Author: Boshkezenian Garik

Armenian chess teams to partake in the European Team Championship

armradio.am
20.10.2007 13:30

The Chess Federation of Armenia has determined the list of men’s and
women’s teams to participate in the European Team Championship to be
held in the Greek city of Heraklion on Creta Island October 28-November
6, Armenpress was informed from the Chess Federation.

Armenian men’s team will comprise Grand Masters Levon Aronyan, Vladimir
Hakobyan, Gabriel Sargsyan, Smbat Lputyan and Karen Asryan.

The women’s team will comprise Grand Masters Elina Danielyan, Lilit
Lazarian, Nelli Aghinyan, Masters Siranush Andreasyan and Liana
Aghabekyan.

After split, town mulls own antibias effort

By Connie Paige, Globe Correspondent | October 21, 2007

Sosse Beugekian says her family has not forgotten what happened to her
great-grandparents a century ago.

A purge and mass slaughter of Armenians by Ottoman Turks prompted the
18-year-old’s great-grandparents to settle in Lebanon. Seven years
ago, she said, she and her parents migrated from there to Lexington.

Last week, Beugekian, a Lexington High School senior, organized a
student petition to selectmen asking them to sever ties to the
Anti-Defamation League’s No Place for Hate program because of ADL’s
stance on the atrocity against Armenians.

"We obviously want everyone to recognize the Armenian genocide," said
Beugekian, who added that she helped persuade more than 250 fellow
students to sign the petition.

At the urging of Armenian-Americans and others, Lexington and
Arlington have joined the growing chorus of communities that have
decided to break with the No Place for Hate program, despite the ADL’s
move to modify its stance on the Armenian genocide.

Now, Lexington selectmen are appointing an organizing committee to
recommend how to carry on the work of No Place for Hate without the
offending political ties and suggesting ways to carry its message of
tolerance statewide. The recommendations are expected within six weeks
or so, said Jeanne Krieger, board chairwoman.

The turmoil over No Place for Hate is occurring as Congress tries to
come to grips with how to characterize the deportation and killing of
as many as 1.5 million Armenians by the Ottoman Turks between 1915 and
1923 that many scholars call genocide. A resolution to that effect
faces opposition from the Bush administration.

As debate rages in local, state, and national board rooms, Al Gordon,
ADL’s associate Northeast regional director, said the group regrets
the most recent votes against No Place for Hate.

"We believe that No Place for Hate has been and continues to be a
valuable tool for combating hate and promoting diversity in about 60
Massachusetts communities," Gordon said. "We think the towns have
benefited greatly from the programs’ capabilities and their access to
the expertise that the Anti-Defamation League brings to the realm of
bias and hate crimes."

Gordon added that many individuals within the ADL, including some
members of the Northeast regional chapter, "have acknowledged the
Armenian genocide."

Still, Sharistan Melkonian, chairwoman of the Armenian National
Committee of Massachusetts, said communities are taking a stand
because a statement by a national ADL officer about the genocide did
not go far enough. She was referring to the statement in August by ADL
executive director Abraham Foxman that the atrocities were
"tantamount" to genocide.

The votes in Lexington and Arlington followed similar withdrawals in
Belmont, Newton, and Watertown. Medford is also considering severing
its ties with No Place for Hate, Melkonian said.

Before the selectmen’s vote last week, Lexington had already
experienced lengthy public and private debate among members of the
local No Place for Hate Committee that sparked outrage earlier this
month from the town’s Armenian-American community.

Three Armenian-American residents complained after they were barred
from an unannounced meeting that the local No Place for Hate committee
held behind closed doors at Town Hall to help determine how they would
approach selectmen about the controversy.

Laura Boghosian, one of those excluded, said she believes ADL holds
contradictory positions – on the one hand supporting human rights,
and, on the other, backing Turkey, as a close ally of Israel.
Officials in Turkey have denied that the killings of Armenians
constituted genocide.

"They have to make a choice what kind of organization they’re going to
be," Boghosian said last week of the ADL. "I don’t think they can do
both."

As part of its human rights mission, the ADL established the No Place
for Hate program in 1999 to promote diversity and allow communities to
take a stand against bias.

To earn the designation, cities and towns had to show the ADL that
they had taken certain steps, including hosting at least three
antibias events. Communities would then receive recertification each
year, provided they held at least two more annual events.

But after the ADL fired its regional director in August for
acknowledging the Armenian genocide, some towns began to withdraw from
No Place for Hate. The regional director, Andrew Tarsy, has since been
rehired.

Along with local communities, the Massachusetts Municipal Association
is "monitoring the matter," said Geoffrey Beckwith, executive
director.

The municipal association released a statement last month saying the
slaughter of Armenians "must be recognized by all as a genocide."

Beckwith said the association has called on the national ADL to
respond to the criticism during a November meeting of the group’s
national governing board.

"After that, we will certainly evaluate our official sponsorship,"
Beckwith said.

Meanwhile, Lexington’s Krieger said she believes that a statewide
coalition of local human rights commissions could be the vehicle for
No Place for Hate’s message.

Beugekian applauded the idea of having new local and statewide
organizations as watchdogs against bias instead of No Place for Hate.
"I think that’s the best solution," she said. "They’ve done a lot of
good work, and we’ve heard about them in school, too. We all
appreciate their work."

Connie Paige can be reached at [email protected].

(c) Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Source: 21/after_split_town_mulls_own_antibias_effort/

Across the Aisle, DC
Oct 19 2007

Support the AKP, Don’t Trip Them Up

by Jonathan Wallace | October 19th, 2007

Last week, the House Foreign Affairs committee voted 27 to 21 to
bring a resolution to the floor condemning as genocide the mass
killings of Armenians in 1915. The genocide of Armenians has been
widely accepted as historical fact. Despite this, the timing of the
House resolution is damaging to American foreign policy. Not only
does this resolution hurt American policy in the Middle East, but it
also is harmful to the current ruling party in Turkey, led by Prime
Minister Erdogan and President Adbullah Gul. This is a time when we
need to support the current Turkish civilian leadership. We do not
need to be adding to its challenges.

The Justice and Development party (AKP), with their mildly Islamist
government, should be held up as a model for a moderate Islamic party
in a well-functioning democracy. Their current electoral success
shows that an Islamic party can appeal to a large cross-section of
the populace in a maturing democracy. The Erdogan administration has
been a valuable ally to the United States both in a bilateral sense
and as an invaluable NATO member. Perhaps most importantly, they
provide an important check against the militarism that always lurks
underneath the surface of Turkish politics. As we saw during the
spring and summer, the Turkish military is always willing to rise to
the intense nationalism of the Turkish people and will attempt to
distort the hard-won democratic gains of the Turkish polity. The AKP
responded admirably to the `cyber-coup’ attempted by the generals,
stood their ground, and finally got Adbullah Gul elected President
(with the popular support of the Turkish people).

The vote by the House Foreign Affairs committee gives the Turkish
military another opportunity to burnish their nationalistic
credentials against the AKP. Turkey has always been particularly
sensitive to the charges of Armenian genocide and this vote could
create a situation where the Army feels that it needs to defend the
Turkish honor. In this way, the military may feel that the AKP is
insufficiently nationalist and could try to exert more political
influence. Additionally, the vote by the House Foreign Affairs
committee may tie the hands of the AKP. Turkish domestic politics may
dictate that the AKP act in some way to show how they will defend
Turkey. We may already be seeing this as the parliament recently
voted to authorize Turkish incursions into Northern Iraq. The United
States and Turkey do not need to open another front in Iraqi
Kurdistan. The US does not want two of its allies fighting each other
and certainly would prefer to avoid another front in the war in Iraq.
The Armenian genocide vote, which does not help United States policy
in any way, may cause more violence in Iraq and will create further
problems for the AKP.

Armenians deserve to have the genocide recognized by the Turkish
government. Turkey’s repeated denials do nothing to help heal the
wounds that are almost a hundred years old. However, I’m not sure
that this resolution is the best way to get the Turkish government to
recognize the genocide. These sorts of issues need to be worked out
by Turkey at a time when a mature, frank discussion can take place.
The United States can speak out against the censorship that
accompanies this issue in Turkey and it is obvious that Turks have a
ways to go in addressing this portion of their history. However, this
resolution will only add to the perception of American foreign policy
arrogance and will only prove to be a hindrance in United States
Middle East policy.

-akp-dont-trip-them-up/

The Emory Wheel
Oct 19 2007

The Politics of Genocide

By Benjamin Van der Horst
Posted: 10/19/2007

It’s been a key tenant of political thought in the West since the
Holocaust:
If a country like the United States recognizes something as genocide –
– – acknowledges an act as the deliberate destruction of a group of
people – then we have a moral obligation to intervene and stop the
killing.
In the past few weeks, talk of genocide has been prominent in the
United States, and especially at Emory. On Tuesday, Paul Rusesabagina,
the man whose story formed the basis for the movie Hotel Rwanda, spoke
at Emory about the genocide he lived through in Rwanda in 1994. In
just three months, more than one million of Rusesabagina’s fellow
Rwandans were killed.
The United States and the rest of the West sat that atriocity out on
the sidelines, even though we knew exactly what was
happening. President Bill Clinton has said that not intervening in the
Rwandan genocide was one of the worst decisions of his presidency.
Genocide has been a hot topic nationally because of a resolution in
the United States House of Representatives that would officially
recognize the slaughter of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire during the
First World War as a genocide. Even though support for the bill has
waned in the last couple of days, last week it still managed to pass
the House Foreign Affairs Committee. This infuriated Turkey, which
strongly disputes the claims of genocide, to the point where they
recalled their American Ambassador to Ankara.
This resolution is pointless. Shame on Nancy Pelosi and the rest of
the Democratic leadership for continuing to push a bill that could
seriously impair American efforts in the Middle East.
For the first time in what seems like years, President Bush is on the
right side of an issue, encouraging Congress to vote down the
resolution.
Turkey is one of our strongest allies in the Middle East and this
resolution will harm vital American-Turkish ties to allow the
Democrats to pander to a small minority – Armenian-Americans – that
conveniently makes up a good portion of Pelosi’s district. Much of the
logistical support helping our troops in Iraq passes through or above
Turkey and if we were to lose the ability to use Turkey in the war in
Iraq, our soldiers could be put at risk.
Pelosi claims that Turkey’s status as an ally has protected them for
too long, and that the United States must call what happened a
genocide. This the Democrats’ attempt to regain the moral high ground:
Calling something that happened 90 years ago a genocide?
If Pelosi and the leaders on Capitol Hill want to actually do
something productive about genocide, I suggest they stop pandering and
do something to stop genocide today. There is still a genocide going
on in Darfur. What is Nancy Pelosi doing to stop it? She’s attempting
to win political points by focusing on a worthless resolution about
genocide that would hurt our efforts in Iraq and alienate one of our
few remaining Middle East allies.
Bravo, Madam Speaker. You’ve managed to demonstrate another way in
which the Democrats have squabbled the trust voters placed in them
last November.
Benjamin Van der Horst is a College junior from Cincinnati. He is
executive director of the nonpartisan political organization CSAmerica
and the managing editor of the Emory Political Review.

US HAS DOUBLE STANDARD AT HOME AND ABROAD
by Ivan Eland

AntiWar
Oct 18 2007

The Bush administration is attempting to soothe the Turkish
government’s apoplectic reaction to the House Foreign Affairs
Committee’s label of "genocide" on Turkey’s slaughter of 1.5 million
Armenians, which occurred almost a century ago. The administration
fears that an enraged Turkish ally, already threatening to invade
northern Iraq in order to suppress armed Turkish Kurd rebels seeking
refuge there, will also cut off U.S. access to Turkish air bases
and roads used to resupply U.S. forces in Iraq. The administration
essentially wants to allow the Turks to continue to deny a historical
fact that preceded even the existence of the current Turkish system
of government.

Similarly, the United States has never been too enthusiastic about
criticizing Japan’s denial of having used Chinese and South Korean
women as sex slaves (so-called "comfort women") during World War II.

More generally, the United States never really says too much when the
current Japanese government regularly tries to whitewash in school
textbooks the atrocious conduct of the Imperial Japanese regime before
and during World War II. Again, a principal ally who does not face
up to important historical facts is not reproved.

Yet the administration is still repeatedly bringing up Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s December 2005 denial of the historical
fact of the Jewish Holocaust at the hands of the Nazis.

That’s because the U.S. government chooses to get along a lot less
with the Iranian government than it does with the governments of Turkey
and Japan; because Israel, Iran’s nemesis, is a U.S. ally; and because
the administration can win points with its domestic Israel lobby.

In the same vein, the administration is supposed to be supporting the
expansion of democracy overseas – that’s why the United States invaded
Iraq, right? – but does so only in less friendly countries, not close
allies. The United States has pressured weaker Arab countries near
Israel to hold elections and make democratic reforms (for example,
among the Palestinians and Lebanese), but it has not pressured Israel
to remove the second-class citizenship of the Arab population living
within its borders. The administration has aided opposition forces in
Iran, even though the groups don’t want the support, while making only
halfhearted attempts to democratize its autocratic allies in Pakistan,
Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Of course, the United States doesn’t really
need to coddle despotic regimes just to win their lukewarm support
for the "war on terror," their promise not to attack Israel, or their
agreement to pump oil, which their own economic interest would cause
them to sell on the world market anyway. But neither does it need to
meddle in the internal affairs of adversaries, such as Syria and Iran.

But if the United States were to have the same standard for
all countries – both friend and foe – and join the international
community in identifying and strongly condemning all documented cases
of genocide, other war crimes, and repressive behavior, then perhaps
there would be a chance that history might not be repeated.

First though, the United States needs to clean up its own act. Other
countries may have acted terribly in the past, but U.S. citizens should
not be blinded to the sins of their own government. Since World War II,
in terms of numbers of military adventures, the United States has been
the most aggressive country in the world. And many such interventions
cannot be blamed on the need to combat international communism. Even
after the United States’ major foe – the Soviet Union – collapsed, the
U.S. expanded its informal empire and stepped up military activities
across the globe. The United States bombed Serbia and Kosovo; invaded
Panama, Afghanistan, and Iraq (twice); and intervened in Somalia,
Haiti, and Bosnia.

Furthermore, the United States has kidnapped people and illegally
rendered them to secret prisons in countries where torture is
perpetrated, or simply had the CIA or U.S. military do the honors.

These prisoners have been denied both the rights of prisoners of war
and the rights of the accused that the U.S. Constitution guarantees
– for example, their right to challenge detention using a writ of
habeas corpus. It’s likely that a substantial portion of these inmates
are innocent.

If the United States is going to criticize other countries’ behavior,
both historical and current, it should eliminate the double standard
at home and abroad and clean up its own act first.

770

POLITICS-US: TIES WITH TURKEY DODGE ONE BULLET
By Jim Lobe

IPS, Italy
Oct 19 2007

WASHINGTON, Oct 18 (IPS) – Amid rising bilateral tensions with Turkey
and strong White House pressure, the Democratic leadership of the
U.S. House of Representatives is expected to set aside a controversial
resolution recognising as a "genocide" the deaths of as many as 1.5
million Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during World War I.

While House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had vowed to force a floor vote
on the issue in the coming weeks, kept silent on the matter Thursday,
a number of key Democrats suggested that the symbolic resolution,
which passed the House Foreign Affairs Committee 27-21 on a largely
party-line vote one week ago, was, for all practical purposes, dead.

"If it came to the floor today," Rep. John Murtha, a close Pelosi
ally who was one of nearly dozen Democratic lawmakers who withdrew
their co-sponsorship of the resolution this week, said late Wednesday,
"it would not pass."

At the same time, Pelosi, a long-time champion of the resolution on
behalf of thousands of Armenian-Americans who live in her northern
California district, also conceded that she was reconsidering her
pledge to bring the resolution to the floor.

If, as now expected, Pelosi withholds the measure until at least
next year, it will mark a major victory for Turkey which, after
the Committee vote last week, recalled its ambassador here for
"consultations" as the first of a series of possible measures designed
both to convey its displeasure and, if necessary, inflict serious
damage on Washington’s position, especially in Iraq.

Of particular concern has been the possibility that Ankara might
restrict access to its airspace and, in particular, to Incirlik Air
Base in eastern Turkey, the single most important external logistics
air hub for U.S. military operations in Iraq.

Indeed, about 70 percent of all air cargo sent to Iraq passes through
or crosses Turkey, as does some 30 percent of the fuel imported to
the U.S. military and virtually of its new, heavily-armoured vehicles,
according to the Pentagon.

Turkey severed all military ties with France after its parliament voted
last year to make the denial of the Armenian "genocide" a crime, and
it did nothing to discourage speculation here during the past week that
it would take similar steps if the genocide resolution went forward.

"Having worked this issue in the last Bush administration (1989-1993),
I don’t think the Turks are bluffing," Pentagon chief Robert Gates told
reporters here Thursday shortly after meeting the defence minister
of Armenia, which has had very rocky relations with Ankara. Turkey
has enforced a virtual blockade against Armenia since the early 1990.

"I will say again it has potential to do real harm to our troops in
Iraq and would strain — perhaps beyond repair — our relationship
with a key ally in a vital region and in the wider war on terror,"
added Gates, who has been the most outspoken Cabinet-level official
opposed to the resolution.

The possibility that it might restrict the use by the U.S. military
of Turkish territory and airspace is not the only concern faced by
Washington about Ankara at the moment, however.

Increasingly frustrated by Washington’s failure to either take direct
action against Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK) guerrillas or persuade the
Iraqi or Iraqi Kurdistan governments to do so, the Turkish parliament
voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to authorise sending troops into
northern Iraq to attack PKK units based there. The vote was 507 to
19 – a margin that may have been inflated as a result of anger over
the genocide resolution.

The PKK, which is considered by the U.S. to be a terrorist group,
has mounted a series of recent deadly actions against targets inside
Turkey in recent weeks. At least 30 Turkish soldiers, police and
civilians have been killed in PKK attacks in just the past two weeks,
according to published reports.

While most analysts here and in Turkey do not expect the government of
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to order a major cross-border operation
in the near future, the fact that the parliament has now authorised
such a move makes the threat of doing so far more credible.

Iraqi Kurdistan is the one region in Iraq that has been relatively
stable — and thus has not required the presence of U.S. troops —
since the U.S. occupation of the country began in 2003.

Any significant Turkish incursion, of the kind it carried out
relatively routinely during the 1990s, could plunge the region into
turmoil at a moment when U.S. forces are already overstretched,
according to analysts here who also noted that crude oil futures
jumped to an all-time high of nearly 90 dollars a barrel after
Wednesday’s vote.

Moreover, the pesh merga — the Iraqi Kurdish militia forces
that are nominally part of the Iraqi army and security forces —
could well rally behind the PKK against the Turks in the event of a
significant cross-border attack, others noted. Indeed, thousands of
Kurds, mostly students, reportedly took part rallies to protest the
Turkish legislation in Irbil, Kurdistan’s capital, Thursday.

It is in this context that mainly Democratic lawmakers who previously
backed the Armenian genocide bill here have been reassessing their
position during the last few days.

"We need every ally we can get [in Iraq]," said Murtha, a co-sponsor
of the resolution who has since withdrawn his support. "[Turkey is]
important to our effort in Iraq. We’ve got 160,000 troops in Iraq.

This is important to the U.S. effort in Iraq, period."

"This is not the time to stick our finger in the eyes of the Turks,"
said Rep. Mike Ross, another former co-sponsor who switched his
position this week.

Turkey has been aided as well by an expensive lobbying campaign
organised and led by a former Republican speaker, Robert Livingstone,
and Richard Gephardt, who, as the former Democratic House Leader,
had co-sponsored a similar resolution. They have also been joined by
several key lawmakers considered close to the so-called Israel Lobby,
including the influential Democratic Caucus chairman, Rep. Rahm
Emmanuel.

Israel has cultivated close ties with Turkey, particularly with
its military, over the past two decades, and Turkish officials have
reportedly requested its help in lobbying against the resolution.

Against this, Armenian Americans, of whom there are an estimated 1.5
million concentrated mostly in California, face an uphill battle.

"I truly hope that no member of Congress is persuaded to jump ship
on such a critical vote as this simply because of some threats by
a foreign government," said Armenian Assembly Executive Director
Bryan Ardouny.

"The government of Turkey and its million-dollar lobbyists are
effectively blackmailing the Congress and the government of the
United States. We should stand up to the threats and demand that
Turkey immediately cease its campaign of misinformation and threats,"
he added.

15

BLATTER AND PLATINI VISIT ARMENIA

FIFA.com
Oct 17 2007

Monday 15 October. The atmosphere on board the jet taking FIFA
President Joseph S. Blatter and UEFA President Michel Platini to
Armenia is relaxed, despite the layer of fog hanging over Switzerland
which delays the take-off. Since the former French midfield maestro
took over the reins at UEFA, the governing bodies of European and
world football have begun to work together ever more closely – a fact
illustrated on a down-to-earth level by the conversations and jokes
shared by the two presidents.

A few hours later, Blatter and Platini land in Yerevan for a 24-hour
visit to inaugurate a number of Goal projects before heading off
to Azerbaijan. The Armenian capital is in the midst of an Indian
summer – ideal weather for the two Presidents to lay the keystone of
the country’s second Goal project – the National Technical Centre,
and to visit the ‘Republican Football School’. a training centre
which was built as part of Goal project I. At the inaugural dinner,
the Armenian Minister for Youth and Sports Armen Grygoryan noted
that "this was the first time that the Presidents of the two most
important governing bodies in world football had travelled together
on official business. That they should do so in Armenia is an honour
for our country."

This was music to the ears of the Swiss and the Frenchman, whose main
aim it is to show that football is one united family. They had a number
of fruitful, no-holds-barred discussions with Mr Grygoryan and Ruben
Hayrapetyan, President of the Armenian Football Federation, on such
subjects as the Sotchy Olympic Games in Russia in 2014, the stadium
in Donetsk for the UEFA EURO 2012, the recent performances of France
and Portugal and the level of domestic football in Armenia – the kind
of wide range of topics you would expect from genuine football fans.

The following morning, Messrs Blatter and Platini had an audience with
the President of Armenia, Mr Robert Kocharian, and Prime Minister Mr
Serzh Sargsyan. The head of the Armenian Republic was delighted with
"the excellent result of the national team over Serbia recently",
while the prime minister hoped that there would be a development in
"football played by the masses, as this sport is part of the school of
life". They were all in agreement with the FIFA and UEFA Presidents
who said that "the cooperation between governmental bodies and the
federation needs to carry on improving" for the good of football
in Armenia.

The various dignitaries met with representatives of Armenian football
for a typical lunch punctuated by a number of toasts before heading to
the Coaching Centre, where the foundation stone for the Goal project
II was finally laid – later than originally planned but finally
underway thanks to the determination of those in charge of Armenian
football. "This centre is not for the players currently exceeding all
expectations in the qualifiers for the EURO but for you, the youth of
the country," said Blatter to the enormous crowd of youngsters who had
come to see the Presidents of FIFA and UEFA in the flesh. "Who knows,
maybe we will see you at the World Cup in 2014 or 2018." "Armenians
are a wonderful people," added Platini. "Charles Aznavour spoke about
them in his songs and he was right."

‘Football makes us better people’ Then it was on to Goal project I –
the Malatia football school inaugurated in 2003. Some 700 youngsters
aged between 7-17 have already attended the school and learned
footballing skills within a structured environment. In Armenia,
football is in a healthy state and is still the number one sport in
the country, and when Messrs Blatter and Platini arrive, the school
is packed to the gunwales with wide-eyed youngsters.

"I played in three World Cups and scored a lot of goals, so here’s
my advice to you – anticipate, think ahead. That’s what makes you
a great player," Platini told the children. "Not everyone can grow
up to be a star like Platini," added Blatter, "but whatever happens,
football will have made you better people. It is a sport that requires
personal discipline and respect for others."

"Enjoy the game and enjoy life," concluded the FIFA President as
cheers rang out from the children and teenagers present. Then it was a
dash back to the hotel for a press conference. The Armenia-Azerbaijan
matches were of course discussed, as was the issue of foreign players
in club football, while Blatter and Platini each reiterated the
"desire of FIFA and UEFA to work together to contribute even more
to the development of countries like Armenia, who are working their
way up into the elite of football, as their recent results against
Portugal, Poland and Serbia have proved".

Twenty four hours in Armenia were enough to see how the support
provided by FIFA and UEFA is helping the development of football and
the wave of hope sweeping over the country, as well as the long road
still ahead of them.

ARMENIAN FOLLY
Helle Dale

Washington Times, DC
Oct 17 2007

A long-smoldering dispute between Turks and Armenians over events
nearly a century old has finally erupted into full flame in the
charged atmosphere of Washington politics in the shape of the Armenian
Genocide resolution. The nonbinding resolution passed the House
Committee on Foreign Affairs last week by a vote of 27-21, following
several unsuccessful attempts going back to 2000. House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi has pledged to make sure the resolution reaches the floor of
the House. If it passes, it will send shock waves throughout American
policy in the Middle East.

Maybe the problem is that the dead never really leave us. The Armenian
genocide by the Ottoman Turks took place almost a century ago, but
the ghosts of the estimated 1.5 million Armenians who lost their lives
in one of the most brutal ethnic-cleansing campaigns in history will
now haunt American efforts to create a stable and viable Iraq.

It is deeply regrettable, but rather than help right a great
historic wrong, the Armenian genocide resolution will now stand as
an egregious example of special-interest politics distorting a larger
national-security issue.

During World War I, most of Turkey’s Armenian population was driven
out of Anatolia and into the desert of Syria. There, most of them
perished from heat and thirst as they struggled to reach the area of
present-day Armenia.

What is wrong, one might ask, with officially acknowledging the
suffering and the destruction of these people? In one sense, nothing.

The history of the 20th century will not be complete until Turkey
recognizes, as Japan and Germany have, the horrors of past regimes.

Indeed, had Turkey many years ago accepted responsibility for the
sins of the past, we would not be where we are today.

The historical evidence of the genocide is solid and documented by
contemporary eyewitness accounts of foreign diplomats – which in
fact at the time caused considerable international uproar. However,
Turks even today tend react violently to any discussion of the
Armenian genocide, disputing everything from the methods to the
numbers. Turks have not been good advocates for their own cause and
have created sympathy in Europe and in the United States for the small,
impoverished Armenian nation next door to the east.

Nor did Turkey do itself much good in the opinion of many Americans,
when its parliament denied the United States the use of its airbases
for the invasion of Iraq. In Congress in particular, the argument
that Turkey is too valuable an ally to offend was severely undercut.

But the problem is that the Armenian genocide is the past — and this
is the present. As Rep. Tom Lantos correctly stated,"We have to weigh
the desire to express our solidarity with the Armenian people…

against the risk that it could cause young men and women in the uniform
of the United States armed services to pay an even heavier price."

In the present, the Armenian genocide resolution will affect
U.S. relations with Turkey, which, with all our ups and downs,
remains a vital strategic ally for the effort it Iraq.

It is through the Incirlik airbase in southeastern Turkey and through
supply routes via Turkey into northern Iraq that a majority of American
supplies and reinforcements flow.

At this point in time, stabilizing Iraq has to be the priority. In
addition to denying the United States the use of these bases, Turkey is
considering a military incursion into northern Iraq to attack Kurdish
extremist strongholds, a move the U.S. government strongly opposes.

American Armenians have pressed for the recognition of past wrongs
for a long time. They are understandably elated, but must pause to
consider the potential harm this will cause to the country that is
now their home and which has enabled them to become one of its most
prosperous ethnic communities.

Meanwhile congressional liberals are shamefully taking advantage of
a historic tragedy to achieve what they could not do otherwise,
i.e. severely hamstring the Bush administration’s efforts in
Iraq – using Turkey as the tool. California is home to the largest
Armenian community in the United States. The California congressional
delegation, including Mrs. Pelosi, has spearheaded the effort to pass
the genocide resolution.

Their strategy is clever, as well as totally unconscionable on so many
levels. Liberals of conscience, such as Mr. Lantos, ought to distance
themselves from this blow to the national interest. It serves neither
Armenians nor Americans.

Helle Dale is director of the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for
Foreign Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation. Her column appears
on Wednesdays. [email protected]

KURDS ARE U.S. REAL ALLIES IN REGION

PanARMENIAN.Net
18.10.2007 13:40 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ "The decision of the Turkish parliament to approve
incursion into northern Iraq doesn’t mean immediate action. This
decision is not unexpected," Director of the Institute of Oriental
Studies at the RA Academy of Sciences, prof. Ruben Safrastyan told
a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter.

"Erdogan’s government is free to act and it can launch operations
any moment. I do not think it will be a large-scale incursion. The
U.S. has already expressed discontent about this plan and will go on
pressing. We should not forget that Kurds are U.S. real allies in
the region. Although, judging from Erdogan’s statements, Turkey is
ready to wrangle with the U.S.," he said.

October 17, despite U.S. and NATO’s warnings, Turkish parliamentarians
okayed the government’s plans on a cross-border operation into northern
Iraq for neutralization of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party rebels.

U. S. Department of State
USINFO-ENGLISH Digest – 17 Oct 2007 to 18 Oct 2007

Congressional Nonbinding Resolutions Can Stir Passions

(Representatives use resolutions to respond to constituents’ concerns)
(835)

By Eric Green
USINFO Staff Writer

Washington — Although nonbinding resolutions by the U.S. Congress have no
force in law and often go unnoticed, they can evoke a passionate response.

Jackson Diehl, the Washington Post’s deputy editorial page editor, told
USINFO that Congress can use nonbinding resolutions as a first step in
crafting legislation.

Nonbinding resolutions have several purposes, Diehl said. Congress can use
them "just to strike a position" on an issue, to satisfy the concerns of
constituents or to put pressure on the White House about a particular
matter.

Diehl discussed a highly publicized nonbinding resolution in the U.S. House
of Representatives that would label as "genocide" the mass killing of
Armenians in the Ottoman Empire from 1915-1917.

The resolution’s main sponsor, Representative Adam Schiff of California,
has 70,000 ethnic Armenians in his Los Angeles area district. The
Democratic congressman, said Diehl, "makes no secret of the fact he’s
trying to satisfy their concerns."

Diehl said another resolution supporter, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of
California, has many Armenians in her San Francisco district. Pelosi long
has supported the resolution but had been unable to move the measure to the
House floor for a vote by the 435-member body while the Republicans held a
majority in the House of Representatives. Pelosi’s elevation to speaker —
the highest ranking member of Congress — after the 2006 U.S. midterm
elections gave the resolution’s sponsors a "new opportunity" to bring it
before the full House, said Diehl.

President Bush reiterated October 17 his call for Congress not to pass the
resolution.

"One thing Congress should not be doing is sorting out the historical
record of the Ottoman Empire," Bush said at a White House press conference.

Diehl asked in a March 5 Washington Post article if nonbinding
congressional resolutions really matter.

"Most are ignored by everyone except the special interests they are usually
directed at," Diehl wrote. But Diehl concluded that in the case of the
Armenians, the genocide resolution was important because of its
implications for U.S. foreign policy.

Congress uses several types of resolutions depending on the circumstances.
A concurrent resolution can create joint committees, authorize the printing
of congressional documents or set the date for Congress to adjourn.
Concurrent resolutions also can express the sense of Congress on many
matters of foreign and domestic policy.

In contrast, a joint resolution, passed by both chambers of Congress, if
signed by the president, carries the force of law. The 1964 Gulf of Tonkin
joint resolution, for example, led to what historians say was an expansion
of the Vietnam War.

Allan Lichtman, a professor of history at American University in
Washington, says a nonbinding resolution, like that addressing the violence
against Armenians a century ago, does not change U.S. policy "because it
does not have the force of law."

Lichtman told the Voice of America that nonbinding resolutions are common,
especially in matters in which Congress does not want to change policy or
lacks the votes needed to do so.

CONGRESSIONAL EXPERT COMMENTS

Norman Ornstein, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in
Washington, said nonbinding resolutions are all about politics.

He told USINFO that members of Congress use nonbinding resolutions in the
hope that they will affect "public opinion enough that it will have an
impact on policy."

Nonbinding resolutions are not sent to the president following
congressional approval, said Ornstein, who appears frequently on American
television as an expert commentator on politics, Congress and elections.
Rather, the resolutions are used as a "symbol" of congressional opinion or
sentiment on a matter, he said.

But symbolism is "not meaningless," Ornstein said. The Armenian
resolution, he said, was a "cheap and easy way" for members of Congress "to
express their solidarity with the Armenian people and especially with the
Armenian-American population."

Ornstein said the resolution "has been around for a long time," because of
the "significant population" of Armenian Americans in the United States.

Armenian Americans are an "extremely affluent and articulate population,"
and "they care passionately" about the killing of their people during the
Ottoman Empire, he said.

The Armenians, said Ornstein, have been pushing in the United States and
worldwide for recognition of the mass killings.

"An awful lot of Congressmen believed that what happened in 1915 to the
Armenians" involved "serious atrocities," said Ornstein. "Recognizing that
a nonbinding resolution was just symbolic, members of Congress said ‘why
not’ pass the measure," he added.

But Ornstein said symbolism has "turned into a deadly serious business"
with huge foreign policy ramifications that caused the resolution to lose
support in Congress.

It is clear, Ornstein said, that members of Congress are "starting to get
the message" that because of the volatility of the issue, the Armenian
resolution is "playing with fire."

The full text (
icle/2007/03/04/AR2007030401047.
html
) of Diehl’s article about the nonbinding Armenian resolution is available
on the Washington Post Web site.