The Atlantic Monthly
October 8, 2008
an-american-vote
McCain’s Armenia Problem
by Daniel Nichanian
Eight years ago, George W. Bush was battling an unexpectedly competitive
John McCain for the GOP’s presidential nomination. Scheduled to vote
just days after South Carolina, Michigan suddenly looked decisive-and
its substantial Armenian-American population became an attractive voting
block.
Three days before the vote, Governor Bush sent a letter to two
Armenian-American businessmen addressing the Armenian community’s
biggest demand-recognition that the 1915 extermination of Armenians
< n_Genocide> in the Ottoman Empire
was an act of genocide. The Turkish government to this day denies that
any genocide occurred, and no president since Ronald Reagan has used
that term while in office. Bush pledged to correct that. "The Armenians
were subjected to a genocidal campaign," he wrote. "If elected
President, I would ensure that our nation properly recognizes the tragic
suffering of the Armenian people." Bush lost in Michigan, won the
presidency … and then bailed on his pledge. Last fall, the House of
Representatives looked set to adopt a resolution affirming the Armenian
genocide. But as Turkey threatened to disrupt its commercial ties with
the United States and to invade Iraq, President Bush warned that America
could not afford to alienate Turkey and pushed Congress to drop the
measure.
Today, Edgar Hagopian, one of the letter’s two recipients, acknowledges
his disappointment. "I have written to President Bush many times but
have not gotten a response," he said, reeling at the remarkable
turnaround that transformed Bush into the biggest obstacle to an
official recognition.
Bush’s record is sure to haunt McCain’s 2008 presidential run, but it’s
not as if the Arizona senator needed any help in alienating
Armenian-Americans. McCain’s own stance against genocide recognition and
his relative indifference toward bilateral relations with Armenia have
been a matter of record since well before George W. Bush emerged on the
national stage. Barack Obama, conversely, looked committed to the
affirmation of the events of 1915 as a genocide long before he decided
on a presidential run. In fact, in the superheated world of ethnic
grievance politics, rarely do presidential elections feature such a
clear contrast between two candidates. In the case of states with a
substantial Armenian-American presence (including California, New
Jersey, Michigan and Nevada) that contrast could hurt McCain.
Historically, neither party has owned the support of Armenian-Americans.
Rather than stake their fortune with one party, national advocacy
groups-starting with the Armenian National Committee of America
<; (ANCA) and the Armenian Assembly of America
<; -have pursued a bipartisan course.
Thanks in part to this strategy, the Armenian-American community has
grown into a highly effective interest group. Cory Welt of Georgetown’s
Eurasian Strategy Project mentions the Armenian lobby’s strength as an
explanation for what he calls the "exceptional" size of Armenian foreign
aid. The Congressional Caucus on Armenian issues
< > has a bipartisan leadership
(it is co-chaired by a Democrat from New Jersey, Rep. Frank Pallone, and a
Republican from Michigan, Rep. Joe Knollenberg) and a large contingent
of 150 members, including 13 of Michigan’s 15 U.S. Representatives, 38
of California’s 53 and 11 of New Jersey’s 13.
As a result, there has been little partisan divide on issues like
genocide recognition and Armenian foreign aid, and past presidential
candidates on the left and on the right were careful to pander to
Armenian-American concerns. George H. W. Bush and his son both talked of
genocide prior to their election before resorting to euphemisms once in
office; Bob Dole was one of the strongest advocates of recognition
efforts, as was John Kerry, who also championed other issues including
the opening of the Turkey-Armenia border.
Denis Papazian, the Founding Director of the University of Michigan’s
Center of Armenian Studies <; ,
explained that a sizable share of Armenian-American voters considers
candidates’ stances on Armenian issues and can be swayed by a pledge to
support genocide recognition efforts. For instance, Papazian pointed to
the strong support the community offered Bob Dole in 1996. He also
estimated that Bush’s letter during the 2000 campaign boosted his
support in the Armenian-American community. "If two relatively neutral
candidates are running," Papazian explained, "Armenian American voters
will stay within the party [they usually feel the closest to]. But if
one of them makes a promise to recognize the genocide, he will get a lot
of votes."
Papazian himself fits that description. A Dole supporter twelve years
ago, he is now supporting Barack Obama-identifying the Illinois
Senator’s stance on recognition as a crucial factor in that decision.
Another prominent Armenian-American who has undergone the same
transition is Oscar Tatosian, the Chairman of the Diocesan Council of
the Armenian Church of America <;.
He , too, was a Dole supporter; he, too, describes himself as an
independent and identifies genocide recognition as a primary issue; he,
too, is supporting Obama. Both well-connected and highly-involved
members of the Armenian community, Papazian and Tatosian professed to
knowing many who share their outlook.
Voters like Papazian and Tatosian are giving Democrats hope they can
make inroads in the Armenian community. And while this might simply be
due to a coincidental combination of one-time factors-a hostile
Republican Administration, an unusually enthusiastic Democratic
candidate and an uncommonly skeptical Republican
nominee-Armenian-American issues have a decidedly more partisan feel
this year.
For one, the genocide question is only one of many issues on which the
Bush Administration has attracted criticism from the Armenian community.
Stephan Astourian, a professor of history at Berkeley, also lists
"Bush’s attempts at cutting the allocation of foreign help for Armenia
almost every year, his clear orientation towards oil-based money and
pro-Azerbaijan stance"-a reference to Armenia’s conflict with Azerbaijan
over the province of Nagorno-Karabagh.
As importantly, McCain is the first presidential candidate in the past
two decades who is on the record as opposing genocide recognition
without already being a member of the incumbent Administration.
Hagopian, one of the recipients of Bush’s letter in 2000, remains a
strong conservative who supports McCain’s candidacy, but he admits his
frustration with the Arizona Senator’s positions. "He has not been a
friend of the Armenian community," he said.
In 1990, McCain voted against a recognition resolution that was
sponsored by then-Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole. In 2000, campaigning
for the Republican nomination in California, McCain confirmed that he
would not support such a resolution. "It was not under this government
in Turkey," McCain said. "I don’t see what this resolution does to
improve this situation one iota." The Senator has stuck to his position
in 2008, attracting widespread criticism from Armenian groups. "I think
the most dangerous part of Senator McCain is that he is toeing the old
Cold War era line that Turkey is this invaluable ally we cannot offend,"
warned Areen Ibranossian, the Chairman of Armenians for Obama
<; , a group promoting the Illinois
Senator among Armenian-Americans nationwide. (The McCain campaign did
not return my requests for an interview.)
By contrast, Obama has pledged that his Administration would recognize
the 1915 extermination as an act of genocide. His campaign released two
statements on this issue on January 19 and on April 28. "The facts are
undeniable," one statement said. "An official policy that calls on
diplomats to distort the historical facts is an untenable policy."
Dennis Papazian predicted that Armenian voters "will shift towards Obama
because of their belief that he will recognize the genocide."
Some Republicans like Edgar Hagopian predict that a President Obama
would renege on his pledge just as President Bush did, but Obama’s
supporters praise the sincerity of his commitment to Armenian-American
concerns and point to his familiarity with these issues. "This is an
individual who is more knowledgeable about Armenian-Americans than most
candidates are and have been," said Rep. Pallone, the New Jersey
Democrat who co-chairs the Caucus on Armenian Affairs. Obama spoke about
the Armenian genocide well before launching his campaign, and many
activists take that as reassurance that his stance is more than an
electoral gimmick. Elizabeth Chouldjian, a spokesperson for the ANCA,
and Areen Ibranossian both cited an Obama press conference during a
congressional trip to Azerbaijan in 2005. Asked about his support for
genocide affirmation in a country that has a tense relationship with
Armenia, Obama did not shy away from reiterating his stance, a moment
Ibranossian described as "extraordinary." "He had no reason to put out
his neck and defend himself," he said.
Nearly all of Obama’s backers also point to his relationship with a
high-profile adviser who is ironically no longer part of his campaign.
In her work on genocide prevention and in her book A Problem from Hell
< 0060541644/theatlanticmonthA/re%20%20f=3Dnosim> ,
Samantha Power has focused on the international community’s failure to
recognize genocides like the one that decimated the Armenians in 1915,
arguing that a proper understanding of past catastrophes is crucial to
preventing genocides in the present. Power resigned from the campaign
after calling Hillary Clinton a "monster" in March, but many in the
Armenian community believe her outlook has shaped Obama’s foreign
policy views.
The campaign’s January 19 statement, for instance, connected the
recognition of the Armenian genocide with broader issues of genocide
prevention. "A principled commitment to commemorating and ending
genocide," the statement said, "starts with acknowledging the tragic
instances of genocide in world history."
The contrast between Obama and McCain extends more broadly to the United
States’ relationship with the Republic of Armenia. Obama’s January 19th
statement pledged to maintain Armenian foreign aid and to move toward a
resolution of the Karabagh conflict that would respect the "principle of
self-determination"-language close to Armenian demands. The ANCA’s
Elizabeth Chouldjian praised Obama’s positions as "the strongest we’ve
gotten from a candidate in over ten years." (The ANCA endorsed Obama in
January, just as it supported John Kerry in 2004; the group remained
neutral in the 2000 election.) On the other hand, John McCain has
remained largely silent on these issues, an attitude his critics deride
as worrisome indifference.
The California-based Armenians for Obama group plans to educate
Armenian-American voters about these differences. The organization is
conducting extensive phone bank operations to contact as many
Armenian-American voters in swing states as possible. "Our first
objective is to make sure that all Armenians know Obama’s stance on
issues," said Ibranossian, the group’s chairman. "We take Obama’s
message and try to make it more consumable by Armenian-Americans, more
relatable to their concerns."
Ibranossian argued that extensive outreach in large Armenian communities
in the Detroit and Las Vegas regions could prove decisive. "If we can
get them out to vote," he said, "that could make the difference in
swinging the election from red to blue." Armenian Republicans are
mounting an effort of their own to help McCain, but they are getting a
late start and the organization they are relying on-the National
Organization of Republican Armenians <;
(NORA)-has been largely inoperative over the past eight years.
Like many others before him, Obama will have to weigh conflicting
interests if he gets to the White House. Georgetown’s Cory Welt points
out that Obama "has been insistent on the importance of reaching out to
international partners and that Turkey will be one of the countries that
he will want to reach out to. He will quickly find the genocide issue to
be an obstacle."
Until then, Obama’s position has given hope to many
Armenian-Americans-even to those who are not planning on voting for him.
A spokesperson for NORA and a McCain supporter, Peter Musurlian is
nonetheless hopeful that President Obama might finally succeed in moving
the United States towards genocide recognition. "I wouldn’t cry in my
beer if Obama is elected, I would say let’s look at what he does on
April 24th," he said, in a reference to the commemorative date of the
Armenian genocide. "Hopefully he will do better than President Bush."