Alienating a Key Ally over an Apology

Apparently the Democratic controlled congress has too much free time on its hands. Instead of balancing budgets, cutting wasteful spending, or working together to improve national security, congress is busy rewriting history and passing judgment on historical events that occurred 90 years ago. Such frivolous behavior is problematic enough by itself, but in their ill-advised foray into historical revisionism, congressional Democrats are needlessly and recklessly jeopardizing diplomatic and military relations with a crucial ally in the War on Terror: Turkey.

A resolution regarding Turkey's alleged genocide of Armenians between 1915 and 1923 sponsored and shepherded through committee by Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff has angered Turkish President Abdullah Gul sufficiently that he wrote a letter to President Bush warning that passage of the resolution would cause “serious problems” between the U.S. and Turkey. As the future of Iraq hangs in the balance and Turkey is expected to have significant involvement in the political and territorial viability of Iraq, the timing of a resolution designed to do nothing more than prick an ally in a sensitive and presently irrelevant area could not be worse. The State Department is working overtime attempting to repair the damage House Democrats seem determined to continue inflicting on U.S.-Turkey relations and has condemned the Schiff resolution.

The Democratic resolution passed by the House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday in a 27-21 vote seeks to placate Armenian-Americans, who, in collaboration with Armenians throughout the world, have long insisted that the forced deportation of 2 million Armenians from the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1923 was actually a “systematic” and “deliberate” genocide that killed 1.5 million Armenians. Ottoman Turks at the time and the current Turkish population disputed Armenian claims of an organized plan for genocide. Turkish and Armenian casualties from violence between the two peoples during that period are estimated to number in the hundreds of thousands.

Congressman Schiff claimed that America has a “compelling historical and moral reason” to label the Armenian deaths officially as genocide. Conveniently, Schiff did not explain what will be accomplished in 2007 by re-labeling events that took place 90 years ago. Other than to give in to the demands of a special interest group and anger the current Turkish government and citizenry who had nothing to do with deportations or alleged genocide, there appears to be no purpose for the resolution.

Does the resolution demand that Turkey pay damage settlements to the victims’ families? No. Does it demand that the alleged perpetrators of genocide be turned over to an international court at The Hague for prosecution? No, of course, because everyone involved is long since deceased. Does it offer any recommendations for preventing future “genocide” between Turks and Armenians? No, because the demographics and political boundaries have altered so significantly since the World War I era that the factors that led to deportations or alleged genocide no longer exist. It is a vengeful document that cannot even provide its bitter supporters with their desired pound of Turkish flesh.

CNN coverage of the dispute included key paragraphs that put the issue in its present-day historical context:

Meanwhile Turkey's ambassador to the U.S., Nabi Sensoy, said the resolution would be a "very injurious move to the psyche of the Turkish people," predicting that its passage would create a backlash in his country.

The vote was also strongly criticized by Turkish newspapers, The Associated Press reported. "Bill of hatred," said Hurriyet's front page, while Vatan's headline read "27 foolish Americans.

The U.S. embassy in Ankara warned Americans there to brace for possible anti-American demonstrations.

Turkish protests come with relations between Washington and Ankara already tense amid Turkish military and political preparations for a possible strike into northern Iraq in response to recent attacks by Kurdish militants.

…Last year France voted to make it a crime to deny that the killings constituted genocide, causing the Turkish government to cut its military ties with the country.

The issue pressed by Armenians is similar to the debate over slave reparations in the United States. Some states have issued official apologies for the slave trade, but historically, what results from such official declarations, condemnations, or apologies? Are the descendants of slaves any less bitter or any more forgiving or placated by these official pronouncements? Other than a “Gotcha” moment and a fleeting feeling of satisfaction from getting one’s point across, nothing substantive or historically relevant occurs.

Holding modern day Turks responsible for alleged genocide 90 years in the past is just as unfair and pointless as demanding that Americans who never owned slaves and whose ancestors fought to free them in the Civil War pay slave reparations 150 years after slavery was abolished. The fact that it existed is horrible and was a stain upon our nation. Fortunately Abraham Lincoln and many others recognized that and much blood was spilled to cleanse the stain. Likewise, even if it were proven conclusively that the Ottoman Empire deliberately killed a large number of Armenians, it would be a stain on an empirical government that could not be cleansed because it disappeared into the annals of history.

Bitterness and ethnic vengeance are not healthy and create nothing productive. Rather than working as enablers of discord, animosity, and blame, congress should work to ensure that present day Armenia and Turkey have good relations and are not on a course destined for conflict, verbal or otherwise. The current Turkish government has offered to conduct a joint investigation of the genocide claims and establish basic diplomatic ties to Armenia. The offer is a gesture of goodwill and would develop diplomatic relations that presently do not exist between the two nations.

Congress should not engage itself in debates over historical events or pass resolutions accepting one people’s version of history simply because they immigrated to America in large numbers and have a louder voice than those they accuse. We reiterate that in the context of today’s Middle East, the question of whether an alleged genocide occurred during World War I is largely irrelevant because there is no conceivable action that can be taken to redress the grievances of those who claim to have been wronged.

We do not suggest that any nation be granted immunity from scrutiny simply because it is currently an ally in the War on Terror. If the modern Turkish government were accused of genocide, such a claim should be given our full attention and an international investigation should ensue. However, such is not the case. Turkey as it exists today is not accused of any such crimes, and is sensitive to any international effort to portray Turks as a genocidal nation. Alienating an ally because its government may have been involved in a serious crime 90 years ago is a high price to pay for providing Armenians with a few moments of international sympathy. Only those with some degree of familiarity with the logistics of the Iraq War and the War on Terror comprehend fully how important Turkey is to our efforts. Ultimately our relationship with Turkey far outweighs any need for historical condemnations, apologies, or labels.

Congress has far more pressing matters to attend to than rewriting the history of a disputed event that appears likely to be resolved through diplomatic and investigative efforts.

Technorati Tags:
Turkey, Armenia, Genocide, Ottoman Empire, Young Turks, Adam Schiff, House Resolution

Truman Best Expressed Bush's Iraq Vision

Critics of the Bush administration in both parties argue that the president has done a poor job of explaining to the American people what we are trying to accomplish in Iraq, why it is necessary, and how much sacrifice might be required to achieve victory and preserve Iraqi democracy. The president and his cabinet members have certainly made plenty of speeches in which these questions are superficially addressed, but it is clear that either through selective media coverage or a national epidemic of Attention Deficit Disorder, Americans, particularly the anti-war Democrats, continually fail to grasp what is at stake in Iraq. President Bush is a plain-speaking man, but his speech writers have done him an enormous disservice by shunning Truman-like bluntness for nuanced platitudes that lost their effectiveness immediately after the president’s initial war address to the nation in 2003. This practice has only worsened as the president has sought to explain why America must continue in Iraq and why setting timetables for withdrawal is a dangerous idea. Phrases such as “embolden our enemies” and “fight them over there so we won’t have to fight them here” are true, but one can only use them so many times before repetition renders them rote and predictable.

It’s not as if the White House speech writers were lacking available material from which to draw inspiration or to be used as templates. Unfortunately, they overlooked a speech delivered by the plainest of plain-speaking presidents, Harry Truman to a joint session of Congress on March 12, 1947. President Truman had received urgent pleading requests from Greece and Turkey for military and economic assistance in the face of Soviet aggression and internal chaos and terrorism. The free governments of both nations faced overthrow by radicals (communists), and Britain, ravaged by World War II, simply lacked sufficient resources to support either nation. Truman came to the realization that if democratically elected governments in Greece and Turkey were to survive, and the peoples of those nations to remain free, America had to come to their rescue, with or without UN assistance. The similarities to the situations in Greece and Turkey and the status of Iraq are remarkably clear. President Bush’s speechwriters should have read Truman’s address to Congress in which he established what became the Truman Doctrine and substituted “Greece” or “Turkey” with “Iraq.” Had they done so, they would have discovered that the best explanation for why we must win in Iraq was offered in 1947 in far more bluntly eloquent language than any set forth by President Bush.

The Truman Doctrine address to Congress requested $400 million in military and economic assistance for Greece and Turkey. I invite readers to substitute “Greece,” “Greek,” or “Turkey” with “Iraq” or “Iraqi.” If readers will do this, they will be armed with the most effectively communicated verbal defense of America’s continued engagement in Iraq. Of particular note, you will observe that both Greece and Turkey faced internal terrorism and concerted efforts to discredit and destroy their elected governments. Iraq faces those same perils and has pleaded for our continued support, but no one in 1947 claimed that Greece and Turkey were embroiled in “civil wars” and neither is Iraq today a civil war despite Democratic claims to the contrary. I want to draw out one sentence in case readers do not take the time to read the address; “It must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures." That policy fits precisely what is occurring in Iraq.

And now, by substituting "Iraq" for "Greece" or "Turkey," travel back in time to 1947, when Truman explained, appropriately for this Memorial Day weekend, why we fight:

Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Congress of the United States:

The gravity of the situation which confronts the world today necessitates my appearance before a joint session of the Congress. The foreign policy and the national security of this country are involved.

One aspect of the present situation, which I wish to present to you at this time for your consideration and decision, concerns Greece and Turkey. The United States has received from the Greek government an urgent appeal for financial and economic assistance. Preliminary reports from the American economic mission now in Greece and reports from the American ambassador in Greece corroborate the statement of the Greek government that assistance is imperative if Greece is to survive as a free nation.

I do not believe that the American people and the Congress wish to turn a deaf ear to the appeal of the Greek government.

Greece is not a rich country. Lack of sufficient natural resources has always forced the Greek people to work hard to make both ends meet. Since 1940, this industrious and peace-loving country has suffered invasion, four years of cruel enemy occupation, and bitter internal strife.

When forces of liberation entered Greece they found that the retreating Germans had destroyed virtually all the railways, roads, port facilities, communications and merchant marine. More than a thousand villages had been burned. Eighty-five percent of the children were tubercular. Livestock, poultry and draft animals had almost disappeared. Inflation had wiped out practically all savings.

As a result of these tragic conditions, a militant minority, exploiting human want and misery, was able to create political chaos which, until now, has made economic recovery impossible.

Greece is today without funds to finance the importation of those goods which are essential to bare subsistence. Under these circumstances the people of Greece cannot make progress in solving their problems of reconstruction. Greece is in desperate need of financial and economic assistance to enable it to resume purchases of food, clothing, fuel and seeds. These are indispensable for the subsistence of its people and are obtainable only from abroad. Greece must have help to import the goods necessary to restore internal order and security, so essential for economic and political recovery.

The Greek government has also asked for the assistance of experienced American administrators, economists and technicians to insure that the financial and other aid given to Greece shall be used effectively in creating a stable and self-sustaining economy and in improving its public administration.

The very existence of the Greek state is today threatened by the terrorist activities of several thousand armed men, led by communists, who defy the government's authority at a number of points, particularly along the northern boundaries. A commission appointed by the United Nations Security Council is at present investigating disturbed conditions in northern Greece and alleged border violations along the frontier between Greece on the one hand and Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia on the other.

Meanwhile, the Greek government is unable to cope with the situation. The Greek army is small and poorly equipped. It needs supplies and equipment if it is to restore the authority of the government throughout Greek territory. Greece must have assistance if it is to become a self-supporting and self-respecting democracy.
The United States must supply that assistance. We have already extended to Greece certain types of relief and economic aid, but these are inadequate.

There is no other country to which democratic Greece can turn.

No other nation is willing and able to provide the necessary support for a democratic Greek government.

The British government, which has been helping Greece, can give no further financial or economic aid after March 31. Great Britain finds itself under the necessity of reducing or liquidating its commitments in several parts of the world, including Greece.

We have considered how the United Nations might assist in this crisis. But the situation is an urgent one requiring immediate action, and the United Nations and its related organizations are not in a position to extend help of the kind that is required.

It is important to note that the Greek government has asked for our aid in utilizing effectively the financial and other assistance we may give to Greece, and in improving its public administration. It is of the utmost importance that we supervise the use of any funds made available to Greece; in such a manner that each dollar spent will count toward making Greece self-supporting, and will help to build an economy in which a healthy democracy can flourish.

No government is perfect. One of the chief virtues of a democracy, however, is that its defects are always visible and under democratic processes can be pointed out and corrected. The government of Greece is not perfect. Nevertheless it represents 85 percent of the members of the Greek Parliament who were chosen in an election last year. Foreign observers, including 692 Americans, considered this election to be a fair expression of the views of the Greek people.

The Greek government has been operating in an atmosphere of chaos and extremism. It has made mistakes. The extension of aid by this country does not mean that the United States condones everything that the Greek government has done or will do. We have condemned in the past, and we condemn now, extremist measures of the right or the left. We have in the past advised tolerance, and we advise tolerance now.

Greece's neighbor, Turkey, also deserves our attention.

The future of Turkey as an independent and economically sound state is clearly no less important to the freedom-loving peoples of the world than the future of Greece. The circumstances in which Turkey finds itself today are considerably different from those of Greece. Turkey has been spared the disasters that have beset Greece. And during the war, the United States and Great Britain furnished Turkey with material aid.

Nevertheless, Turkey now needs our support.

Since the war Turkey has sought financial assistance from Great Britain and the United States for the purpose of effecting that modernization necessary for the maintenance of its national integrity.

That integrity is essential to the preservation of order in the Middle East.

The British government has informed us that, owing to its own difficulties, it can no longer extend financial or economic aid to Turkey.

As in the case of Greece, if Turkey is to have the assistance it needs, the United States must supply it. We are the only country able to provide that help.

I am fully aware of the broad implications involved if the United States extends assistance to Greece and Turkey, and I shall discuss these implications with you at this time.

One of the primary objectives of the foreign policy of the United States is the creation of conditions in which we and other nations will be able to work out a way of life free from coercion. This was a fundamental issue in the war with Germany and Japan. Our victory was won over countries which sought to impose their will, and their way of life, upon other nations.

To ensure the peaceful development of nations, free from coercion, the United States has taken a leading part in establishing the United Nations. The United Nations is designed to make possible lasting freedom and independence for all its members. We shall not realize our objectives, however, unless we are willing to help free peoples to maintain their free institutions and their national integrity against aggressive movements that seek to impose upon them totalitarian regimes. This is no more than a frank recognition that totalitarian regimes imposed on free peoples, by direct or indirect aggression, undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the security of the United States.

The peoples of a number of countries of the world have recently had totalitarian regimes forced upon them against their will. The government of the United States has made frequent protests against coercion and intimidation, in violation of the Yalta agreement, in Poland, Rumania and Bulgaria. I must also state that in a number of other countries there have been similar developments.

At the present moment in world history nearly every nation must choose between alternative ways of life. The choice is too often not a free one.

One way of life is based upon the will of the majority, and is distinguished by free institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom from political oppression.
The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority forcibly imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a controlled press and radio, fixed elections and the suppression of personal freedoms.

I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.

I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way.

I believe that our help should be primarily through economic and financial aid which is essential to economic stability and orderly political processes.

The world is not static, and the status quo is not sacred. But we cannot allow changes in the status quo in violation of the Charter of the United Nations by such methods as coercion, or by such subterfuges as political infiltration. In helping free and independent nations to maintain their freedom, the United States will be giving effect to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

It is necessary only to glance at a map to realize that the survival and integrity of the Greek nation are of grave importance in a much wider situation. If Greece should fall under the control of an armed minority, the effect upon its neighbor, Turkey, would be immediate and serious. Confusion and disorder might well spread throughout the entire Middle East.

Moreover, the disappearance of Greece as an independent state would have a profound effect upon those countries in Europe whose peoples are struggling against great difficulties to maintain their freedoms and their independence while they repair the damages of war.

It would be an unspeakable tragedy if these countries, which have struggled so long against overwhelming odds, should lose that victory for which they sacrificed so much. Collapse of free institutions and loss of independence would be disastrous not only for them but for the world. Discouragement and possibly failure would quickly be the lot of neighboring peoples striving to maintain their freedom and independence.

Should we fail to aid Greece and Turkey in this fateful hour, the effect will be far reaching to the West as well as to the East.

We must take immediate and resolute action.

I therefore ask the Congress to provide authority for assistance to Greece and Turkey in the amount of $400 million for the period ending June 30, 1948. In requesting these funds, I have taken into consideration the maximum amount of relief assistance which would be furnished to Greece out of the $350 million which I recently requested that the Congress authorize for the prevention of starvation and suffering in countries devastated by the war.

In addition to funds, I ask the Congress to authorize the detail of American civilian and military personnel to Greece and Turkey, at the request of those countries, to assist in the tasks of reconstruction, and for the purpose of supervising the use of such financial and material assistance as may be furnished. I recommend that authority also be provided for the instruction and training of selected Greek and Turkish personnel.

Finally, I ask that the Congress provide authority which will permit the speediest and most effective use, in terms of needed commodities, supplies and equipment, of such funds as may be authorized.

If further funds, or further authority, should be needed for purposes indicated in this message, I shall not hesitate to bring the situation before the Congress. On this subject the executive and legislative branches of the government must work together.

This is a serious course upon which we embark.

I would not recommend it except that the alternative is much more serious. The United States contributed $341 billion toward winning World War II. This is an investment in world freedom and world peace.

The assistance that I am recommending for Greece and Turkey amounts to little more than 1 tenth of 1 percent of this investment. It is only common sense that we should safeguard this investment and make sure that it was not in vain.

The seeds of totalitarian regimes are nurtured by misery and want. They spread and grow in the evil soil of poverty and strife. They reach their full growth when the hope of a people for a better life has died. We must keep that hope alive.

The free peoples of the world look to us for support in maintaining their freedoms.

If we falter in our leadership, we may endanger the peace of the world -- and we shall surely endanger the welfare of our own nation.

Great responsibilities have been placed upon us by the swift movement of events.

I am confident that the Congress will face these responsibilities squarely.

The Republican Congress in 1947 united with Democrat Truman and approved the strategy and its accompanying funding, and the course of history for Greece and Turkey remained one of freedom and self-determination. Our current Congress has the same responsibility and opportunity with Iraq. Will they rise to the occasion? Their behavior since the November 2006 elections inspires little confidence.