Haven't written an entry in a about a month; it has been a crazy few weeks at school. Read a story on CNN.com yesterday that has brought me out of my hiatus.
The U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs passed a measure last Wednesday that labeled the Turkish killing of Armenians during World War I as a genocide. The Bush Administration spoke out against the measure, fearing Turkey (who denies the event as a genocide) would be antagonized to the point of stopping their cooperation with the U.S. in the Iraq war. Turkey is a key ally used for U.S. troop deployments and the movement of supplies. As predicted by those opposing the resolution, Turkey claims the House decision has put U.S./Turkey relations "in jeopardy." Turkey also recalled its ambassador in response.
Let's get one thing out of the way. The Ottoman Empire's subjugation and slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians from 1914-1918 was manifestly genocidal. The killing was state sponsored, complete with concentration camps and mass graves. Greeks, Jews, and other religious and ethnic minorities were also targeted by the Muslim majority. Nearly half of the estimated Armenian population in Turkey perished. Adolf Hitler would later use the Ottoman effort as a model for his attempted extermination of the Jews in Nazi Germany.
The distinction of genocide to these events is as obvious as it is unimportant. Outside of the Middle East, where incredulity and ignorance already run rampant, it is a widely held opinion that genocide did indeed occur. Does this not render the House's official recognition of genocide anything but a formality? On the surface, this would seem harmless (while perhaps a waste of congressional time), but the reality of our current situation in Iraq makes the measure an unnecessary nuisance. This is a truism that is not contingent on a political party or where one stands on the Iraq war. If you favor involvement, Turkey is a vital resource for troop and supply movement. If you favor withdraw, even immediate withdraw, Turkey's cooperation is necessary for a smooth and organized redeployment from Iraq. With this is mind, why would the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Relations choose this point in time to anger one of our most important allies in the Middle East? The timing is indeed curious. The circumstances of the genocide itself make the U.S. declaration of genocide long overdue, but at the same time, now would not seem to be the most prudent time for it.
There is another aspect of this whole mess that makes it even more grotesque. As Turkey and the U.S. Congress argue over the correct language to describe an event that happened almost 100 years ago, 400,000 people have been murdered and 2 million more have become refugees in western Sudan as of September 2006. There are few in the west who fail to recognize these events as genocidal, yet the United States has yet to declare them as such, or intervene in the massacres. The United States and Europe have displayed indifference in this matter reminiscent of the Rwandan genocides of the 1990s.
To sum up, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs has put U.S. efforts in Iraq in jeopardy by alienating a key ally, and showed that its priorities are woefully out of line. They would rather declare a 100 year-old conflict a genocide than act on the systematic murder of thousands of people that is happening in the here and now.
This measure should be voted down by the majority of the House, and/or the Darfur conflict should soon be likewise recognized as genocide and action should be taken against the Janjaweed.
The U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs passed a measure last Wednesday that labeled the Turkish killing of Armenians during World War I as a genocide. The Bush Administration spoke out against the measure, fearing Turkey (who denies the event as a genocide) would be antagonized to the point of stopping their cooperation with the U.S. in the Iraq war. Turkey is a key ally used for U.S. troop deployments and the movement of supplies. As predicted by those opposing the resolution, Turkey claims the House decision has put U.S./Turkey relations "in jeopardy." Turkey also recalled its ambassador in response.
Let's get one thing out of the way. The Ottoman Empire's subjugation and slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians from 1914-1918 was manifestly genocidal. The killing was state sponsored, complete with concentration camps and mass graves. Greeks, Jews, and other religious and ethnic minorities were also targeted by the Muslim majority. Nearly half of the estimated Armenian population in Turkey perished. Adolf Hitler would later use the Ottoman effort as a model for his attempted extermination of the Jews in Nazi Germany.
The distinction of genocide to these events is as obvious as it is unimportant. Outside of the Middle East, where incredulity and ignorance already run rampant, it is a widely held opinion that genocide did indeed occur. Does this not render the House's official recognition of genocide anything but a formality? On the surface, this would seem harmless (while perhaps a waste of congressional time), but the reality of our current situation in Iraq makes the measure an unnecessary nuisance. This is a truism that is not contingent on a political party or where one stands on the Iraq war. If you favor involvement, Turkey is a vital resource for troop and supply movement. If you favor withdraw, even immediate withdraw, Turkey's cooperation is necessary for a smooth and organized redeployment from Iraq. With this is mind, why would the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Relations choose this point in time to anger one of our most important allies in the Middle East? The timing is indeed curious. The circumstances of the genocide itself make the U.S. declaration of genocide long overdue, but at the same time, now would not seem to be the most prudent time for it.
There is another aspect of this whole mess that makes it even more grotesque. As Turkey and the U.S. Congress argue over the correct language to describe an event that happened almost 100 years ago, 400,000 people have been murdered and 2 million more have become refugees in western Sudan as of September 2006. There are few in the west who fail to recognize these events as genocidal, yet the United States has yet to declare them as such, or intervene in the massacres. The United States and Europe have displayed indifference in this matter reminiscent of the Rwandan genocides of the 1990s.
To sum up, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs has put U.S. efforts in Iraq in jeopardy by alienating a key ally, and showed that its priorities are woefully out of line. They would rather declare a 100 year-old conflict a genocide than act on the systematic murder of thousands of people that is happening in the here and now.
This measure should be voted down by the majority of the House, and/or the Darfur conflict should soon be likewise recognized as genocide and action should be taken against the Janjaweed.
Read more about the issue here:
Posts
