PRO-CON: Should Congress Decry 1915 Massacre Of Armenians? NO

PRO-CON: SHOULD CONGRESS DECRY 1915 MASSACRE OF ARMENIANS? NO

Kansas City Star, MO
Oct 23 2007

A U.S. House committee’s condemnation of Turkey for the deaths
of up to 1.5 million Armenians in World War I was ill-timed and
ill-advised. Fortunately, a growing number of House members from both
parties have expressed misgivings about the nonbinding resolution,
which calls the mass killings genocide.

While there is no question about the atrocities perpetrated against
Armenian civilians, this rebuke, which has been kicking around Congress
for years, is an ill-timed provocation of Turkey, a stable ally in
the volatile Middle East.

Was the Democratic-led Foreign Affairs Committee trying to hinder
U.S. operations in Iraq by enraging Turkey? That’s one theory, although
Democrats and Republicans on the committee didn’t vote along party
lines for or against the resolution.

Or is the resolution the result of political pandering? Its chief
sponsor, Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff, has 70,000 Armenian-Americans
living in his California district. Democratic House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi, a strong supporter of the resolution, also is from California.

Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch editorial
30.html

PRO-CON: Should Congress decry 1915 massacre of Armenians? YES So,
riddle us this, America … Why is it that President Bush chastised
Congress in its efforts to declare the mass killings of Armenians by
the Turkish-led Ottoman Empire starting in 1915 genocide?

Because it’ll upset a key ally in the region, Turkey, which allows us
to drive our supply trucks into Iraq through its border. So why then
does he feel it’s OK to stick it to the Chinese by honoring the Dalai
Lama with a Congressional Gold Medal? His urgent need for diplomacy
took a powder, angering the Chinese. Could it be because China has
refused to condemn Iran’s quest for nuclear energy?

Surely the timing is no more convenient for this move than it is for
the Armenian motion before Congress.

We happen to believe that the Tibetan spiritual leader deserves the
honor bestowed upon him – we just find it hard to believe that Bush’s
motives for honoring the man were pure. If we’re getting on the right
side of history on Tibet, we should get it right with the Armenians.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer editorial
26.html

http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/3284
http://www.kansascity.com/273/story/3284

You may also like