Blue Crab Boulevard

Damaging Foolishness

The House of Representatives appears to be heading for passage of yet another non-binding resolution. This time it is not aimed at administration policy or internal politics. It isn't aimed at the US at all. It is aimed at Turkey and denounces the genocide in Armenia 92 years ago. And it is an appallingly bad political move.

Here is a debate that could occur only in Washington — a bizarre mix of frivolity and moral seriousness, of constituent pandering, far-flung history and front-line foreign policy. And that's just on the American side; in Turkey there is the painful struggle of a deeply nationalist society to come to terms with its past, and in the process become more of the Western democracy it wants to be.

Start with the pandering: Schiff, a Democrat from Los Angeles, cheerfully concedes that there are 70,000 to 80,000 ethnic Armenians in his district, for whom the slaughter of Armenians by the Young Turk regime during World War I is "anything but ancient history." Local politics also explains why a resolution that has failed numerous times in the past 20 years is suddenly looking like a juggernaut: Pelosi, of San Francisco, also has many Armenian supporters……

……Imagine the 435 members of the House, many of whom still don't know the difference between Iraqi Shiites and Sunnis, solemnly weighing whether Schiff's version of events 92 years ago in northeastern Turkey deserves congressional endorsement. But the consequences of passage could be deadly serious: To begin with, Turkey's powerful military has been hinting that U.S. access to the Incirlik air base, which plays a key role in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, could be restricted. Gul warned that a nationalist tidal wave could sweep Turkey and force the government to downgrade its cooperation with the United States, which needs Turkey's help this year to stabilize Iraq and contain Iran. Candidates in upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections could compete in their anti-American reactions.

So the same folks who think we should not be involved in Iraq now think it's fine to meddle in the affairs of an allied nation. Even if it damages US interests in the region. To do what, exactly? Strut politically, accomplishing no good and lots of potential harm? Look, I fully understand that a lot of Armenians died during that period in history, I grew up with a friend who was of Armenian descent, so I've likely known more about that period than the politicians who will posture over this whole thing. And the next president will have to live with the damage the fools in the House do with this sort of pointless gesturing. Because the resolution will do no good. None at all.

Politics, World news | Gaius Monday, 5 March , 2007

By feeblemind, Monday, 5 March , 2007 @ 9:47 am

Sounds like an excellent plan….if your goal is to see US defeated in that part of world.
By cfaller96, Monday, 5 March , 2007 @ 1:54 pm

Gaius, how is a non-binding resolution designed to pander to an ethnic community inside a certain Congressman’s district “meddl[ing] in the affairs of an allied nation?” Really, this post just seems like a silly excuse to criticize Dems.

And wasn’t that editorial really critical of the Turkish political class, because they’re getting worked up about a silly non-binding resolution?

Next time, stick to meaningful criticisms of Dems, Gaius.
By Thomas Nephew, Monday, 5 March , 2007 @ 4:50 pm

Another point is that a great number of Republicans have co-sponsored HR106, including both Diaz-Balarts, Musgrave, Rohrabacher, and Sensenbrenner.

But there’s also no inconsistency in opposing continued presence in Iraq and calling Turkey to account for its crimes against humanity. No one’s talking about *invading* Turkey, after all.

I couldn’t disagree with you more that this resolution does no good. Not passing it would be much worse. It always does good to call criminals to account for crimes, it always does harm to shy away from doing that. If there are consequences, so be it; high time they were borne by the country of Turkey, and not by Armenians waiting for justice for 3 generations.
By syn, Monday, 5 March , 2007 @ 4:56 pm

I guess this means that 92 years from now Democrats will condemn Saddam’s genocide against the people of Iraq.
By Gaius, Monday, 5 March , 2007 @ 5:39 pm

The criminals are long dead. You want inherited guilt to be passed on to today’s generation.

Think very hard about what you are demanding here. You want today’s Turks to answer for what their ancestors did.

Kind of medieval of you.
By patrick, Monday, 5 March , 2007 @ 6:30 pm

Nice straw man, buddy; no one is saying that todays Turks are guilty for what their ancestors did. They just need to acknowledge that their country has not always been innocent; it is currently illegal in Turkey to acknowledge historical events that are almost universally accepted outside the country.
I know people like you like to talk about “democracy in the middle east”; what this guy is saying is that Turkey, out of all the Middle East countries, has the best potential to evolve into a Western-style democracy IF they get over nationalism and historical myopia.
By Gaius, Monday, 5 March , 2007 @ 6:40 pm

That’s your opinion. It changes nothing, does not one bit of good and causes antagonism.

But it makes you happy.

Nice self-righteous there, buddy,
By Thomas Nephew, Monday, 12 March , 2007 @ 3:26 pm

kind of medieval of you
By way of metaphor: if great-grandpa killed someone, and then Grandpa, Dad, and I conceal that and argue it didn’t happen, then we are guilty — not of murder, but of conspiracy to obstruct justice. And to forestall one argument, statutes of limitations that apply to homicide shouldn’t to genocide.

Turkey’s present day guilt is similar. The harm done to themselves (thinking they’ve got away with murder) and others (thinking they’ll get away with it too) is similar. And yes, acknowledging guilt might lead to (wholly just) reparations to the heirs of hundreds of thousands Armenians driven from their homes, robbed, and killed (it’s estimated as many as 1.5 million died). This is not an empty exercise, it’s a crucial one.