Turkish Propaganda strategy

[Joseph]

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=83657

Turkish lobbies in US stepping up efforts

Tuesday, September 18, 2007


Elif Özmenek
NEW YORK – Turkish Daily News

As Washington has increasingly been turning a blind eye to the red lines of Turkish foreign policy, pro-Turkish lobbies are looking for ways to strengthen their position in the United States.

The American Turkish Society (ATS), one of the leading Turkish lobbies in the U.S., asked key businessmen to become members on its board. Muhtar Kent, the president and chief operating officer of The Coca-Cola Company, Murat Megalli, JP Morgan Turkey director and Haluk Dinçer, president of the Food and Retailing Group joined the ATS. With its new members the ATS is targeting to become more effective in better promoting Turkish-U.S. relations.

After Ahmet Ertegün, the founder of Atlantic Records and also long time president of the ATS passed away last year many were concerned that the Turkish community in the U.S. had lost an important voice. Ertegün successfully brought American and Turkish businessmen and politicians together and almost served as an unofficial ambassador for well over 20 years. Kent was one of the names being mentioned behind the scenes to take Ertegün's place to promote Turkish-American relations.

Like Ertegün, Kent is also the son of a diplomat. Ertegün's father Munir Ertegün was a prominent figure in Turkish-U.S. relations. In 1946 then President Truman ordered the battleship USS Missouri to return his body to Turkey as a demonstration of U.S. power opposing Russian demands on Turkey. Likewise Kent's father was also an interesting figure in Turkish diplomatic history. Ambassador Necdet Kent was posted as Consul General to Marseilles between 1941 and 1944, gave Turkish citizenship to dozens of Turkish Jews living in France who did not have proper identity papers to save them from deportation to the Nazi gas chambers. Thus the American Sephardic Federation and Raoul Wallenberg Committee awarded Necdet Kent.

Muhtar Kent's good relations with the Jewish community is accepted as an important asset for the Turkish lobbies. Especially after the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) acknowledged the “Armenian Genocide” in August. Although the ADL's statement reaffirmed that the legislation pending in Congress to recognize the genocide is "a counterproductive diversion" it created some concern in Ankara. Many Democrats think that those concerns are valid. Off the record some Democrats say that the Armenian Genocide Resolution will for sure pass sometime this fall. Political observers believe that as well as the Armenian Genocide issue, the outlawed Kurdistan workers' Party (PKK) is another problem that Washington and Ankara should find common ground on. Sources close to Democrats say a process is underway to prepare a report on the PKK. However many think that a report of this nature will be a “bitter pill” to swallow for Ankara.

Ankara will need a strong lobby in Washington in the meantime. Kent is seen as an important player in this picture. However it is still a question mark if Kent's busy schedule will allow him to play the role expected of him.

[Joseph]

Nice Try Ankara

Turkey demands to unmount Armenian khachkar in Bratislava
19.09.2007 16:06 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Turkish Foreign Ministry is constantly sending notes of protests to the Slovakian MFA demanding to unmount the khachkar symbolizing the passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution by the Slovakian parliament last year. At the worst, Ankara requires to rub off the inscription (the text of the resolution in Slovakian, English and Armenian).

Upon receiving a rejection from the Slovakian MFA, Turkey charged its ambassador with a task to find substantiation for unmouting the khachkar, Bratislava’s Petrzalka district prefect Milan Ftacnik said.

“Turkey can nothing but resign itself to the fact that the Slovakian supreme power – the National Council – has recognized the Armenian Genocide,” he said.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry, however, attempted to question the legacy of building the monument and was checkmated, for the building process was irreproachable, Yerkir reports

[Joseph]

It is truly shameful that Turkey coerces Patriarch Mutafyan to oppose Armenian Genocide Resolution
19.09.2007 12:32 GMT+04:00
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ The Armenian National Committee of America recently sent a letter to all 535 Congressional offices regarding the upcoming visit of Patriarch Mutafyan of Constantinople.

As ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian told a PanARMENIAN.Net reporter, the letter stresses that: "the Patriarch - like the leaders of all religious minorities in Turkey - lives in constant fear of acts of discrimination and retribution by a Turkish government that actively persecutes those who speak freely on human rights and other “sensitive” issues. As a virtual hostage, the Patriarch - whose life has been threatened on many occasions - will, as has in the past, be forced to follow the Turkish government’s line. It is truly shameful that Turkey has resorted to using coercion - cynically taking advantage of the concern of Patriach Mesrob for the safety of his flock - in a last ditch bid to block the adoption of the Armenian Genocide Resolution."

Rep. Adam Schiff, the lead author of the Armenian Genocide Resolution, commented on the growing pressure on Turkey’s remaining Armenians, noting that, "In order to perpetuate its campaign of denial, Turkey seeks to intimidate all Armenians worldwide, but especially the Armenians in Turkey who must live with daily threats. It is a criminal offense to merely speak about the Armenian Genocide, let alone advocate for the passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution before the Congress. The editor of the last Armenian-language newspaper in Turkey, Hrant Dink, was assassinated for writing about the genocide this year, and a popular video now being circulated in Turkey celebrates his killers and threatens Armenians."

[Joseph]

Not going to work this time!

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=122737

Patriarch’s speech postponed under US Armenian pressure
A theological center at Georgetown University has indefinitely postponed a presentation by Patriarch Mesrob II (Mutafyan), the spiritual leader of Turkey's Armenian Orthodox community, citing "logistical conflicts" as the reason.


Patriarch Mesrob II (Mutafyan)
Yet statements by an influential lobby group of the Armenian diaspora in the United States clearly indicate that the reason for the postponement was strong pressure from the Armenian diaspora, which is at odds with the conciliatory attitude of Mesrob II concerning the Armenian allegations of genocide.
The presentation by Mesrob II entitled "The Impasse between Turks and Armenians Must Be Broken" was scheduled to take place at the Woodstock Theological Center of Georgetown University on Thursday afternoon. The presentation was to be a joint activity held in collaboration with the Rumi Forum, established by Turks living in Washington, D.C., to enhance inter-religious and intercultural dialogue.

The influential Armenian National Committee of America recently sent a letter to all members of the US Congress regarding the ongoing visit of the Armenian patriarch, Armenian media reported. Meanwhile, Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) Executive Director Aram Hamparian told the Armenian media that the letter stressed the following: "The patriarch -- like the leaders of all religious minorities in Turkey -- lives in constant fear of acts of discrimination and retribution by a Turkish government that actively persecutes those who speak freely on human rights and other 'sensitive' issues. As a virtual hostage, the patriarch -- whose life has been threatened on many occasions -- will, as he has in the past, be forced to follow the Turkish government's line. It is truly shameful that Turkey has resorted to using coercion -- cynically taking advantage of the concern of Patriarch Mesrob for the safety of his flock -- in a last ditch attempt to block the adoption of the Armenian genocide resolution."

Two separate resolutions are pending in the US Senate and House of Representatives urging the administration to recognize the World War I-era killings of Anatolian Armenians as genocide. Turkey has warned that passage of the resolutions in the US Congress would seriously harm relations with Washington and hence impair cooperation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US administration has said it is opposed to the resolution, but the congressional process is an independent one.

"The Armenian genocide resolution pending in the US Congress disrupts both the relations between Turkish people and Armenians in Turkey and between Turkey and Armenia," Mesrob II said in an exclusive interview published in Today's Zaman on Monday.


21.09.2007

Today's Zaman Ankara

[Joseph]

Yes, to win the friendship of Turkey, the US has to be willing to kill Kurds and ignore genocide. Interesting how he says third parties should not be involved; didn't the Turks request "independent scholars be used to judge? More Turkish doublespeak, amnesia, and schizophrenia



Babacan: PKK and Armenian resolution pose danger to Turkish-US ties

Print
Saturday , 22 September 2007



CHICAGO - Turkey's strategic partnership with the United States are facing risks from the terrorist threat posed by the outlawed PKK in Iraq and resolutions pending in the US Congress on Armenian claims, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan has said.



Babacan, on a visit to the United States, said it was not possible to explain to the Turkish people why the PKK still launches attacks on Turkey from its Iraqi bases. There are at least 3500 PKK terrorists in Iraq and no single PKK militant has been captured or arrested by the US or Iraqi authorities.

"We expect the United States and the Iraqi government to take urgent and concrete steps in handing over the PKK terrorists to justice," Babacan said in a speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs on Thursday, according to excerpts published by the Anatolia news agency.

Ankara has long been pressing the United States to take action to eliminate the PKK presence in Iraq and the lack of steps so far despite Turkish appeals is straining the two countries' decades-old alliance.

The situation is further complicated by two resolutions pending in the US Congress that urge the US administration to recognize Armenian claims. Armenians name the 1915 communal clashes as genocide while the Turks argue the reverse. According to the Ottoman archives more than 520.000 Turkish, Kurdish and Jewish civilian people were massacred by the Armenian nationalist groups during the First World War. Turkey accepts the Ottoman State's responsibility for the bad results yet Ankara has never accepted the genocide claims.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan said a third party should not play the judge in a dispute like this and reminded that Armenian allegations have never been confirmed legally or historically.

"Slanders targeting Turkey have always showed up in the political arena," Babacan said in his speech.

"We want the US Congress to not take any side in historical matters like this and we want common sense to win in the end. This is a matter between Turks and Armenians and can be resolved by frank and sincere dialogue between the two sides."

Turkey's hopes that the resolutions will be blocked in the Congress received a major blow last month when an influential US Jewish group, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), revised its long-standing stance and said the World War I events amounted to genocide. Other Jewish groups still stick to their position of not supporting the Armenian claims.

In Chicago, Babacan met with representatives of US Jewish groups including the ADL and the American Jewish Federation. In the meeting, Babacan reiterated that passage of the resolutions would harm both Turkish-US relations and Turkish-Israeli relations. Representatives of the Jewish groups, including those of the ADL, insisted at the meeting that they were against the resolutions in the Congress. They also raised concerns over Iran's nuclear program, while Turkey said its recent energy deal with Iran should be considered as part of its policy of diversification of energy sources. In his speech at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Babacan said Turkey has been urging Iran to be transparent about its nuclear program and said Ankara could play a role in passing the international community's messages to Iran as well as Syria, emphasizing that isolating these two countries would be wrong.

The foreign minister also gave assurances that Turkey would continue its efforts to become a member of the European Union, saying Turkish membership will prove the clash of civilizations thesis to be wrong. He also said Turkey was in a process of fast transition, emphasizing that it is seeking to become the tenth biggest economy of the world by 2023 and that people are already speaking of Turkey as "Europe's China."

22 September 2007

US-Turkish Relations

[Joseph]

This editorial is disgusting and ignorant on so many different levels. I have highlighted the especially distorted sections.

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/yazarDetay.do?haberno=122930

FEHMI KORU [email protected] Politics
On empires and their destiny

Wherever I go in Washington and whoever I talk with, I hear that Congress will certainly pass the Armenian resolution, regardless of possible reactions from all the pertinent bodies and personalities, including President George W. Bush. The Armenian lobby is going to be successful this time around; so my sources tell me. But I also hear the opposite: that the Congress will not give way to the Armenian lobby’s demand in a time the US is in dire need of Turkey’s assistance in a region beset with problems that the US has a huge stake in. As it was the case many times previously, the president will write a letter to the Congress as well as place a call to Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the house, giving a detailed account of Turkey’s importance and asking to postpone the proposed resolution. “Don’t worry,” people in the know say, “The resolution will not pass.”
Now you hear it, now you don’t.

I have never seen the Turks living in the US capital so gloomy. The Armenian resolution is an issue taking up all the energies and efforts of Turkey’s representatives in a country where there are higher objectives to achieve for the benefit of both sides. Turkey can easily adapt itself for a mandate which would be a tremendous help to the US in its endeavor to reach a workable status in the Middle East. Turkey, with its highly respected democratic government, can also show the US how to handle the problem of its constant image deterioration in the eyes of the Muslim world.

I have great doubts about the resolution of historical events with modern political tools. The Armenian resolution will do no good to any of the parties involved, apart from the satisfaction it would bestow to fanatics and bigots. What did happen in 1915 can not be undone with a resolution passed by a third party’s parliament. How can the misery and tribulations of the Armenians who suffered badly during a war which also caused the extinction of the lives of millions of other people be rectified by a simple declaration of parliamentarians who close their ears to the suffering of masses all over the world?

More than 800,000 people have lost their lives in a bloody war declared by the US Congress almost unilaterally and the same Congress will pass a declaration condemning the Armenian losses in a war too distant to remember. What a grave contradiction!

During my extended sojourn in the US capital this time around, I found myself in an unwanted position of attracting interest. Those who follow events relating to Turkey closely in Washington wonder what would happen if the Armenian resolution is accepted by the Congress. What would be the public reaction in Turkey? In which direction will the reactions be channeled? Would the Turkish government stimulate the aggravation or try to allay the public’s outburst?

I answered all these questions positively: Yes, there will be a public uproar if and when the resolution is passed. There will be calls for total boycotts of anything American and officials in Turkey will find it very difficult to convince the people to side with American positions when the necessity arises.

Turkey will lose face, but the Americans will suffer most from the Armenian resolution if it passes through Congress.

Let us assume that the resolution passes -- what will it be achieved by this development? The only change likely to occur is its possible shadow cast over Turkish-US relations. The bilateral relations between the two have never been easy; there have been turbulences along the way, but both countries have managed to remain friends nevertheless. Up until now. With the resolution’s passing, from now on nothing will be the same.

During my stay in Washington, I have consistently been asked the same question: According to opinion polls, the Turkish public is the most anti-American in the world, with only 9 percent showing some sympathy toward the US -- what would it change with one more negative development?

The change will be enormous: the lack of sympathy in Turkey toward the US stems from American involvement in regional problems and will evaporate when the situation changes; with passing of the Armenian resolution by Congress, the Turkish public’s regard for the US will diminish completely. Our feelings, negative or positive, toward the US are powerful; this alone must be a cause of concern for Washington.

Of course the issue between the Turks and the Armenians has to be solved, and solved justly. We, the people of Turkey, will find a way to make amends with the Armenian people in the future. Turkey will extend its hand toward Armenia, using the presence of Turkish citizens of Armenian extraction in Turkey to both countries’ benefit. We feel sorry for all the losses during an unfortunate war which cost us more dearly. We lost not only a large chunk of our compatriots, we also lost our empire.

I expect to see some understanding from the US, in a time when its own empire faces grave difficulties.

24.09.2007
Comments | Send to Print | Send to My Friend

[Gavur]

Sick denier!

[Joseph]

I have one questions for Mr. Kinkikoglu; would you like some cheese with that whine?

Ah, Turkish despair over their relations with the US... I like it. I sincerley hope US-Turkish relations continue to deteriorate. Us Ameiricans have been supporting that fascist nation long enough. We need to support Armenia, Greece, and the establishment of a Kurdish state.


ttp://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/yazarDetay.do?haberno=123157

SUAT KINIKLIOGLU [email protected] Diplomacy
The illusion of Turkish-American partnership

After three days in Washington, one leaves with a distinct sense of alienation from the capital of the United States.
Every contact we meet cautiously whispers that this time the infamous Armenian resolution might pass. Interestingly, they also acknowledge that they know that it is not in the interest of the US to do so. Regardless of the gloom and doom, some analysts believe that there is still some common sense among the democrats that recognizes the potential risks of passing such a resolution at this time. "Why kill the cash cow now when we are entering an election campaign?" noted another. Of course it is clear that once the resolution passes there would be no more need to financially support exorbitant election campaigns. The present situation is actually ideal as it allows representatives to garner the benefits of the current environment, which on the one hand suggests inevitability and on the other leans on the sober reality of impossibility. Let the Armenians pay for one more year.
Needless to say, the security threat posed by the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and the unwillingness of the US to assert proper influence over President Massoud Barzani was at the center of our meetings. We humble Turks have difficulty grasping how the United States Central Command (CENTCOM) can manage to get away with stalling action on the PKK when President Bush and Secretary of State Rice repeatedly ordered the military command to deal with the PKK issue. Turkey's friends in Washington were equally aghast when Undersecretary Burns listed the areas in which the US was expecting Turkey's help at an Atlantic Council event. Unfortunately, no one among the audience could hear what Washington was offering in exchange. Turkish ears were particularly curious to hear what was going to be said about the PKK menace in northern Iraq. Far from expecting any new items on the agenda, Ankara would have been happy to hear what its NATO ally was going to do about the PKK, which really is a responsibility rather than a favor. In fact, the overall message of Burns' speech was that all was fine on the Turkish-American front. Luckily Burns avoided reading his wish list to Prime Minister Erdo?an in Ankara.

We Turks need to come to terms with the fact that this administration is not going to lift a finger on the PKK. The only hope is that the violence remains at a sustainable level until a new administration takes its place in the White House. Fixing the Turkish-American relationship will take years, if it happens at all. The US appears to have made a very calculated choice when it comes to Turks and Kurds in Iraq. That choice is clearly in favor of Mr. Barzani and the Kurds. That a strategic ally is alienated and is being lost in the process appears to be a secondary concern. It is too early to tell what this will mean in the mid to long term, but this relationship is neither strategic nor visionary any more. We need to get used to it and reorganize ourselves, instead of reminiscing about the old days or deceiving ourselves about a nonexistent partnership.

A last word is appropriate on the Iraqi Kurds. Iraqi Kurds, especially those who burn with Barzani's nationalism, seem to believe in the illusion that the US will provide them with an eternal security umbrella. Similar to the Romanians, they are inexperienced in dealing with our friends in Washington. Regardless of what they base their calculations on, there is no doubt that Turks, Kurds, Iranians and Syrians, not to mention the Shiites and Sunnis of Iraq, will be facing each other when everyone else is gone. Wise leadership would take this into account.

Ultimately an honest discussion on how to mend the Turkish-American relationship would require the US to make significant policy changes. This is not going to happen before 2009, if at all. We should acknowledge that instead of pretending that all is fine.

26.09.2007
Comments | Send to Print | Send to My Friend

[Joseph]

Issue #39 (259), September 28, 2007
(September 28, 2007)
The Art of Denial: Turkey’s evolving denials of the Armenian Genocide
By By Dr. Rouben Adalian
Director, Armenian National Institute
Many across the Jewish community in the United States seemed to have breathed a sigh of relief when the influential Anti-Defamation League acknowledged the Armenian Genocide. The growing gap between public understanding of the historical events and the political concerns of the Jewish-American leadership over relations with Turkey had become untenable.
{ai251101.jpg|left}The longstanding policy of the Turkish government to deny the Armenian Genocide has suffered yet another embarrassment. Virtually everywhere the Armenian diaspora has a presence it has had its voice heard by local communities and host governments. With one major exception, the United States, twenty countries have on record formally recognized the Armenian Genocide.

It is no secret that the Jewish community has been divided over the issue of U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide. To curry favor with Turkey on behalf of Israel’s security and strategic interests, most key organizations representing the Jewish-American community in Washington have supported the Turkish Embassy’s lobbying strategies to hinder approval of congressional resolutions. Of course they are not alone in opposing such legislation. The Departments of State and Defense have also consistently disagreed with proposed congressional resolutions on the argument that relations with Turkey would be harmed. There is no real evidence that relations between Turkey and the United States would rupture as nothing of the sort has happened upon recognition by other countries. Nor can it be argued that a relationship built upon a half-century long United States - Turkey alliance is so shaky that it can be undone by one congressional resolution. Still the debate continues.

What is apparent through all this is the failure of the Turkish government to convince the rest of the world of its position on the events of 1915, That position, which only twenty-years years ago was unchallenged is now viewed as inconsistent with the facts and offensive in its propositions. How far Turkey has retreated is evident in the continuously evolving denial arguments manufactured somewhere in Ankara. As one case after another was discredited, more arguments were contrived. Even the politicians in Turkey have lost sight of where their government started and where it has ended up.

Turkey’s starting point was complete denial that anything out of the ordinary had occurred in Armenia in 1915. At best a program to relocate Armenians from the war zone with Russia was allowed and Ankara argued that this was done out of humane consideration for the benefit of the Armenians in order to remove them from harm’s way. This absurd line of argument proving too ludicrous to maintain for long was replaced with another arguing that wartime conditions precipitated the resettlement of the Armenians because they had become an unreliable population.

Heatedly denying the commission of atrocities, in the face of the growing evidence that began to be issued mostly retrieved from official archival sources, the enormous loss of life suffered by the Armenian population begged an explanation. First the theory of epidemics was promoted, attributing the death to passive causes. Then the theory of wartime military exigency and the lack of sufficient manpower to oversee the wholesale relocation of the Armenians was advanced, and thereby shifted the blame for the casualties to lawless elements and especially unruly Kurds. Finally a civil war was posited to deal with the matter of the scale of the atrocities. As dismissal of the evidence attesting to such could no longer be sustained, the denials began insidiously to imply that Armenians invited the calamity upon their own heads and got what they deserved by taking up arms. The argument also ignored the logic that if there was a civil war then there might have been legitimate cause for people to defend themselves. The blame was laid upon the victims for starting the conflict, ignoring the fact that the Ottoman state had fully equipped armed forces and Armenians constituted a largely unarmed civilian population.

When all failed, a country that had always prided itself in its military might contrived the strangest defense yet. If it is true that Armenians were subjected to genocide, the Turks were the victims of genocide also, a bizarre combination of admission and accusation that possibly made facing the historical evidence more palatable.

The pressure upon the public, the media and academia inside and outside Turkey to sustain these rationalizations only delayed the reckoning that was occurring in many quarters all across the globe. As the scholarship on the Armenian Genocide grew and improved, skepticism in academia retreated, so much so that a mere handful nowadays defends the official Turkish version of events. That scholarship proved rigorous enough to raise questions in the mind of Turkish academics. For a brief moment in 2005 they dared convene a conference in Istanbul to address the issues and possibly usher in a new beginning in the debate over the Armenian Genocide. In response prosecutors invoked Article 301 of the Turkish penal code criminalizing reference to the Armenian Genocide. Then the assassination in January of 2007 of the outspoken Hrant Dink, who was motivated by honorable intentions, spread fear and silenced those who had dared challenge the system.

Dink was allowed a public funeral and even the Turkish media conceded its shock upon the demise of man who never advocated violence and who passionately strived to cure some of the sources of the hatred that poisoned relations between Armenians and Turks. The reality of an independent Armenian state symbolized for him a new scope of possibilities and the Turkish media had found in him an interlocutor who could help explain the rancor and offer remedies.

In some small way perhaps the Turkish government thought that it could ease the situation by announcing the re-opening of the renovated Church of the Holy Cross, more simply known as Akhtamar, one of the very rare still intact places of worship once venerated by Armenians.

However, the occasion of the re-opening of Akhtamar was squandered by the lack of coordination with the Armenian community in Turkey and by the hoisting of the national flag and a giant poster of Ataturk upon the entrance to the church. Everyone is entitled to raising the flag of their country upon an appropriately positioned mast, but the hanging of a giant portrait of Ataturk where people once worshiped the Deity bespoke of the vast distance remaining between Armenians and Turks. The Turkish authorities may have wanted to leave the impression they had permitted the renovation of an Armenian church, and certainly they allowed the media to spread that notion widely. What they actually announced was the formal secularization of the onetime church as a museum and as a tourist site, and in so doing stressed less its renovation and more its appropriation as a Turkish cultural heritage site.

Finally, there is a long way to go before a common language is shared by Armenians and Turks. One thing is certain, however, the vindication of the memory of the Armenian Genocide has made men and women of conscience take note, and governments to take heed, and for some Turks to take steps toward a rapprochement that does not discard the acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide that caused so much loss and so much injustice.

[Joseph]

Source: Asbarez

Glendale, CA

July 1, 2005

The Genocide Study Trap

By David B. Boyajian

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently asked Armenia to agree to the creation of a Turkish and Armenian commission that would study the murder of Armenians in 1915 to determine if it constituted genocide.

President Bush liked the idea. So did German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and Council of Europe Secretary General Terry Davis.

The Turkish members of such a commission would, of course, never consent to a finding of genocide. The result, therefore, would be a "hung jury," exactly the kind of ambiguity that Turkey is looking for.
Fortunately, at least for now, President Robert Kocharian turned Turkey down. He suggested, instead, an "intergovernmental commission" that could discuss "any issue."
What many individuals and countries are unaware of, or deliberately ignoring, is that the mass killings of Armenians have already been the subject of a number of studies conducted by third party organizations.
Verdict: Genocide
In 1985, the United Nations Sub-commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities issued a genocide study that is sometimes referred to as the Whitaker report.
"The Ottoman massacre of Armenians in 1915-1916," stated Paragraph 24 of the report, is an example of "genocide." Furthermore, it "is corroborated by reports in United States, German and British archives and of contemporary diplomats in the Ottoman Empire."
The Permanent Peoples' Tribunal, sitting in Paris in 1984, impaneled a jury of Nobel Prize recipients and distinguished experts in international law from around the globe. Its conclusions, published in "A Crime of Silence: The Armenian Genocide," sliced Turkey to pieces:
"The extermination of the Armenian[s]…through deportation and massacre constitutes a crime of genocide...within the definition of the [UN Genocide Treaty of] 1948."
Furthermore, "By virtue of general international law" and the UN's 1968 "Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutes of Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity", the jury determined, "no statute of limitations can apply" to Turkey's crimes.
Nor can Turkey use "the pretext of any discontinuity in the [1915 vs. current Turkish] state" and so "must recognize officially...the consequent damages suffered by the Armenian people."
Another study, requested by the Turkish Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC), was released in 2003. TARC itself was, of course, controversial and ill-fated. Nevertheless, the study, facilitated by the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), concluded that the 1915 murders "include all of the elements of the crime of genocide as defined in the [UN Genocide Treaty of 1948]."
(In view of TARC's US State Department sponsorship, it was to be expected that the report also alleged that the 1948 Genocide Treaty is not retroactive to 1915 and, consequently, Armenians cannot assert land or reparations claims against Turkey. In any event, for the reasons cited by the 1984 Tribunal and others, the report is wrong about Armenian claims and implicitly acknowledges that, conceding that it did not consider "other...international law").
Genocide Games
Were there to be another study, Turkey, the US, Europe, various business interests, and perhaps Turkish friends such as Israel and Pakistan, would covertly try to bring about a judgment of "no genocide" or "we are unable to arrive at a decision." The study would also emulate the TARC report by trying to relieve Turkey of liability.
The West, after all, wants to shield eastern Turkey from Armenia claims as that territory is the only land bridge to the oil and gas rich Caspian Sea basin that bypasses Russia and Iran.
Even during the Cold War, international political pressure corrupted a UN report on genocide. The report's Paragraph 30, issued in 1973, had stated that the Armenian "massacres" were considered "the first genocide of the 20th Century." Turkey objected and was supported by the US, Austria, France, Iran, Italy, Nigeria, Pakistan, and others. During the ensuing years, Paragraph 30 was removed.
Just last year, a United Nations report on the mass killings in Darfur, Sudan decided they might not be "genocide." Even the US had, grudgingly, termed them genocide. The report may have been the victim of clandestine international influence.
Still, let's suppose that a new study were to reaffirm that Turkey committed genocide.
Turkish Tricks
Regardless of what it may promise now, Turkey will almost certainly reject a verdict of genocide. It has, after all, brushed aside every previous study that affirmed the factuality of the Genocide.
Even if it were to accept such a verdict, Turkey would retreat to its well-known fallback position: "Modern" Turkey bears no legal responsibility for the actions of "Ottoman" Turkey.
Turkey's pathetically obvious game is to keep asking for new studies until it gets one that concludes there was no genocide. That would be bad news for Armenians. Western nations would pronounce the Genocide issue dead.
The Diaspora's Job
Besides, should we be trading our dignity and rights for what is likely to someday be an ambiguously-worded, half-hearted statement of guilt by the Turkish government?
Even a sincere genocide acknowledgment's value is questionable as, by itself, it is unlikely to heal Armenian wounds or change Turkish policy toward Armenia.
Only restitution and the return of Armenian land will ultimately bring a significant degree of satisfaction. Restitution means the recovery of, or in some instances compensation for, homes, farms, stolen assets, schools, communal property, and thousands of churches.
Quantifying the theft and material damage committed by Turkey is urgently needed. A starting point is published studies from the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 and more recent works by scholars such as the late Professor Kevork K. Baghdjian. Last year's successful prosecution of the New York Life Insurance Company by Armenians shows that headway can be made.
Geographic and demographic studies of eastern Turkey should also be undertaken. Future territory must include a Black Sea coastline so that Turkey and its friends can no longer block Armenian access to Europe and Russia.
We recognize that achieving all our goals right now is not realistic. In the meantime, Armenia must at least avoid anything that would make the future prosecution of claims more difficult.
Poor and preoccupied with Karabagh and the Turkish blockade, Armenia lacks the resources and public relations savvy to undertake a full defense of its rights against Turkey. Diasporan think tanks and political parties must, therefore, shoulder the burden. Is it not the job of political parties, after all, to uphold national rights?
But, first, we must not yield to the temptation for yet another study to confirm what we and the world have already proved: Turkey committed genocide against Armenians.
Now, let's move on.
David B. Boyajian is an Armenian American freelance writer based in Massachusetts

Article used with authors permission.