A COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION MODEL FOR ALLEGATIONS ON ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

At the session on Oct. 10, 2007, the US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs endorsed the resolution proposed by California Representative Mr. Schiff and his colleagues on Jan. 30, 2007, by 27 against 21.

Following the decision, Turkish President Abdullah Gül made an official statement where he noted that the unacceptable decision by the Committee on Foreign Affairs was simply invalid for Turkish people. I think that this statement implies that Turkey will refrain from taking concrete steps that would seriously affect bilateral relations with the US. In the presidential statement, it is also noted that some politicians considered domestic political calculations when dealing with serious international issues. This part of the statement can also be taken as a lenient approach to the US administration. Obviously the presidential statement did not make references to probable sanctions simply because the president is not an executive actor. However, even the statement by the Foreign Ministry contained a simple condemnation and noted that the Armenian approach to maintain dialogue was the right approach.

Meanwhile, Parliament deputy Egemen Ba???, who had meetings with the House of Representatives in Washington to prevent the adoption of the resolution, said the rise of the number of representatives who opposed the resolution to 21 was satisfactory. Ba???’s lenient approach is worth consideration. These statements show that Turkey will not consider a package that contains serious measures that would cause deterioration of relations with the US at least until the draft resolution is taken to the agenda of the House of Representatives. The messages delivered by the US which urged Turkey not to take immediate steps should also be viewed from this perspective. The statement by the US administration noting that the administration would exert the maximum effort to prevent the adoption of the resolution in Congress points to the same reality.  However, the statements do not change the fact that the Armenian genocide resolution will remain on the agenda of the US for at least a month.

At the next step, the decision already taken on the Armenian resolution will be taken to the House of Representatives in a week and voted upon in mid-November. There is little chance that the resolution will be rejected at this stage as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi aligned with the Armenian lobby and put pressure on the Democratic members to ensure the passage of the proposed resolution. Therefore, if the resolution is forwarded to the House agenda, most probably the 226 members who already signed the resolution will vote for it, while the consent of just 218 will suffice for its adoption.

US foreign policy to be shaped under proposed resolution

It is imperative for Turkey to consider the draft with determination and inform the US administration and public of its probable consequences. Some commentators’ emphasis on the non-binding character of the resolution is misleading and shows that the content of the proposal was not reviewed carefully. Above all, referring to the non-binding quality of the draft resolution might lead to a misunderstanding that it would not be a problem for Turkey at all. However, the draft calls on the president to consider this a legal tool in determination of foreign policy. It also asks the president to declare April 24 a commemoration day for the Armenian genocide and deliver a message noting that 1.5 million Armenians were systematically and deliberately exterminated in 1915 every year on that date. More importantly, the Republic of Turkey is directly held responsible for the so-called genocide. This implies that the draft resolution will open the door for demands of compensation and reparations from Turkey if it is adopted by the full House. In fact, Armenians have already launched a legal war through lawsuits filed with American and French insurance companies. The willingness of the insurance companies to respond to the Armenian demands and resort to friendly settlements is an important success for the Armenian lobbies. It should also be recalled that Armenians ensured the adoption of a binding bill at the French Parliament, following a non-binding resolution in 2001, and that a binding draft proposal is waiting before the Belgian Parliament for final approval. Parliaments of other countries will surely follow suit if the US Congress adopts the present draft resolution. This will make Turkey and the Turkish nation the second nation that committed the crime of genocide. However, the opened archives and the publicized documents demonstrate that Turkey has been subjected to a lynching campaign. There is plenty of information on the Web site of the Turkish Historical Society (TTK).

Our unknown and right theses

Obviously, it would be naïve to think that the draft resolution passed by the US Committee on Foreign Affairs is a simple decision with no binding effect. Reluctance to recognize the draft will have serious consequences. The Turkish government should make a statement immediately and declare the adoption of a package of concrete measures. We should proceed in accordance with the remarks by Democratic Senator Sherman, who noted that Turkish Republic would go back to a normal state of affairs following a few days of anger and protest, which would mean that we accept our indifference to the case. For this reason, concrete steps should be taken from now on to prevent adoption of the resolution and a national action plan should be implemented. As a historian, I hold that explaining the flaws of the draft and the historical facts should be included in our priorities. The signatory congressmen noted that they believe there was commission of an Armenian genocide. They also note that Turkey did not explicitly forward its own theses against the allegations.

At this point, I would like to review the measures voiced by some academics and the opposition. Clearly, the most exciting way to retaliate would be to close down the Incirlik military base. Obviously, it is not possible to take such a move because of NATO agreements. Moreover, this would also negatively affect Turkey’s strategic importance and considerations. The readiness of the US to launch a base in northern Iraq is ignored. However, it is also known that the use of the base by the US is beyond the limits of and framework drawn by the relevant NATO agreements. Therefore, it seems reasonable to restrict the use of the base by the US in the operations in regards to Iraq. No doubt, this will be an effective measure in the short run as the Incirlik base is more appropriate than the others in the region for the US for logistical purposes. It is still strategically important for the US military presence in Iraq.

Although the proposal to withdraw the Turkish troops in Lebanon and Afghanistan seems to be very reasonable, its impact on the American congressmen is pretty doubtful simply because the Democratic members already oppose Bush’s operations in these countries. Therefore, withdrawal from Lebanon and Afghanistan would help the Democrats, who want President Bush to be put in a difficult position. Moreover, the presence of Turkish troops in both countries to combat terrorism would contribute to Turkey’s image in Western public opinion. Withdrawing Turkish soldiers from the terrorist battleground would lead to accusations against Turkey and undermine its effectiveness inside NATO. This could lead to isolation of Turkey from the world. It would be difficult for an isolated country to publicize its arguments. As an academic who witnessed the negative atmosphere against Turkey when the famous March 1 motion was rejected by the Turkish Parliament, I strongly believe that any steps to be taken should not isolate the country from the world. I uphold that refraining from being included in the US plans regarding the Middle East would mean destruction of our strategic importance by our own hands.

We have learned from past experience that calls for boycotting the countries which passed laws that supported the Armenian allegations were fruitless. To this end, it should be pointed out that closing down the Habur border gate may cause increasing Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) influence over the people in the region, who would suffer from unemployment in connection with this move.

Therefore, the short-term measures to prevent the engagement by the House of Representatives in the Armenian genocide resolution should be directed against Armenia and the Armenian diaspora rather than the US. I personally believe that the persons and the institutions rather than the countries should be targeted within the struggle against the Armenian lobbies. My proposal is to activate measures against Armenia first. Unlike the demands by some circles and the EU, opening the borders to ensure Armenia’s participation in dialogue activities should be discarded. Turkey should implement the policy of isolation more harshly. The illegal workers coming from Armenia to Turkey should be deported. This move will lead the Armenians living in Armenia to react against the diaspora. Based on my personal observations, Armenian people oppose direct involvement of the diaspora in the rule of the country and its growing influence in domestic politics. Many Armenians I have talked to said the diaspora moved Turkey to adopt harsher policies vis-à-vis Armenia and caused pricing increases in the housing and real estate market. Within the same strategy, persons and institutions working in or for the Armenian lobbies should be declared persona non grata and should be included on Turkey’s black list. The Armenian behavior in response to the appointment of an ambassador who declared he did not recognize the Armenian genocide to Yerevan should be a prime example for us. For this reason, the only way to ensure that the Armenian genocide resolution is not adopted in the US and other countries is to implement a comprehensive action plan and promotion schedule.

All expat Turks should be assembled within the Turkish Promotion Foundation or another civil society organization. Permanent committees should be established in all countries and these committees should have a goal of combating the actions that would undermine Turkey’s image. Businessmen and other sources should allocate substantial funding to these organizations. These committees should be independent yet accountable to Parliament for their budgetary affairs. However, use of the funds should be subjected to the tender law. The committees’ main goals should include translation work, employment of researchers, establishment of different institutes, support of existing institutes, granting scholarships and establishment of think tanks. The number of centers working on the Armenian question should be increased in Turkey. The TTK should be restructured. Recall that allegations of the Pontus and Assyrian genocides will follow if the resolution is adopted. Unless harsh measures are not taken against the resolution in the US, the draft bills on the Pontus and Assyrian genocides will be discussed in the parliaments of different countries.  If the above measures are implemented, Turkey’s proposal to appoint a joint commission of historians which will address the Armenian question will be better explained. I think that this proposal is the best maneuver of Turkey vis-à-vis the Armenian allegations. Unfortunately, this initiative was not adequately promoted and the Armenian lobbies took the drafts that penalized the denial of Armenian genocide to the parliaments of different countries to render this proposal ineffective. Our media and universities failed to effectively respond to these attempts that destroyed the environment of free speech. This indecisiveness and lack of planning culminated in the adoption of the draft by the Committee on Foreign Affairs simply because those hostile to Turkey had gone unpunished and unsanctioned up to that point. Armenia is hiding the fact that it illegally holds 20 percent of Azeri territories under occupation by keeping the genocide allegations alive. The government should work to abort this plan and develop a state policy accordingly.

*Kemal Çicek is a professor in the department of history at Karadeniz Technical University