Armenians look to Bush to step up pressure on Turkey over 1915 'genocide'

[kskiska]

International pressure on Turkey to recognise the 1915 massacre of more than one million Armenians as genocide is mounting on the eve of the 90th anniversary of the start of the killings.

As Armenians worldwide prepare to commemorate the murders tomorrow - amid hopes that the US president, George Bush, will use the term genocide for the first time to describe the massacres - Ankara faced growing calls to own up to the slaughter.

(snip)

The calls on Ankara to face up to its past have cast a shadow over the country's efforts to join the EU. Increasing numbers of European politicians are demanding that Turkey accept that almost its entire Christian Armenian community died.

Speculation has been rife in the Turkish press that Mr Bush will tomorrow cave in to pressure from US Armenian groups and endorse the description of genocide in his annual statement condemning the massacres. Yesterday, President Jacques Chirac laid a wreath at a monument in Paris built to commemorate the victims.

more…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/turkey/story/0,12700,1468506,00.html

[ScrewyRabbit]

1. Fat f***ing chance

The only question for this administration is: "How does this benefit me?"

[Erika]

2. Why would anyone look up to Bush?

[dArKeR]

18. One looks to aWol to massacre and butcher in the name of Christ

[strategery blunder]

3. Bush doesn't care

I don't think Turkey killed any of his oil buddies in the Armenian genocide.:eyes:

[AlGore-08.com]

4. For those who don't know, this was one of Smirk's big promises in 2000

Just like he bashed Clinton & Gore for not getting the gas prices down, he bashed them for not getting this admission out of the Turks. Similarly, he was also the first major Pol to bring anti-Arab discrimination to national attention. Unfortunately, a decent number of Armenian Americans and Arab Americans bought into it.

The GOP continues with this strategy of trying to peel away a small but critical amount of the ethnic support that the Dems have - - just enough to swing close elections.

[OETKB]

5. A STEP CLOSER

The present Turkish PM of the Turkish republic, Ecep Erdogan, has proposed that scholars and diplomats from different countries chosen for their scholarship review the documentation of that era under Ottoman rule. It has always been highly politicized so that the raw truth has remained a victim. It will probably turn out that there were atrocities on both sides and again point out the horrror and destructiveness of war to our things, population, and psyche. Let the chips fall where they may.

<http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/4/E962283F-6683-4529-940A-7C96683717AF.html>

[cascadiance]

15. I just had a long talk with my Armenian officemate last night...

I lived in Turkey myself for five years back in the late 60's early 70's as a kid when my Dad was working there. There are many decent Turks living there and now.

It pains me to see this issue still stays with us many years and generations after it happened. No doubt when it happened there was much tragic consequences to what the Turks at that time did, and probably in some cases the other side did back in response. But most of the people that were the primary victims and those that wreaked those crimes are dead now.

Those that are still living today are probably mostly kids from that time. And those survivors on both sides probably in many respects are victims. If you had a father or a grandfather who you knew slaughtered innocents in that fashion, wouldn't you also feel brutalized by that knowledge?

I think the problem we have today, in addition to the reluctance of Turks not wanting to acknowledge this, is those seeking "recognition" of these events as "genocide" stating what their true goal is in getting Turks to "recognize" this. What do they really want, to force reparations to the point that the Turkish government and its country gets run into the ground? Some expectations are honorable and may be realistic. Others aren't and is precisely why you have such resistance that has built up over the years, even from reasonable Turks that might want to acknowledge this. The Turkish government that presides now isn't the Ottoman Empire that ruled then. It has gone through many democratic changes since that time.

If those seeking "recognition" can really quantify what they do want and don't want, they might get more of a response from the Turks. If the can say things like, "Our real goal here is to establish the real historical record of what happened then that everyone can agree happened, and that by doing so, we make it a message for future generations of Turks and Armenians and everyone else not to repeat these same mistakes", then they might get more of a mutual response from Turks living today. It would still be hard for them to support this, but if they were also to say things like "All of us sign onto this are willing to have such an agreement reflect that current Republic of Turkey and its citizens aren't materially responsible for those events of yesterday", then perhaps an impasse can be resolved.

Right now there is a window of opportunity, with the Turks trying to become a part of the EU, and also with probably not many years left before all who might have lived in those times have passed away so that it will be harder to get eyewitness accounts of what happened then. It would be a shame to not utilize that opportunity to get the record straight.

I think it will take courage, and a sense of trying to put the past behind them for both sides in terms of responsibility for what happened then, but trying to take mutual responsibility to preventing such things from happening in the future. That will be hard, but if those today can try their hardest to put aside prejudices and other strong feelings of hate and sorrow, they might be able to get together to do this.

Bush won't do this, but even if he does, that won't solve the fundamental issues of coming to a real resolution to the Turkish/Armenian dispute.

It's kind of like current lawsuits here on slavery reparations here too. Maybe at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries, or before that, such lawsuits might have been more appropriate, when those directly affected were alive and could collect on it. However, at some point, even though tragic things happened in the past, one has to leave it in the past and work more on what is happening in the present and the future. Those living today shouldn't be seeking retribution just because of the color of their skin or ethnic backgrounds. As some have noted, given the displacement of today's generations from then, you might have many being given money, because they are black, in fact having been recent immigrants and descendants of slave owners in Africa that sold folks to those sending slaves to America then too. Why should they be compensated, when arguably their ancestors were part of the problem. This is why we should never try to hold a descendant of a criminal materially responsible for their ancestors' crimes.

I'm more interested in solving the problems of what is happening now, and punishing those that are now committing these sorts of crimes, like Darfur, Rwanda, etc.

[OETKB]

19. You and I Agree

What you state in your piece has the ring of reasonableness that each side will have to come to. However, since you and I do not have irons in the fire of this debate, the road is bumpy. Victimhood and any emotional state that tries to avoid humiliation(hatred, prejudice, e.g.) will impair the ability of each side to come to a compromise solution. Politicizing the issue also confuses the issue. If outside parties can gain political points by attaching themselves to one side to garner power, unfortunately, they will. Meanwhile the ordinary citizens of both countries suffer as they lose access to each other's culture. This is a shame since before this tragedy both sides(Turkish and Armenian) were contributing mightily to each other's well being as a society. Benjamin Franklin, my personal hero, noted, "There is no good war or bad peace."

It will have to be left to the leaders and their constituencies in this debate to develop the groundwork. Its work must be a framework where advantages outweigh the disadvantages of coming to a resolution. Until that happens this impasse will continue.

To answer your question to me,namely, if my forbears were part of the mayhem on either side and you allowed me access to my present state of mind, I would not seek revenge or self-righteousness. My resolve would deepen that war destroys our ability to survive. It sets problems in motion that do not easily go away even after 90 years and even under an entirely different government.

Mr. Bush's experience, knowledge, and attitude leave him ill suited to step into this arena. I fully concur with that. As for reparations, this is a loaded word and concept. What happened with slavery and its aftermath was quite complicated. How Afro-Americans were treated after slavery ended has not been fully addressed even today. Further, many corporations exist today that benefited from uncompensated labor or underpaid labor. They also blocked reasonable advancement in these companies by people of color. To my mind it is an advantage to society to figure out how all those who are not surviving at a fair level are helped them do so. This would be fair compensation to those who are particularly disadvantaged. Quite frankly I think this is also what disadvantaged people are also seeking(A living wage, equal access to affordable health care, proper education, and security in our home, workplace, and neighborhoods).

By the way I am a Jewish man married to a Turkish woman in Turkey over 30 years ago. My witness at the wedding was an Armenian friend of my wife's family whose two daughters were her best friends. Go figure.

[cascadiance]

20. Good to hear someone else with some sensible feelings too...

I'm hoping to influence those that I know with more feet in the fire that I'm not siding with either side, but that they need to step back and not get too personally involved. If you saw the movie Ararat, a movie that was actually pretty well done by Armenian filmmaker Atom Egoyan (which I saw with my Armenian officemate), the one moment that stood out for me was when the Turkish "actor" in it (played by a Greek) has a big personal discussion with the main character who was Armenian, discussing the movie within the movie (which was a bit biased towards Armenian concerns) but how he was voicing the same concerns you and I are about today being today, and yesteday being yesterday, when the Aremenian main character asks "Ali" if he feels guilt for playing a role that puts down his own people. It's too bad that the film didn't do more to play up this theme and have the rest of the characters see and think about those few lines in the movie. I think it would have made it better, but I appreciate Egoyan's decent attempt towards coming towards the middle with that scene.

I do agree that many problems generated by the original acts of slavery in America still exist today, and that people today are suffering from them. But I do think we need to look at these problems in today's context, and who are responsible for reinforcing such problems today and taking issue with them, and not making everyone feeling collectively responsible for actions of folks many years in the past, which really cannot unfortunately truely be undone, no matter what we do today. If we dwell too much today on what happened in the past, we make our problems and prejudices of today that much worse.

I do support affirmative action, even though I don't think it is the ultimate solution, primarily because those folks that want to take it down, even tough they are right about it instituting racism of its own, nine times out of ten don't present any useful alternative to it that deals with the problems it was initially set up to address. I'm principled, but yet I'm also pragmatic and open in trying to find a workable solution that is more relavent today. Those presenting solutions though are under the obligation to present a workable solution before tearing the current system down. The Armenians, who are seeking change to the status quo, need to come forward with something that addresses their concerns, but that is pragmatic and acceptable by most of all the present day parties involved. Otherwise it doesn't do any good.

I think the problems you mention are problems in general for all of society versus corporations and their affects on it, not just AFrican Americans, though they might have had more direct affects to them over the year. If a soloution can be presented by them that addresses the issue globally and not try to single out just African Americans as beneficiaries, which is almost impossible to do fairly and without generating more ill feelings this many years after the original problems, then they might get more support for their efforts.

They should help getting house parties to watch "The Corporation", and maybe help people like Thom Hartmann and others tear down the false notion that corporations are people created by an activist court reporter in a head note that had nothing to do with the actual case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad in effect "created" these rights because future court judges/juries/lawyers, etc. were too lazy to read past the inaccurate head note in coming years and rendered countless other court decisions since that time in corporations favor incorrectly. Even the Supreme Court when confronted on this dilemna, couldn't rule on it (which hardly ever happens), because of their concern for not rendering a decision that was totally wrong in face of the evidence, and also not tearing down the "corporate society" that our economy is based on now.

If the corporate society can be taken down in a constructive fashion, that would go a long ways to rectifying some of the corporate feudalism that has grown on black slaves backs in the 1800's and earlier, and that is growing now on outsourced slave labor today.

This is getting a bit off topic, but I think the fundamental issues are how long we expect responsibility for acts in history that deserved punishment and didn't receive any, even if those alive today don't share anything with the original perpetrators other than their bloodlines. Corporations arguably "still live" today that created problems like slavery in the past, but part of the problem there is the notions that corporations are persons are fundamentally flawed to start with. Those in charge of these corporations today are completely different people than those in charge then, and should be held accountable for what corporations do today (aka Enron), and not many years ago (aka JP Morgan helping trying to start a failed coup against FDR or other companies living off of Afro-American people's backs).

[OETKB]

23. The role of Governments

Government deals with societal wrongs and problems and tries to bring solutions to curb or correct these. What problem is it the Armenians are asking to be corrected? Do they want land back? Reparations? Recognition of their plight?

As for land, until recently, there was no Armenia, just an aspiration of certain activist in that period of time. Is it now enough to have their own country. However it is not a uniform place since some Turkish peoples also live in that country. It is a modern anachronism to to expect that one can have ethnicly pure nations. So this is off the table.

If it is reparations, it was war time and everyone was as bad off as the other. The fate of the Armenians was up and down in the Ottoman Empire, mainly depending on their aspirations to become a single country. If this was attempted the Ottomans put this down and usually not with diplomatic finesse. This was the law of survival in that day. Hopefully more enlightened contemporary minds will realize that more negotiated answers to such issues should take place.

Recognizing their plight in 1917 is a bit more dicey and probably the crux of the issue. There is a difference of opinion on the facts between the two groups. General opinion is slanted toward the Armenian version in the West. I think it is a positive first step for Mr. Erdoyan, the Turkish PM, to open up the national archives of that period to independent scholars chosen by both sides to clarify what happened. This was wartime in a remote area of the country with a host of anecdotal records laced with strong emotional reactions. If this is to be done, the purpose of it is to be clear. The record is to be cleared and these old ethnic discords are to be abolished. Our past is our past. We, in the US, certainly have history that is a blot on our humanity, but one can not set things right if your do not examine and learn from what is wrong.

[emad]

6. Armenians look to Bush to step up pressure on Turkey over 1915 'genocide'

Helena Smith in Athens
Saturday April 23, 2005
The Guardian

International pressure on Turkey to recognise the 1915 massacre of more than one million Armenians as genocide is mounting on the eve of the 90th anniversary of the start of the killings.

As Armenians worldwide prepare to commemorate the murders tomorrow - amid hopes that the US president, George Bush, will use the term genocide for the first time to describe the massacres - Ankara faced growing calls to own up to the slaughter.

Armenia's foreign minister, Vardan Oskanyan, said, "Without recognition of the fact of genocide and an admission that it was wrong, we cannot trust our neighbour, which has a tangible military weight."

Up to 1.5m Armenians may have died as part of a plot hatched by Ottoman Turks to ethnically cleanse the region during the first world war.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/turkey/story/0,12700,1468506,00.html

[Zuni]

7. why is 'genocide' in paren?

What happened in 1915 and also in the following years was the first true modern genocidal campaigns in history. Although conquerers had laid waste to countries they pillaged since the Pharoahs, sometimes wiping out the population, like Gengis Khan, Tamerlane etc.
This was the first modern style industrial age slaughter.

[kskiska]

12. It began way before 1915

My Armenian grandfather arrived in the U.S. in 1909 after having lost most of his family to the Turks, including his young bride. Unfortunately, I never met him, since he died in his 30s long before I was born, but all my life I heard stories he related to my grandmother about specifics of the Turkish atrocities, such as running their swords through babies and slicing off women's breasts.

[Zuni]

16. Read the book " the Burning Tigris"

it details anti-armenian pogroms in the 1880s, 1890s, 1900-1915

the actual genocide, in modern terms, started in April 1915, but pogroms, killings and persecution happened often in the preceding decades

[kskiska]

17. Thanks, Zuni

Glad to see that substantiated. I'll look it up.

[Gregorian]

22. Armenians were killed in the late 1800's

Grandfather died in his forties. Lost everything. Even his country. Started over again, only to lose it in The Depression. Very very sad.

Actually, the Armenians underwent genocidal type atrocities in the late 1800's.

[iamjoy]

8. How About Doing Something In Darfur First?

No disrespect to the Armenians and we should acknowledge the genocide and educate about it.

But we have genocide going on right now in Darfur and Dubya is doing nothing about it (just as Clinton did nothing about Rhwanda in 1994)

[BuddhaGirl]

9. good Mother Jones article from last year

http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2004/04/04_534.html

My first husband was Armenian, from Turkey. His mother used to tell me stories about how some of her male relatives were arrested and murdered during the round-up of intellectuals in Istanbul (then Constantinople), which was a prelude to the Genocide.

[leesa]

10. Funny. There hasn't been a genocide he disapproves of...good for bidness

[Gregorian]

11. The Turks are playing Bush

Huh? What genocide?
Well, my relatives will attest to the roundups. The train ride to hell. The loss of everything they owned. The bullets. The death. All aimed at Armenians. Whether they admit it or not- WE KNOW.

Don't ask George. He has no heart.

[Igel]

13. Recently Turkey shifted its position.

It was always that the Armenian "die off" had its original cause in disease or starvation. That's become less tenable.

The recent position, if I understand it right: there was ethnic fighting, half a million Turks were killed, and they, the poor victims, were just fighting back against those nasty, rapacious Armenians.

Whatever.

[LostinVA]

14. Sounds like the Hutus in Rwanda...

Poor "victims," being victimized by the Tutsis they control, and whom they outnumber about 6:1. Boo frigging hoo.

[d_b]

21. Riiiiiight.