Armenian Genocide Vote: Turkey Displeased

If you haven't run into this in the news, you probably will in the next few days:

"Turkey said on Friday chances of its parliament ratifying peace protocols with Armenia were jeopardized by a U.S. congressional panel vote that labeled as 'genocide' the massacre of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915...."
(Reuters)

Maybe not on Reuters, but it's been in The New York Times and on The Associated Press feeds: so odds are that your favorite news source will get around to mentioning that vote.

Or, not. Depends on what the editors decide.

And what Congress does.

"There are no plans at this point to schedule a full U.S. House of Representatives vote on a resolution labeling as genocide the World War One-era mass killings of Armenians by Turks, a Democratic leadership aide said on Friday...."
(Ynet)

Congress works according to a set of rules - or is supposed to. The 'genocide' resolution was non-binding, and may not have the support required to pass the matter along.

You may not have heard of the 'Armenian genocide' in the early 20th century. Interestingly, Turkey had a different government when all those Armenians just happened to drop dead (the official explanation). Not a different administration. Not a different party with a majority of votes. A different government.

The closest analog, using American history, would be to imagine a situation where someone criticized actions taken by a royal governor, pre-1776. And the American Congress took that as a personal affront.

I've written about this before.

Related post:

• "Turkey, the Ottoman Empire, Dead Armenians, and Learning from Mistakes"
  (February 28, 2009)

In the news:

• "Aide: No plans to bring Armenian measure to US House"
  Ynet (March 5, 2010)
• "A diplomatic mistake over Armenia"
  guardian.co.uk (March 5, 2010)
• "Turkey says U.S. genocide vote endangers Caucasus peace"
  Reuters (March 5, 2010)

Genocide, Schmenocide: Let's All be Friends

I think it's nice to be considerate of other people's feelings. President Barack Obama is, apparently, being nice - at least in Turkey.

He didn't call that massive die-off of Armenians, about a century back, "genocide."

That's very polite of him.

Armenian Genocide - or Not

A little backstory is in order here. About a century back, piles of Armenians in and around eastern Turkey stopped breathing.

The Ottoman Empire (not the current government of Turkey) got credit for the first big genocide of the twentieth century. In its own way, the Ottoman empire was a trend-setter.

Then, the Ottoman Empire collapsed. Mustafa Kemal (Mustafa Ataturk Kemal, for those who prefer the founder of the Republic of Turkey to be mentioned with the honorific "father of the Turks") is a national hero in Turkey. Mustafa Kemal is credited for founding the Republic of Turkey.

Which is not the Ottoman Empire.

The Republic of Turkey governs Turkey, which was the heart of the Ottoman Empire: but The Republic of Turkey is not the Ottoman Empire.

The Republic of Turkey is the government which sorted out the mess left by the Ottoman Empire.

Back to the Republic of Turkey, Whose Government was Not Involved at All in the Armenian You-Know-What

The Armenian you-know-what (you know - the g-word) is a remarkably sensitive topic for the government which replaced the regime which actually committed the you-know-what.

That's probably why President Obama politely walked around the subject in his speech to the Turkish Parliament. Hrant Dink, an Armenian journalist, was killed, back in 2006: probably because he insisted on calling that you-know-what a genocide. (December 8, 2007) I doubt that anybody in the Turkish Parliament would have taken a shot at the American president: or that President Obama would have had a fatal accident later. But Turkey and many of its citizens are quite sensitive about the you-know-what that involved Armenians. A hundred years ago. Under another, entirely different, government.

President Barack Obama's speech to the Turkish Parliament didn't avoid the subject of Armenia entirely, though. These are the two paragraphs from the text of his speech, which mention Armenia or Armenians:

Human endeavor is by its nature imperfect. History is often tragic, but unresolved, it can be a heavy weight. Each country must work through its past. And reckoning with the past can help us seize a better future. I know there's strong views in this chamber about the terrible events of 1915. And while there's been a good deal of commentary about my views, it's really about how the Turkish and Armenian people deal with the past. And the best way forward for the Turkish and Armenian people is a process that works through the past in a way that is honest, open and constructive.

We've already seen historic and courageous steps taken by Turkish and Armenian leaders. These contacts hold out the promise of a new day. An open border would return the Turkish and Armenian people to a peaceful and prosperous coexistence that would serve both of your nations. So I want you to know that the United States strongly supports the full normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia. It is a cause worth working towards. (AP)

Being Nice is Nice: Being Real Has Merit, Too

I hope that President Obama has some grand plan, which will address the little matter of dead Armenians, Turkey's feelings, and his desire for a nice world.

In a way, he's doing a better job of dealing with reality than journalists.

Some news articles do acknowledge piles of Armenian bodies, and the stink they left in history.

The Los Angeles Times had a story with this subhead:

"Last year he described the deaths of up to 1.5 million ethnic Armenians before and during World War I as genocide, but today he emphasizes increasingly cordial contacts between the two nations." (Los Angeles Times)

Reteurs' lead paragraph was quite straightforward:

"(Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama on Monday stood by his views on mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915, which he has termed genocide, but said he expected a breakthrough in talks between Turkey and Armenia...." (Reuters)

Others, not so much. In the "In the news" links, below, articles about President Barack Obama's achievements in Europe which do not contain the words "Armenia" or "Armenians" are identified with the notation (NDA) - standing for "No Dead Armenians."

Which is slightly interesting, since all of them show up in a Google news search, using this search string:

obama armenian geoncide

I suppose that happened because President Obama's name shows up often in the selected articles: Search engines seem to work that way.

Blame Turkey Forever? No - Get Real? Yes

I don't think that Turkey's name, reputation, and national character. should be raked over the coals at regular intervals over the Armenian you-know-what. The Ottoman Empire was in charge when all those Armenians stopped breathing: about a century ago.

The current government in Turkey is not the Ottoman Empire. Actually, the Republic of Turkey is the outfit that cleaned up the mess left by the Ottoman Empire.

Whatever its faults, the current leadership of Turkey had nothing to do with the Armenian genocide. Which makes the Republic's refusal to admit the you-know-what's existence rather hard to understand.

I do think that it's a mistake to be nice, and ignore unpleasantness has had a serious effect on people - in this case, Armenians. Who do, assuredly, remember the you-know-what.

As President Obama said, "...Human endeavor is by its nature imperfect. History is often tragic, but unresolved, it can be a heavy weight...." And I'm not at all sure that an issue can be resolved by politely ignoring it: or making believe it's unimportant.

Related posts:

• "Sounds of Silence: 2009"
  (March 31, 2009)
• "Is the War on Terror a War on Islam? Not Quite"
  (December 8, 2007)
• "Turkey, Iraq, and Kurdistan"
  (October 16, 2007)
• "Turkey, the Ottoman Empire, Dead Armenians, and Learning from Mistakes"
  (February 28, 2009)
• "Fried, Rice Talk Turkey"
  (October 13, 2007)
• "Dead Armenians, Peeved Turks, and Congress"
  (October 11, 2007)

In the news:

• "Obama: 'US supports Muslim world'"
  itv.com (April 6, 2009) (NDA)
• "In Turkey, Obama avoids the word 'genocide'"
  Los Angeles Times (April 6, 2009)
• "WHITE HOUSE NOTEBOOK: Obama not rushed on trip"
  The Associated Press (April 6, 2009) (NDA)
• "Obama sees breakthrough in Turkish-Armenian ties"
  Reuters (April 6, 2009)
• "Reaching out to Turkey"
  The Economist (April 6, 2009)
• "Obama extends hand to Muslims"
  BBC (April 6, 2009) (NDA)

Background:

• "Text of Obama's speech to Turkish parliament"
  The Associated Press (April 6, 2009)

Turkey, the Ottoman Empire, Dead Armenians, and Learning from Mistakes

I went to school in America, so I know about the

• Broken treaties with Indian nations
• Dark days of legalized slavery
• Overthrow of Kamehameha's kingdom
• Atrocities during the War Between the States
• Reconstruction's carpetbaggers
• Relocation camps of WWII
• Micromanaged mess we call the Vietnam War

In the last case, I was around while My Lai (and Watergate) became cultural icons.

That's one reason I'm so glad to be an American. Not what America did wrong: that, as an American citizen, my country made very sure that I knew what America had done wrong.

A Few Armenians Drop Dead, and They Act Like it's Some Big Deal

Around the start of the 20th century, a whole lot of Armenians stopped breathing, rather abruptly in some cases, in and around eastern Turkey. Scholars who study genocides give the Ottoman Empire credit for committing the first big genocide of the 20th century. More followed, making the Ottoman Empire a sort of international trend-setter.

Then, the Ottoman Empire collapsed. Turkey was a mess for a while, until Mustafa Kemal led the country into the current era of comparative peace and stability.

This is important:

• Survivors of the Armenian genocide, who witnessed what the Ottoman Empire did, say that what happened was a genocide
• Scholars who study genocides agree with them
• The Ottoman Empire collapsed generations ago
• Turkey was a mess, until Mustafa Kemal helped create the current government of Turkey
  • Which is not the Ottoman Empire

Given Turkey's history, I can understand - although not approve of - Turkey's blocking YouTube recently. Somebody thought that some video clips on YouTube insulted Mustafa Kemal.

So, Turkey blocked YouTube.

Think of it this way: If you're an American, and a YouTube video insulted (in your opinion) Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, or Harvey Milk, wouldn't you feel an impulse to block YouTube?

Maybe not. America doesn't operate that way, as a rule.

In Turkey, and elsewhere, it's different.

What started this post was a news item about a lawsuit:

"A father is suing the Turkish Education Ministry for forcing his 11-year-old daughter to watch a “racist” and “disturbing” film countering claims that Ottoman Turks committed genocide against Armenians in 1915 with graphic allegations of Armenian atrocities against Turks." (TimesOnline)

That's right, folks: "Armenian atrocities against Turks."

Like the Old South, where dark-skinned people did terrible things to melanin-deficient immigrants.

I'm Not Anti-Turkey, But: Let's Get Real

I think that the post-Ottoman Empire government of Turkey, which isn't the Ottoman Empire at all, is not the worst national government in the world. By far. In fact, given the culture and history of the area, they're doing quite well. Sure, a few Christians get killed here and there (some were involved with printing Bibles, you see), and the odd journalist gets knocked off.

But I'm willing to assume that those incidents are part of what happens when a country is dragged across several centuries, into the the post-eighteenth-century world.

The refusal of Turkey's current government - which is not the Ottoman Empire - to recognize what the Ottoman Empire did to Armenians: that's something else.

But, I'm used to living in America. When we do something stupid, we admit it.

Then, we make learning about what we did wrong part of the curriculum for our educational systems: So we won't do it again.

Related posts:

• "'Towelhead,' 'Retard,' and Talking Sense in a Global Society"
  (February 24, 2009)
• "Guinea, Military Rule, and Terrorism: Beware Hasty Judgment"
  (December 29, 2008)
• "The New York Times, Insularity, and Assumptions"
  (October 21, 2008)
• "United States of America: 232 Years in the Freedom Business"
  (July 3, 2008)
• "Leaky Prisons, Air-Tight Internet: Yemen, Turkey, and the Islamic Way?"
  (May 5, 2008)
• "Japanese Court, Okinawa, Kenzaburo Oe:
  There's a Lesson Here"
  (April 5, 2008)
• "YouTube Banned by Pakistan"
  (February 24, 2008)
• "WWII and Japanese Americans, the War on Terror and Muslims: Learning the Wrong Lesson"
  (February 15, 2008)
• "With Friends Like These, Does Islam Need Enemies?"
  (January 22, 2008)
• "Is the War on Terror a War on Islam? Not Quite"
  (December 8, 2007)
• "Turkey, Iraq, and Kurdistan"
  (October 16, 2007)
• "Fried, Rice Talk Turkey"
  (October 13, 2007)
• "Dead Armenians, Peeved Turks, and Congress"
  (October 11, 2007)

In the news:

• "Father sues Turkish Education Ministry over Armenian 'genocide' DVD"
  TimesOnline.com (February 28, 2009)

Turkey, Iraq, and Kurdistan

If the powers of the Middle East could make money off the region's ability to produce crises, they wouldn't need oil revenue. The people running countries there are at least as thin-skinned and reality-averse as people everywhere.

Take Turkey and Kurdistan, for example.

Odds are that Turkey's parliament will give the okay tomorrow, to invade northern Iraq. "Invade" isn't the word used in the news. It's more like 'conduct "operations"' and "send troops." And, Turkey has some reason for taking action like that. A terrorist group, PKK, that says it's for Kurdish independence, has been going into Turkey and killing people.

People in Turkey are understandably upset.

And, people in the part of northern Iraq that's called Kurdistan aren't too happy about the possibility of Turkish troops in their territory, breaking things and killing people.

"The passage of the motion in Parliament does not mean that an operation will be carried out at once," is what Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said. "Turkey would act with common sense and determination when necessary and when the time is ripe."

A government acting with common sense would be nice.

I'd say there's a good chance that Turkey won't invade Iraq right now. Turkey needs oil revenue as much as other countries need oil, and starting a war in northern Iraq would put a serious crimp in their business.

As for a massive anti-PKK raid turning into a war of conquest, it's hard to believe that the current rulers of Turkey seriously plan to re-conquer the Ottoman province of Kurdistan. But stranger, and more self-destructive, things have happened.

What still puzzles me is why Turkey's current leadership is so concerned in denying what the Ottoman Empire did to another ethnic minority: the Armenians. The U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution recently, recognizing the death of about 1,500,000 Armenians around WWI and following: and the Turkish government is so peeved about it that they might stop letting U.S. forces get supplies to Iraq through Turkey.

Turkey isn't alone in wanting history re-written, of course. For example, Japan's government denies that the Japanese drafted Korean women as prostitutes during WWII. Japan's denial is more understandable than Turkey's defense of the Ottoman Empire. There's a fairly direct connection between Japan's government during WWII, and the current leadership. (And, Japan's efforts are slightly less likely to succeed, at least for a while: Some of the "sex slaves," as the press likes to call the women drafted into a sort of state-run sex industry, are still alive: like Wu Hsiu-mei.

The Armenian connection is important because the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution that would officially recognize the Armenian genocide. That resolution may not last, though. Members of the majority party in the house had a flash of insight, and are reconsidering their position on the Armenian resolution.

• The real:
  "Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG)" They want in made clear that they're not the PKK. "The Kurdistan Region is Iraq’s safest and most secure. But we may soon pay a heavy price for the actions of the PKK in Turkey, and for a House Foreign Affairs Committee vote about Armenia in the U.S. – neither of which have anything to do with the Kurds of Iraq or the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG.)" is how today's lead article put it.
  
• The ideal:
  "aka Kurdistan / a place for collective memory and cultural exchange" - a pretty good online resource, which also seems to be selling a book. The site includes a "map and timeline to find photographs and stories from Kurds and Westerners about Kurdistan's history and culture. The map was a rather hopeful one, dating from 1945, shown at the San Francisco Conference by the Kurdish League Delegation.

Fried, Rice Talk Turkey

There's no doubt that the U.S. government is taking Turkey seriously.

Both Undersecretary of Defense for Policy and former ambassador to Turkey Eric Edelman and Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Dan Fried have joined Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Turkey. That's a lot of secretaries.

The purpose of the Edelman-Fried-Rice team is over there to talk turkey about the Turkish government about America's use of Turkey's airspace and ground transportation to supply troops in Iraq. That, and the American House of Representatives embarrassing Turkey by reminding the of the Armenian Genocide that Turkey says didn't happen.

On top of logistics and alternative histories, there are the 60,000 or so Turkish troops on the Iraq border. One reasonable explanation is that Turkey wants to, ah, enter Iraq and deal with Kurdish rebels who have been killing Turks. The Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, seems to a particularly troublesome group. (The U.S. State Department has declared the Kurdistan Workers' Party to be a terrorist group.)

Turkey says that it's tried to get America and Iraq to take care of the PKK and other annoyances, but is ready to go into Iraq and do the job itself, if necessary. The Iraqi government doesn't see that sort of invasion in a very positive light.

Although it's wildly unlikely to happen, and I don't approve of the PKK, I wouldn't mind seeing Kurdistan become a nation, made up of parts of eastern Turkey, Northern Iraq, and western Iran.

The land of the Kurds is a distinct area where Kurds live. There was a province of Kurdistan in the Ottoman Empire. There would probably be a Kurdistan now, if the allies hadn't been distracted (and, in my opinion, arrogant) when they carved up the Ottoman Empire, and other colonial holdings, after WWI. Actually, a "Kurdistan" was defined, but Mustafa Kemal and company sent troops in, and now we've got today's boundaries.

If you think I'm biased about this, check out the Kurdistan Regional Government website. And remember: Being biased doesn't necessarily mean being wrong.

Back to Turkey

Today, not quite a century later, American officials are dealing with a successor of Mustafa Kemal's bunch, who don't like being reminded of what a previous dynasty did to the Armenians.

What puzzles me most about the current Turkish situation is why the current rulers are so anxious to hush up something done by a previous set of rulers. I'd think that they'd be happy to be able to show how superior they are to the Ottoman Empire.

Dead Armenians, Peeved Turks, and Congress

The American House of Representatives, in a remarkable display of international solidarity and moral rectitude, voted to join 21 other nations in recognizing the first major genocide of the 20th century.

Just one problem. The genocidal country is Turkey. And the Turkish government doesn't like to be reminded about one of the dying Ottoman Empire's last gasps. In fact, Turkey would just as soon have everyone accept the official Turkish version of events.

International Relations: Nothing's Ever Simple

Today, over two thirds of the cargo, and about a third of the fuel, heading for American forces in Iraq go through or over Turkey. And, Turkey provides water to U.S. bases in northern Iraq.

All of which makes the good will of Turkey important.

And, right now, a little hard to maintain, thanks to the House of Representatives doing something decent.

Turkey's ambassador to America is back in Turkey, for at least a week of discussions. At least, that's what a Turkish official said.

Background: The Armenian genocide in Turkey

1,500,000 of the 2,500,000 (Christian) Armenians in the Ottoman Empire just happened to die, unexpectedly, during WWI (1915-1916), with mop-up clusters of death running as late as 1923 or so.

Survivors say that it was a genocidal operation. Eyewitnesses say it was a genocide. So do scholars who study genocides.

If fact, genocide scholars give the Ottoman Empire credit for the first big genocide of the 20th century. Which makes Turkey an international trend-setter, considering genocidal operations of the 20th century.

Despite this claim to fame, the Turkish government, while admitting that Armenians died, say that there was no genocide, and resent statements to the contrary.

I've thought this is a little odd, since the current Turkish government is the successor of a string of coups and elections dating back to 1923. That's when Mustafa Kemal led Turkey out of the mess left by Turkey's Ottoman Empire.

Back to the Present

America went through something like this back in 2000, with the resolution going nowhere after the White House said that it would hurt American security. And no, I don't think this is evidence that the 9/11 (2001) attack was an American plot.

I do, however, think that it's ironic, and moderately disgusting, that in order to deal with Islamic fanatics, it's necessary to cooperate with a Muslim country's secular government.

Countries Acknowledging the Armenian Genocide,
One way or another

• Argentina
• Austria
• Belgium
• Canada
• Cyprus
• France
• Greece
• Italy
• Lebanon
• Lithuania
• The Netherlands
• Poland
• Russia
• Slovakia
• Sweden
• Switzerland
• Uruguay
• Vatican City
• Venezuela
• Wales

A pinch of salt is appropriate when someone claims to be glad to admit mistakes, but in this case, I really am. In a previous post, "Ahmadinejad's Plan for Peace: Banish the Jews to Alaska" (October 7, 2007), I wrote that academics would probably regard the Armenian Exodus as a disputed claim. Researching today's post, I found that the Armenian Exodus is generally accepted as a real event.

Facts from

• Armenians Mark 92nd Anniversary of Armenian Genocide
• Fact Sheet: Armenian Genocide - U. of M. Dearborn
• French politicians pass Armenian genocide bill
• Turkey (CIA)
• Turkey Recalls Ambassador to U.S. Over Armenian Genocide Bill