Spring is approaching and that means that all Turkish and Armenian eyes are again focused on Washington D.C. The question is the same every year: will the U.S. Congress adopt a resolution labeling the 1915 killings of Armenians as genocide and will, if that happens, the American president use the G-word in his traditional speech on April 24, the day the world commemorates the tragic events? Until now, the outcome of all the excitement has also been the same each year. It does not happen.
In the past, a resolution was adopted on the committee level several times but never made it to the floor of the House. Turkey lobbied frantically against the adoption of such a statement and in the end, the U.S. president used his influence on the deputies to take the issue off the agenda. The most important argument used by both governments is that the U.S. needs Turkey strategically and cannot afford to create a major incident between the two countries that would put American policy in Iraq or Afghanistan in danger. It is one of the most blatant examples of successful arm-twisting that always leaves a bad taste with many who feel the blackmailing is not the best way to deal with this historic legacy.
This year probably won’t be much different. Having spent some days in Washington last week, it seems clear the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs tomorrow will vote in favor of a resolution. There is some speculation whether or not the Barack Obama administration will use its leverage to stop it from being adopted by the Congress. Most probably, it will because, indeed, the U.S. desperately needs Turkey’s help in getting its soldiers out of Iraq.
On top of that, Turkey has already threatened that the rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia of last year could suffer a fatal blow. The protocols between the two countries are one of the few foreign policy successes of the Obama government. So why put even that meager result in danger? Nothing new, it seems. Turkey, again, will manage to bulldozer its way out of this problem.
Still, I propose a different strategy this time around. First, why not use, for a change, the good arguments against such a resolution? Why should politicians, who overall have no expertise on the history of the 1915 tragedy, speak out on an issue that is still hotly disputed by historians? Leave it to the latter. Even more importantly, Obama taking sides on this highly controversial issue for Turkey will undoubtedly be counterproductive. The growing number of Turks who are willing to openly discuss the events of that era will be silenced once again. The ones who keep on denying any wrongdoing will be strengthened by what will be seen by many as an unfortunate outside intervention in a debate that should be held between and among Turks.
After years of discussing this issue in Europe, I am convinced that these arguments could potentially convince many politicians, also in the U.S., not to interfere in what should basically be a domestic argument. It is the single most important reason why the European Parliament since 2006 has refrained from using the G-word.
Next to these arguments, there is another positive step that the Turkish government could make to persuade American legislators. That would be to stop blaming the Armenians for slowing down the process of ratification of the protocols.
Let’s be fair: it was Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan who, immediately after signing, made the adoption dependant on Armenia giving in to Azeri demands on Karabakh. No one else put up this formidable hurdle. If the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, really wants zero problems with its eastern neighbor, it should stop making this link that, anyway, has not worked since 1993 and that clearly goes against the spirit of the protocols.
If you have the choice, why not use good arguments instead of threats that, one day, will come back to haunt you.
Joost Lagendijk/Hurriyet Daily News
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
