I have no particular view on this but it's pretty funny.
« Huckabee Mania | Main | At The VA »
The Armenia Lobby
05 Mar 2007 09:02 am
Comments (28)
Wow. Commenter Matt (not the famous one) is dead-on right about Armenia's more pressing need for good relations with Turkey than symbolic recognition by the U.S. House of the genocide and about the Armenian diaspora's well-meaning-but-misdirected support for Armenian causes.
It almost passed the House in 2000, but a Clinton call to Denny Hastert called it off at the last moment.
The timing is awful. We can wag our finger at Turkey some other day. This is absurd. Let's get the hell out of Iraq first.
In a similar vein, Gavin Newsom's gay-marriage circus in 2004 was bad timing. It was great for Gavin, but hurt the Kerry campaign by magnifying the gay issue and energizing those several state initiatives that brought out the conservative vote.
Let's fight for progressive issues, but let's also be pragmatic. I'm not saying that everything should be postponed until Democrats (or whoever) are in power, but there are situations where clearly worse outcomes are in the balance (Kerry losing with the Supreme Court nominations in play, or not having the Iraq War ended). Moral posturing is often an empty, and counterproductive exercise.
The article doesn't mention one possible consequence of not passing the resolution: Ahmadinejad calling the US on its hypocrisy.
I'm not sure I get why it's so funny, but it is another example of a strange phenomenon, that "expat" ethnic communities in the US often have more "hardline" views than the people still living in "old country" (be it Israel, Armenia, Greece, etc.). What's worse is that Congress' view of what US foreign policy is then driven (as illustrated here) primarily by these US ethnic communities, and not by any larger strategy or consideration of what makes sense.
You people are morons. Turkey offers us nothing worth having. Seriously, what do they provide for us that we don't recieve and could not get from plenty of other nations? If you want to engage in actual realism, fine, but how about making an actual case for it instead of basically arguing that good relations are an end in an of themselves.
And to Quiddity, for his especially vile comment, I really only have this to say: You're the reason why the base doesn't trust the establishment. You're the kind of person that throws on faction of the coalition under the bus for a nice pat on the head for opposing those nasty "special interests" (i.e. real actual citizens). To you, it's not John Kerry's fault he lost, despite how personally weak he was or how unwilling he was to fight. It wasn't conservatives fault for putting party before country and bigotry before the future. No, it was the damned gays for making trouble. He's probably still fuming at blacks for demanding the right to live in peace and giving Nixon the whitehouse.
Yes, quiddity, you are saying that power trumps results. Just saying you aren't when the rest of your statment clearly says you are isn't really enough to counteract that. John Kerry lost because he was a balless loser who didn't attack half as viciously as he could have, and spent too much time defending himself than counter attacking. If you want to shit all over a member of this political coalition, go right ahead. Don't expect me to put up with it.
Down with the internet! Abandon all blogs!
As for the Mahmoud-inator, the US isn't denying that many Armenian civilians were killed by Turkish forces during the First World War and hosting conferences to that effect. As for the issue as a whole, the French have criminalized denying this genocide and some Euro politicians and commentators have suggested making recognition of this by the Turkihs gov a condition for entry to the EU. NOne of this is relevant except to imply some snarky "Well, you guys, like, like Europe, but you also don't think we should be in a state of total hostility with the Islamic world. I bet you feel really stupid" as opposed to the actual implication of "There is clearly no unified alliance against Cheneyismo as opposed to people just disagreeing with it."
On the question of the genocide, Armenians in Armenia definitely have strong feelings. Armenian nationalism is also very strong and very visible, with maps and people both calling the genocide zone of southeastern Turkey "western Armenia," sometimes with a "historic" qualifier. In this case, though, there's an obvious compromise, and that is to link the Armenian genocide resolution to one acknowledging and deploring the massacres of Turkicized eastern European Muslims in the late 1800's.
Turkey offers us nothing worth having. Seriously, what do they provide for us that we don't recieve and could not get from plenty of other nations?
I hear their coffee and hashish are top-rate. For people who entertain thoughts of larger purchases, they make rugs and maintain air bases.
So that's what Adam Schiff has been up to since he resigned as Manhattan D.A.
Hey soullite, go vote for Nader again!
Just wondering - did we require admission by the Germans of their role in the Holocaust before we normalized relations with them? There is a valid human rights issue here - one that the Turks do not allow to be discussed at all cost. I don't think that this is the kind of thing that should be charaterized as "funny". Maybe the resolution is misguided - maybe it isn't, but I don't think it's unreasonable to consider ways to pressure the Turks to acknowledge their aggregious human rights failures if they wish to be considered part of "the West".
I missed the funny part of the story.
Brian Ulrich: Having spent a few years in Armenia myself, I absolutely agree that Armenians in Armenia care deeply about recognition of the genocide. But that's not all they care about. They also care about the closed border with Turkey, which makes trade and travel more difficult and expensive and generally depresses the Armenian economy, which forces people to leave their homeland for work or beg from far-flung relatives. The largely-wealthy diaspora, on the other hand, has emotional ties primarily to the event that caused the diaspora, and not so much to the constant struggle it is to survive in Armenia today. If you asked the population of Armenia if they'd like a House resolution recognizing the genocide, they'd be all for it. If you asked them if they'd rather a House resolution or an open border with Turkey, I think they'd choose the open border.
JH- I'll buy that, since my experience was just a few days =)
I'm sorry but I'm going to have to call East Coast bias on you Matt, the Washington Post, and some of the comments here. I'll tell you people who wouldn't find this story "funny", the majority of Armenian-Americans who live in my apartment building, my block, my neighborhood in Los Angeles. Its not that this genocide resolution is dominating people's lives, but it the not to distant past of a large and involved segment of Southern California life, and its hard not to think about it when you look at the directory of names for some of the buildings here AND some public officials who represent the area. This isn't funny so much as an ethnic community working through elected repsentatives to achieve political goals.
My jaw dropped when I read this line:
"Friends of Turkey in Washington, from American Jewish organizations to foreign policy satraps, are working the Hill"
Is this really true? Of all people, how can Jewish organizations oppose recognizing one of the worst genocides of the 20th Century? I know Turkey is a major strategic ally of Israel, but this is shameful.
This is only tangentially related, but the murder of the Armenian journalist mentioned in the WaPo article was one of several high-profile assassinations in Turkey in recent months. In each case, the subsequent investigation found (by tracing serial numbers) that the weapon used was a Glock that was among the 400,000 originally brought into Iraq by the US for the use of Iraqi law enforcement. (Of that 400,000, only 12,000 can currently be accounted for).
this sort of thing, while perhaps good for those who have a strong interest in building and maintaining ethnic solidarity among Armenians in the US, hurts Aremnians in Armenia by causing them to have worse relations with Turkey, a country they desperately need to have good relations with if Armenia is ever to survive on anything other than selling cognac to Russia and handouts from the diaspora.
Hmm, a well-funded lobby in the U.S. supporting resolutions and policies which run directly counter to the actual interests of the country that lobby ostensibly supports? I think I've heard this one before...
Peter H,
Its called realpolitik. Turkey is a Muslim country that recognizes Israel in the Middle East and has relatively normal relations with it. Israel values that relationship highly and has taken steps in the past and will steps in the future to shore up that relationship.
I'm curious about Diehl's claim that American Jewish groups are lobbying against the resolution. What I've read indicates that some Jewish orgs have, in the past, opposed such a resolution, for fear of hurting Israel's relationship with Turkey, but that most are not opposing the current resolution.
http://www.forward.com/articles/despite-ankara-s-entreaties-groups-stay-mum-on/
bwunderlick: The point is this is a purely symbolic resolution that will accomplish two things: warm the hearts of some Armenian-Americans and piss off Turkey. It will not change the historical record, which is already clear. It will not even solidify the historical record because its a finding of fact by people who mostly don't know anything about the facts. It will not change Turkey's position on the issue, except perhaps to harden it. It is a purely political gesture for the benefit of an American interest group, which may be worth it, but you have to weigh that limited benefit against the costs.
If we think its really important for Turkey to recognize what it did or pay reparations or give land to Armenia or whatever, then we should demand that and then apply real pressure. But this kind of symbolic resolution seems like just giving Turkey the finger without actually getting anything from them except strained relations.
I totally understand what you are saying Joseph, but I wasn't talking about the resolution, I was talking about this bemused attitude about it. Your points are totally valid, but this is different then saying the resolution is silly and strange because its about something that happened a long time ago.....
I totally understand what you are saying Joseph, but I wasn't talking about the resolution, I was talking about this bemused attitude about it. Your points are totally valid, but this is different then saying the resolution is silly and strange because its about something that happened a long time ago.....
To be clear, I am very sympathetic to the Armenian cause and to educating the public about the Armenian genocide and its place in the history of the region and in American culture and especially its precedent value in establishing global indifference to genocide (the Nazis cited the Armenian genocide in justifying their actions). Its a tragic and educational history that people should be made aware of. I'm the last person to be "bemused" by the tragedy or to be impressed by Turkey's resistance. But having spent a few years in Armenia, I've been struck by how different the Armenian-American community's well-funded interests are from the poorly-funded interests of the people actually struggling to live in modern Armenia. So, when I see this resolution as the main issue brought to the U.S. Congress for consideration by the Armenian-American community, the waste of resources makes me want to scream.
I disagree with Yglesias; there's nothing at all funny about Diehl's hatchet job of an honorable goal: to make one people face up to their genocide of another. It passes my understanding what should be put off about that; it's beyond belief that should be mocked by Diehl, or laughed at by Yglesias.
In three public opinion polls conducted during 2006 for the International Republican Institute, by the Baltic Surveys Ltd. / The Gallup Organization and the Armenian Sociological Association, with funding from the United States Agency for International Development, 1200 Armenian residents were asked this question (even though it is Turkey that has closed the border)
Should the Government of Armenia agree to open the border for trade, etc. with Turkey – even if the Turkish Government does not recognize the Genocide ?
Should not open the border
May 2006 - 49%
August 2006 - 57%
Nov 2006 - 47%
Should open the border regardless
May 2006 - 42%
August 2006 - 39%
Nov 2006 - 43%
DK/NA
May 2006 - 9%
August 2006 - 4%
Nov 2006 - 10%
Comments closed March 19, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
It is funny. But it's also sad because this sort of thing, while perhaps good for those who have a strong interest in building and maintaining ethnic solidarity among Armenians in the US, hurts Aremnians in Armenia by causing them to have worse relations with Turkey, a country they desperately need to have good relations with if Armenia is ever to survive on anything other than selling cognac to Russia and handouts from the diaspora. Since those giving handouts like the influence that gives them in Armenia and the influence this campaigne gives them in the US it seems unlikely that anything worth while will happen from this.
Posted by Matt (not the famous one) | March 5, 2007 9:11 AM