| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Bush warns against Armenia bill |
| 2007-10-10 |
| President George W Bush has urged US legislators not to pass a resolution declaring the massacre of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire to be genocide. "This resolution is not the right response to these historic mass killings," he said hours before a vote by the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Such a move, already taken by France's parliament, would do "great harm" to US relations with Turkey, Mr Bush added. Turkey disputes the causes of the 1915-1917 massacre. Armenia alleges that up to 1.5 million Armenians were killed in an organised campaign to force them out of what is now eastern Turkey. That is strongly denied by Turkey which says that large numbers of Turks and Armenians were killed in the chaos surrounding World War I and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire when Armenians rose up. Turkish indignation Speaking before Mr Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the passing of the resolution would be "very problematic" for US policy in the Middle East. It could, she added, destabilise US efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan because Turkey is a main hub for US military operations in the region. Even if it passes and is then adopted by the House, the bill will not be binding. Mr Bush has made clear that he also opposes it. But the BBC's Sarah Rainsford, in Istanbul, says that this will have little impact on the reaction in Turkey. Ankara has pulled out all the stops to prevent the genocide resolution reaching Congress for a vote, she adds. Politicians have travelled to Washington to lobby lawmakers, while the country's prime minister and president have both contacted Mr Bush. Turkish President Abdullah Gul warned of "serious problems that will emerge in bilateral relations if the bill is adopted". All this comes on top of mounting anger that the US is not doing enough to counter the Kurdish separatist PKK group, which mounts deadly attacks on Turkey from inside Iraq, our correspondent says. Some Turkish analysts believe the passing of the resolution would make it harder for the Turkish government to resist public pressure to cross the border. Armenian pressure It is still extremely difficult to establish a set of undisputed facts about what happened in eastern Anatolia almost a century ago, the BBC's regional analyst Pam O'Toole says. But the issue has been kept alive by the powerful Armenian diaspora. Twice as large as the population of Armenia itself, over recent years it has stepped up efforts to get Western parliaments to recognise those events as genocide, and has even sought to link it to Turkey's efforts to join the European Union. Last year, the lower house of the French parliament declared the killings a genocide. Ankara argues that there were massacres by both sides at the time but completely rejects the allegation that there was a state policy to kill Armenians. Some Turks fear if those events are recognised as genocide, that could open the door to claims for compensation or even territory, our analyst says. Only two years ago it seemed that a long-standing taboo had been broken when academics were allowed to hold a conference in Turkey discussing the mass killings of Armenians at that time. But since then rising nationalism inside Turkey itself has effectively halted further debate, our analyst adds. |
| Posted by:anonymous5089 |
| #13 The article hints at the phrase we await: "Armenian right of return". |
| Posted by: Chuckles Jaise7272 2007-10-10 20:32 |
| #12 The Armenians were Christians, the Kurds Muslim, rjschwarz. So of course the Kurds couldn't be touched until the kaffir issue was addressed. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-10-10 19:34 |
| #11 Uprooted and moved during the middle of the winter, thus death. |
| Posted by: Heriberto Ulusomble6667 2007-10-10 17:18 |
| #10 To answer #9, because Saladin was a Kurd and the Ottomans were afraid of creating another Kurdish general who could effectively lead troops against them in Arabia. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2007-10-10 16:17 |
| #9 Historical question, why'd the Turks go after the Armenians and not the Kurds, or both. Why not do what the Soviets did and just uproot and move the folks you don't care for. Move the Armenians to Jerusalem. Get the Kurds to act as your elite soldiers in keeping the Arabs in line. Divide and conquer. The Turks really were lame Imperialists. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2007-10-10 15:34 |
| #8 I have long been dubious about the treatment in the US of the entire issue. This is because when my *grandfather* was going to college, a corrupt dean shorted the students dinner one day a week, supposedly to send money to "the starving Armenians". But it was discovered that he was pocketing the money, a fairly substantial amount. The university administration did nothing, so my grandfather did. Pretending to be a parochial student, he went to the dean's house and persuaded his gullible wife to give him several of the dean's chickens, "to help feed starving orphans." So at least for one week, the student's stolen dinner was replaced by fried chicken. Fortunately for my grandfather, the dean was smart enough to write them off. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-10-10 13:54 |
| #7 Mr. President, I for one am damn tired of your blind spot when it comes to Muslims. Why not call a genocide a genocide? Without truth, a nation is doomed. |
| Posted by: mcsegeek1 2007-10-10 13:36 |
| #6 Why are we doing this now This is not news. The bill has been struggling to get passed for decades. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-10-10 13:27 |
| #5 To caveat my above comments; if the shoe fits, wear it. |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2007-10-10 13:13 |
| #4 Maybe some you who are far better at reading the smoke signals than can enlighten me: 1) Why are we doing this now & which congress folks are spear heading it (that should tell the ulterior motives or not)? 2) What's the significance if our country says it was a genocide? Turkey can tell us to kiss their *ss publicly but then still do business as usual behind the scenes. 3) The bill's not binding, so what does it really mean if it even passes the senate? side note: Seems there are 22 other countries that recognized this as a genocide to include, Poland, Russia, & Soviet Canuckistan |
| Posted by: Broadhead6 2007-10-10 13:10 |
| #3 In George's Dhimmi mind Muslims never commit genocide. What an asswhip. |
| Posted by: Icerigger 2007-10-10 13:03 |
| #2 Congress, If there's no problem, create one. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-10-10 13:00 |
| #1 Please shut up, George. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-10-10 12:59 |