Tweet
Amidst all of Turkey's parading and posturing to put together "a joint, non-biased committee to research the events of 1915", I'm left baffled by the lack of mention that this has already been done. Instead, we have allowed Turkish officials to claim that Armenians refuse their offer because they know they have no proof of genocide.
Is this because Armenians are unaware that the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) existed? Is it because they don't realize that this committee presented their case to the International Center for Transition Justice (ICTJ), an unbiased 3rd party designed solely for getting to the bottom of these kinds of matters, who decided in favor of calling the events of 1915 a genocide?
TARC was formed in Geneva in July of '01, consisting of members who were agreed upon by BOTH GOVERNMENTS. Turks and Armenians alike had mixed feelings about this commission, with nationalists on both sides being strictly against it. After a while, both governments started to distance themselves from this committee due to pressure from the nationalists. Nevertheless, TARC carried on with its mission of trying to create relations between the 2 nations.
Not much came of this committee. That is....except for one VERY important achievement in favor of the Armenians. On September 10, 2002, both sides presented their case in a jointly sponsored study conducted by the ICTJ to look into the events of 1915. After careful consideration, the ICTJ concluded that what happened in 1915 clearly fit into the definition of genocide, which, of course, Turkey naturally rejected (in spite of having been FOR this whole process).
The core facts common to all of the various accounts of the facts we have reviewed in the course of preparing this memorandum establish that, in viewing the Events collectively, at least three of the four elements of the crime of genocide identified in Section II.C.1 of this memorandum occurred during the Events.
First, one or more persons were killed. Second, such persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Finally, the conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group. While the accounts we have reviewed reveal some disagreement on the intent or motives that animated the perpetrators of the Events, the overwhelming majority of the accounts conclude that the Events occurred with some level of intent to effect the destruction of the Armenian communities in the eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire, with many claiming that this was the specific intent of the most senior government officials. The Turkish government maintains that no direct evidence has been presented demonstrating that any Ottoman official sought the destruction of the Ottoman Armenians. In light of the frequent references to the participation of Ottoman officials in the Events, we wish to highlight that a finding of genocide does not as a legal matter depend on the participation of state actors. On the contrary, the Genocide Convention confirms that perpetrators of genocide will be punished whether they are "constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals." Thus, it is legally appropriate to maintain that the Events constituted genocide as defined in the Convention on the basis of a conclusion that they were perpetrated with the intent of permanently resolving the "Armenian question", whether or not this was the official state policy of the Ottoman Empire.
So here we have a JOINT commission of Turks and Armenians, comprised of members agreed upon by BOTH governments, presenting a case to an INTERNATIONAL committee that both sides OKed.....JUST as Turkey is calling for now.......again. So why haven't we been rubbing the results of this decision in their faces? Why is it that we don't bring up this critical point? Why don't we publicly ask them "are you trying for 2 out of 3? And then what? If you loose that, 3 out of 5, and so on?"
Is this because Armenians are unaware that the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) existed? Is it because they don't realize that this committee presented their case to the International Center for Transition Justice (ICTJ), an unbiased 3rd party designed solely for getting to the bottom of these kinds of matters, who decided in favor of calling the events of 1915 a genocide?
TARC was formed in Geneva in July of '01, consisting of members who were agreed upon by BOTH GOVERNMENTS. Turks and Armenians alike had mixed feelings about this commission, with nationalists on both sides being strictly against it. After a while, both governments started to distance themselves from this committee due to pressure from the nationalists. Nevertheless, TARC carried on with its mission of trying to create relations between the 2 nations.
Not much came of this committee. That is....except for one VERY important achievement in favor of the Armenians. On September 10, 2002, both sides presented their case in a jointly sponsored study conducted by the ICTJ to look into the events of 1915. After careful consideration, the ICTJ concluded that what happened in 1915 clearly fit into the definition of genocide, which, of course, Turkey naturally rejected (in spite of having been FOR this whole process).
The core facts common to all of the various accounts of the facts we have reviewed in the course of preparing this memorandum establish that, in viewing the Events collectively, at least three of the four elements of the crime of genocide identified in Section II.C.1 of this memorandum occurred during the Events.
First, one or more persons were killed. Second, such persons belonged to a particular national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Finally, the conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group. While the accounts we have reviewed reveal some disagreement on the intent or motives that animated the perpetrators of the Events, the overwhelming majority of the accounts conclude that the Events occurred with some level of intent to effect the destruction of the Armenian communities in the eastern provinces of the Ottoman Empire, with many claiming that this was the specific intent of the most senior government officials. The Turkish government maintains that no direct evidence has been presented demonstrating that any Ottoman official sought the destruction of the Ottoman Armenians. In light of the frequent references to the participation of Ottoman officials in the Events, we wish to highlight that a finding of genocide does not as a legal matter depend on the participation of state actors. On the contrary, the Genocide Convention confirms that perpetrators of genocide will be punished whether they are "constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals." Thus, it is legally appropriate to maintain that the Events constituted genocide as defined in the Convention on the basis of a conclusion that they were perpetrated with the intent of permanently resolving the "Armenian question", whether or not this was the official state policy of the Ottoman Empire.
So here we have a JOINT commission of Turks and Armenians, comprised of members agreed upon by BOTH governments, presenting a case to an INTERNATIONAL committee that both sides OKed.....JUST as Turkey is calling for now.......again. So why haven't we been rubbing the results of this decision in their faces? Why is it that we don't bring up this critical point? Why don't we publicly ask them "are you trying for 2 out of 3? And then what? If you loose that, 3 out of 5, and so on?"