of Turkey’s NATO allies are pushing for more sanctions against the Islamic republic over its alleged efforts to obtain nuclear weapons.
    The vote comes at a sensitive time, too, for Turkey’s relations with Armenia. The pair have been at odds since Turkey closed the border in 1993, during Armenia’s war with Turkey’s ethnic cousins in Azerbaijan. Last year, protocols were agreed that foresaw an establishment of diplomatic relations and an opening of the border. But Armenia’s highest court then declared that the protocols were not in line with Armenia’s constitutionally mandated policy that foreign affairs conform to the Armenian view of the genocide. Turkey responded with fury and the protocols were endangered. The American vote will anger Turkey further and perhaps make it even more inclined to turn away from Europe, America and Armenia in favour of its Islamic neighbours.
    One hope is that Turkish anger will subside if, as happened in 2007, the House leadership stops the resolution from reaching a full vote. It may do so again. Turkey recalled its ambassador after Thursday’s vote just as in 2007. The Turkish government, in a spat with the country’s nationalist army, may play the foreign-insult card to bolster its domestic strength. But ultimately the Turks are unlikely to weaken their relationship with America lightly.

  • Davutoglu challenges U.S. to answer the question whether it wants peace in the region:

    Davutoglu challenges U.S. to answer the question whether it wants peace in the region:

    Turkish FM calls on U.S., West to saypic63267 whether they really want Armenia-Azerbaijan reconciliation- UPDATE

    spacer

    05 March 2010 [16:21] – Today.Az http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttuzoe7x4UI

    spacer
    In his televised speech on March 5, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu urged the United States and West to resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.Stability in the South Caucasus can become real only after Armenia withdraws from Azerbaijan’s occupied lands and Armenia-Turkey and Armenia-Azerbaijan reconciliation are ensured, CNN-Turk quoted Davutoglu as saying.

    Unilateral reconciliation is impossible, Davutoglu said.

    It is difficult to reach a full peace through reconciliation only between individual countries in the South Caucasus region, the Foreign Minister explained. In his view, a full peace is possible if only all existing conflicts are solved.

    Davutoglu stressed that not only the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation, but also the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation must be focus of attention adding that the United States and West are interested only in normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations.

    “If we want peace, then why we talk only about the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation? Why do not we put forward the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation? Why can not we believe that this can be realized? Why Turkey is mistaken when it talks about the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation? Our American and Western friends need to think about it.”

    “The question is clear and open. And our response is clear and open, too. Does someone want the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation? Yes, Turkey wants. And now we ask the question: “Do you want the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation or not?” Let them come out and say: “We do not want.” And we’ll know about it. But if they want, let them do all that it is required,” the Turkish FM underscored.

    Peace depends on a political will. The path is difficult, but this is not an impossible goal, Davutoglu added.

    ———–
    13:15

    Turkey calls on Armenia to open all archives and not to exert pressure through the U.S. Congress, and negotiate face to face, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said.

    “The adoption of the resolution on” Armenian genocide” is comical, as the difference of one vote seems very strange,” he added.

    U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs on Thursday adopted 23 votes to 22 a resolution recognizing the so-called “Armenian genocide”.

    Armenia claims that the Ottoman Empire committed genocide against Armenians living in Anatolia in 1915.  Making greater efforts to promote the issue internationally, Armenians have achieved its recognition by parliaments of some countries.

    Signing the protocols with Armenia, Turkey sought to bequeath to future generations of peace and stability among nations, but the adoption of this resolution by the U.S Congress’s Committee shows that Yerevan does not act openly in this matter, he added.

    The minister considers erroneous the view that the adoption of the resolution could put pressure on Ankara to ratify the Armenian-Turkish protocols.

    “The fact is that Turkey has taken decision on in this issue for ten days while Armenia has done for four months,” he said.

    The intervention of a third party, in this case the U.S., in relations between Armenia and Turkey, complicates the process of reconciliation between the countries, he said.

    The adoption of a resolution recognizing the “Armenian genocide” indicates that the U.S Congress is very weak in developing a future political strategy, the Turkish minister said.