EXPLAINING THE FATE OF THE 'GENOCIDE RESOLUTION'

The past few weeks have shown a dramatic turn around in one of the most contentious issues facing American-Turkish relations: the so-called Armenian Genocide resolution.  After the Oct. 10 vote in the Committee of Foreign Affairs, it looked like the resolution was on a path towards a general vote in the House of Representatives.  Turkish officials were outraged, and sympathetic Americans railed against the measure on the floor of Congress.  Then, all of a sudden, the resolution found its support decreasing, as many Representatives, including co-sponsors began to drop out. From outside Congress, this seemed like a dramatic and sudden turn around.  The media seemed to lack a cohesive explanation, and other stories, mostly surrounding Turkey's southern border, distracted from the issue.

  On the surface it looks like that if this resolution were ever going to succeed it would have been now; the Speaker of the House, who sets its agenda, is Nancy Pelosi. She is from California, a state that has a substantial and powerful Armenian constituency.  Yet discussions with three leaders in congress, Congresswoman Kay Granger (R-Texas), Congressman Ed Whitfield (R-Kentucky) and Congressman Robert Wexler (D-Florida), reveals why this resolution needed to be defeated and the multifaceted effort that was executed to ensure that it was  efforts taken by both those in Turkey and the US.

  These discussions revealed that on the larger scale Turkey's reaction was extremely important.  Initially many criticized Turkey for the threatened actions, which would weaken both the U.S. and Turkey itself.  However, as Rep. Whitfield points out "while it sounds tough, Turkey was right to speak out, there is no reason for [the resolution] to pass. Prime Minister Erdo?an is a mature and measured leader, and I believe he wouldn't put our continued work together at risk." 

  Turkey's aggressive reaction, which included governmental threats accompanied by civilian protests, demonstrated the importance of the issue in Turkey, an importance of which many in the U.S. were unaware.

  The measure was also opposed by informed and powerful figures within the American foreign relations community. "The resolution has been opposed in a letter from all living Secretaries of State, and three Secretaries of Defense, that is a diverse group of people, and I think it took a lot of my colleagues by surprise," said Rep. Whitfield.  A point further supported by Congresswoman Granger: "Many in congress think that because it's just a resolution and doesn't have any action attached to it, they don't see it as important as it is, to take action against an ally." She goes on to highlight how the legislative nature of the resolution led to a more flippant approach to the issue, "If you don't understand how it's viewed in Turkey it's easy to think it's not such a big deal  I mean we pass resolutions to congratulate sports teams."

How the change came?

  The fact that the Turkish reaction took many in Congress who originally supported the resolution by surprise opened the door to begin the process of changing their minds.  However, supporters really began to drop after action taken by their fellow Representatives. As Granger commented, "A lot of people worked very hard to change our colleagues' minds, literally one by one when needed."

  Congressmen like Robert Wexler made a point to demonstrate how important it is to preserve the two nations' "strategic partnership," saying, "My sense is that most people have great empathy for the tragedy and suffering of the Armenian community but they understand [Congress members'] first priority is to protect American lives and anything that disrupts the safety of the troops, like this resolution might, will make them stop and ask 'why are we doing this?'" The combination of all these collective efforts makes it look like the resolution has been defeated for now.

  While it is unlikely that the resolution will be called to vote anytime soon, the prospect is not entirely removed:  "The resolution has been around forever, it's one of the reasons we formed the Turkish caucus in Congress," Granger said.

  The U.S. and Turkish relationship has been strained, regardless of whether the resolution is ever called to vote.  While the governments of the two nations have had several high-ranking meetings in the past weeks and are collectively ushering in a new phase of their relationship, the potential lasting damage from the resolution is its effects on popular sentiment.

  With Turkish opinions of America already at an all time low, this most recent incident is only salting a wound that has already been in need of treatment for sometime, a sentiment best summed up by Congressman Whitfield: "Turkey is a vital part on our war on terror and a key diplomatic ally, but what's more important than all that is the relationship between the two nations, and the two peoples. We need to stop thinking these relations matter only when there is a crisis."

* David Merahn is with the BAC Military Science.