Yes, You Can Say ‘Genocide,’ Mr. President.
Mark Dietzen
March 16, 2012
Photo by REUTERS/Michael Dalder
On April 24, 2012, the 97th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, President Obama will have the opportunity to fulfill his campaign promise to officially recognize Ottoman Turkey's deliberate and systematic destruction of its Armenian population as genocide. For decades, the United States has refrained from formal recognition of the mass killings of Armenians as genocide for fear of upsetting its relations with Turkey, a strategic ally. The Turkish government has perpetuated this apprehension by issuing strong but ambiguous threats of ‘negative diplomatic consequences’ in the event of US recognition.
Yet Turkey’s state-sanctioned denial of its genocidal past and the hypocritical US failure to speak truthfully about the Armenian Genocide threatens the reputations of both as well as their respective capacities for regional and global leadership. It is time to remove this albatross.
On the night of April 24, 1915, Turkish authorities arrested some 250 of Constantinople's Armenian intellectuals and community leaders and sent them to prison camps, where most were summarily executed. The following eight years saw the annihilation of some 1.5 million Armenians. Obama knows this history well, stating on January 19, 2008, "that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable."
Yet despite his 2008 commitment to recognize the genocide as president, Obama has not been true to his word. As a precursor to his first Armenian Remembrance Day statement on April 24, 2009, he refrained from using the "G-word" three weeks beforehand on April 6th during a speech to the Turkish parliament. "My views are on the record and I have not changed views," he said. "I want to focus not on my views right now, but on the views of the Turkish and Armenian people. If they can move forward and deal with a difficult and tragic history, then I think the entire world should encourage that."
Sure enough, when April 24th arrived, his much-anticipated statement employed similar language. Obama referred to the genocide as "Meds Yeghern," which in Armenian means "Great Calamity," rather than calling it the "Armenian Genocide" outright. "My interest," he stated, "remains the achievement of a full, frank and just acknowledgment of the facts. The best way to advance that goal right now is for the Armenian and Turkish people to address the facts of the past as a part of their efforts to move forward." Not saying the words "Armenian Genocide," Obama appears to have thought, would aid the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation process.
Initially, that indeed seemed to be the case. Six months later in October 2009, after lengthy negotiations and intensive 11th hour shuttle diplomacy by US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, Foreign Ministers Ahmet Davutoğlu of Turkey and Eduard Nalbandian of Armenia signed the Protocol on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations and the Protocol on the Development of Bilateral Relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Turkey (hereafter “the Protocols”). The accord was penned amidst much fanfare: the signing ceremony was attended by Clinton, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the European Union's High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, Javier Solana. The great expectations of the protocols, however, were only met with great disappointments.
Shortly after the Protocols were signed, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stated that Turkey’s ratification of the Protocols would depend on a peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, a predominantly Armenian enclave which broke away from Azerbaijan during the eclipse of the Soviet Union. In so doing, Erdoğan linked Turkey’s implementation of the Protocols with one of the most intractable and complicated conflicts in Eurasia.
Yet the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is not mentioned in the Protocols anywhere. Azerbaijan, a close ally of Turkey, had expressed serious concern that normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations would make the Armenians less likely to make concessions at the bargaining table. Thus Turkey, capitalizing on this sentiment and in a calculated bid to ensure that the Protocols would fail so that Turkey would not have to take action in regards to Armenia, recrafted the Protocols into an imaginary Armenian-Azerbaijani concern.
This precipitated the slow death of an agreement that the Obama Administration once touted as a major diplomatic achievement. Obama had perceived Turkey’s commitment to the Protocols to be genuine and rewarded it by abstaining from use of the word “genocide,” as both Obama’s 2010 and 2011 Armenian Remembrance Day statements employ similarly evasive language as his first statement in 2009. Unfortunately, Turkey had different intentions for the Protocols from the beginning.
President Obama's purging of "Armenian Genocide" from his lexicon did not result in a change in the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation process. Armenia extended a hand, but Turkey was unwilling to unclench its fist, squandering a momentous opportunity for peace.
This is a loss for both Turkey and the United States. True, formal US recognition of the Armenian Genocide would strain US-Turkish relations in the short-term, including the temporary withdrawal of Turkey’s Ambassador to the United States and a provisional restriction on the use of Incirlik Air Base in southern Turkey. The long-term consequences of genocide denial, however, impose far greater strategic and reputational costs, most notably in threatening Turkey’s accession to the European Union. There is also the genocide's most enduring human rights legacy: an open wound on the collective memory of the Armenian people.
Furthermore, Turkey’s threats of political and economic retaliation against those countries that have officially recognized the Armenian Genocide have turned out to be largely empty. Ankara’s ambassador to France returned to Paris four months after being recalled following France’s 2001 recognition of the genocide. And international trade data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development reveal that ten advanced economies – including Russia, France and Canada – have actually experienced growth in bilateral trade with Turkey despite their recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
History can be a bitter pill to swallow, yet Turkey is not the first country to require US prodding in order to confront its past. Obama should remember that good allies, like good friends, must be willing to not only praise achievements, but also reproach failures. In addition, this issue has repercussions for Obama's reelection. Many Armenian-Americans feel his message of “hope and change” does not apply to them, that they have traded their votes for an empty promise. So long as Obama remains a hypocrite in their eyes, he should not expect their support in 2012.
Vice-President Biden, Secretary of State Clinton, and Special Assistant Power – whose book, A Problem from Hell, devotes its first chapter to the Armenian Genocide – have all previously gone on record in support of Armenian Genocide recognition. As April 24th approaches, they should recall the fate of the Armenians in Constantinople in 1915. And if this year’s Armenian Remembrance Day statement is just a reworded version of last year's equivocation, perhaps one of them will have the courage to tell Obama, “Yes, you can say ‘genocide,’ Mr. President.” And yes, he should.
Mark Dietzen is an international affairs analyst and consultant specializing in European and Eurasian Affairs. He holds an MA in International Relations with Concentrations in U.S. Foreign Policy in Europe and Eurasia, and International Law, and Certificates in International Security and Policy Studies, from Yale University. The views expressed are solely those of the author.
11 Responses »
Leave a Response
Without precedent of its own, the Armenian Genocide stands alone as history’s first genocide. In fact, the United Nations coined the term “genocide” because of the events that took place in Armenia between 1915 – 1923. Hitler’s statement about the “extermination of the Armenians” shows just how important it is; and all other mass murders of groups of people have been carried out with the blueprint of the Armenian Genocide as their basis.
Who are the Armenians? Most of us don’t know anything about an “Armenian” except for the lifestyles shown to us by the tv show, “The Kardashians.” The culture and heritage of the Armenian people go much, much further back and are much more greater importance than a reality tv show. The Armenians are an ancient people who have existed since before the first century C.E. Armenia has gained and lost a tremendous amount of territory throughout its long and turbulent history. They are direct descents from Noah, and in fact, Noah’s ark landed in Armenia, near a great mountain named Mt. Ararat, following the great flood of the bible. Armenia was the first nation to adopt Christianity as a state religion, in 301 C.E. This early Christian identity has greatly influenced Armenian culture and history.
We have enough trouble with our history being re-written without completely denying a part of history that has empirical proof of its existence. While there is no Turkish remnant of the Ottoman Empire alive today, the current Turkish government cannot pretend that their past regime did not commit the atrocities they did. Just as the Jews needed their tragic holocaust recognized officially in order that they might begin to heal, the Armenian people are also in need of an official acceptance of responsibility by the Turkish government. Countries all over the world agree, as does at least 23 of these United States. So why should America take a stand? For one thing, many scholars believe the Armenian genocide directly inspired Adolph Hitler, who noted in 1939 that the world seemed to have forgotten the fate of the Armenians. Silence, in other words, became complicity -- and helped set the stage for the Jewish Holocaust.
During President Obama’s campaign for president, he stated "Two years ago, I criticized the Secretary of State for the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, after he properly used the term 'genocide' to describe Turkey's slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915. “… as President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide," said Obama. Today, Obama steers away from the use of the word “genocide” for fear that the repercussions by the Turkish government will affect relations with the U.S. While campaigning for president, Obama promised to use the word "genocide," but in his first trip to Turkey, he did not utter the 'g' word. Still, he has been ambiguous regarding the upcoming vote, and the Turkish lobby is worried.
Let me put this in a better context for all of us. Let’s go back in time and elect a president who campaigns against the African-American slavery, the shameful events which taint America the beautiful’s history – then after we’ve elected that president, we listen to him say “Well… It wasn’t EXACTLY slavery…”
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman for the first time publicly spoke against recognition of the Armenian Genocide. He stated that “the sufferings that Jewish people faced during the World War II cannot be compared to any events.” In response, Armenia’s Foreign Minister, Edward Nalbandyan, reminded Liberman that Professor Israel Charny, who is the Executive Director of the Institute on the Holocaust and Genocide in Jerusalem, said that it is enough to occupy oneself with playing with words and called on Israel to recognize the Armenian Genocide. "I think it is apparent that Charny has not voiced this statement taking into account political profits. It is evident to everyone, including those in Israel, that Charny perfectly knows the meaning of Holocaust and Genocide," said Mr. Nalbandyan.
Frankly, I’m aghast that Israel wants to keep “genocide” to themselves, as though no other country in the world could have ever suffered as much as they did. Need they be reminded of one of the most successful genocides in history? That of the Native Americans of the United States?
Countries around the world have acknowledged this crime against humanity, as have 43 American state governments. Yet each time Congress has considered affirming the Armenian Genocide, intense lobbying and threats by the Turkish government and its allies have killed proposed legislation. This multi-million dollar campaign of genocide denial perverts historical truth and corrupts our political process.
Genocide denial – the last stage of genocide – threatens everyone. It fuels current genocides and emboldens those who would commit future atrocities. Stopping the cycle of genocide begins by speaking truthfully about past genocides.
To live in a society means we have an inherent responsibility to the societies that we share. That responsibility is to reflect the society back to itself, hold the society up to view itself. We should all be invited and encouraged to bring forth the best of personal expression for the purpose of sharing that expression with the world and participating in an effort to stimulate more and better dialogue among the people of this world. We can all influence this world, for better or worse, depending upon one’s individual perspective, and we share a responsibility to do so. We can collectively illustrate the conscience of humanity. That is and can be a very tall order indeed. That has also proven to be truth throughout the written history of mankind and civilization.
From this descendent of an Armenian Genocide survivor, thank you for the time and effort putting together such an article that was based on accurate observations.
The truth will always win! I respect your courage. Thank you!
Thank you Mr. Dietzen for this important article. Yes indeed, morality should make part of the policy as regards to the Armenian Genocide.
Thank you
The US's use of the word genocide will not force Turkey to 'confront' its past, because their concept of what happened in that past is different. France just accepted a bill to criminalize the denial of the Armenian Genocide - that hasn't prompted Turkey to 'confront' its past. Turkey's views of what happened are completely different. A genocide is a systematic policy of a government to exterminate a whole ethnic group/race. That wasn't the case here. There were millions of Armenians living in Istanbul at the time, who weren't massacred.
Turkey acknowledges that 'tragic' events happened, in which both Turks and Armenians lost their lives, but it rejects the accusation of “genocide.” The Turkish government maintains that there was no centralized attempt to wipe out the Armenians. Instead, Turkey says that many massacres were committed on both sides as a result of inter-ethnic violence in the context of a broader world war. Turkey has offered to establish a committee of historians (both Armenian and Turkish) to research the issue. Armenians have refused.
The problem is that Armenia as a nation has nothing to hold it together except the 'Armenian genocide'. This is their patriotic thing. That's why they hold on to it so much.
The issue with the Congress/House is just a U.S. domestic policy issue. Nancy Pelosi needs to cater to her Armenian constituents in CA. OK, fine, but what does that have to do with something in another country's past? What good does it do us to pass laws/bills on the history of another country? It's completely pointless.
As far as how to refer to it - Hillary Clinton had the best solution: She calls it the 'so-called' Armenian Genocide. It has the word 'genocide' in it to make the Armenians happy; and the words 'so-called' to make the Turks happy. Now that's a good diplomat...
If you want an example of a practical benefit to Armenians. Armenian's were denied the ability to sue the Turkish government by the 9th Circuit (in a correct decision) because... the President and Congress have not recognized the genocide!
At the very least, lawsuits can continue to go forward.
The Armenians will continue to be nevertheless the Turks will accept genocide or not. History has shown so far that despite so many wars and despite the worst geographical position and being surrounded by enemies, the Armenians continue to be and will be forever.
Thank you Mark, for presentation of the facts. We want Turks to accept the genocide in order other nations to see that such massacres are punishable.
As I can see the Turks have always acted anonymously and the Turk that has left his/her reply here is also anonymous.
Why? Is he/she afraid? Why can't he/she put his/her name under their ideas? Who is he/she afraid of?
Can a whole nation be so ignorant as to be slaves in the hands of their own Government? How long can this situation last?
I sincerely hope that there would appear a number of progressive thinkers in that nation to help the Turks come out from the darkness and ignorance, they have appeared because of their leaders and state policy, and help them to gain courage to accept the crime performed by their fathers and grandfathers and save their souls.
As for the author of the article, I would like to thank Mr. Mark Dietzen for his honesty and braveness. He can look through the comments and see once again who is who. Armenians never forget those who do something good for them and never forgives the villains.
Excellent and timely article. The "great calamity" is the hypocrisy and complete lack of courage displayed by U.S. officials such as President Obama, former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and US Secretary of State Clinton. Each of these representatives of the US has shown total disrespect for the millions of Armenians who died, and the countless others who suffered as a result of the Armenian Genocide, by first recognizing the genocide, then shallowly flip-flopping with vague and ridiculous characterizations of what happened just to appease the Turkish government for use of their precious Incirlik Air Base. Is that what the US government stands for? All three officials would do well to flip open a Dr. Seuss book and read the phrase, "I meant what I said and I said what I meant."
Mark Dietzen is correct: It IS time to remove this albatross!!
Love it!!!