Morton Abramowitz and Henri Barkey in the Washington Post are concerned about the Turkey-Israel tensions, and want the U.S. to convey to Turkey that it won't take its side against Israel. They regard "American interests" and Israel as fully aligned, but recognize that the lobby may become politicized:
Israel could become a significant issue in the 2012 presidential campaign, especially if the United States is defeated in its opposition to a General Assembly vote to create a Palestinian state. The situation will generate concern on Capitol Hill and give Republicans another opportunity to attack Obama for not defending American interests and Israel....
A resolution recognizing the 1.5 million Armenians killed by Ottoman Turks has repeatedly failed to garner enough support for a floor vote. But its backers may calculate that the worsening conditions between Israel and Turkey would prompt the powerful Israel lobby to no longer support Turkey on this matter, raising the likelihood that the resolution would pass.
Two comments:
1) It is umpteenth time that Israel lobby waves the issue of Armenian Holocaust, and yet nothing happened. My take is that Israeli (who have influence here) cannot decide if their irritation with Turkey is stronger than their dislike of Armenians.
2) On more substantial matters, Turkey will not be forced to say “ah, never mind”. So what is the end-game? Alliance of Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria and perhaps Egypt? We can convey all day long that we do not want it.
Israeli (who have influence here) cannot decide if their irritation with Turkey is stronger than their dislike of Armenians.
I don’t think the State of Israel has a particular dislike for the Armenians. They have no power – why should Israel care?
This is all about Turkey’s rupture with Israel.
It is worse than that. Armenian diaspora is present in ME, in Lebanon and in Jerusalem. They have assorted grievances to Israel, to name few issues: Armenian community in Lebanon shared the fate of Lebanon, Armenian patriarchate in Jerusalem had part of its property confiscated by Israel, and extremist Jews have a habit of spitting at Armenian clerics (there is a belief that Haman was an Armenian, so spitting incidents are worse during Purim). And Armenia has very cordial relationship with Iran (which has substantial Armenian community).
About 10 years ago I was somewhat shocked: I was driving in New Jersey and trying to find some radio station. Then I heard news about Intifada, occupation forces and resistance. It was a news hour of a radio station of local Armenians.
It is umpteenth time that Israel lobby waves the issue of Armenian Holocaust,
It can’t very well wave the issue of the 1899 Philippine Holocaust when the US killed 1.5-2 million people who were only guilty of demanding their own emancipation from colonial domination.
Why is Israel so obsessed with the Armenian genocide? I used to think it was because they might believe they have a monopoly on genocide (the holocaust). The way they’ve been waving it in front of Turkey all the time is quite strange though. Turkey is independent of the former Ottoman Empire and royalty. There is likely few if any alive today who were responsible for it. It should be a non-issue (although Armenians would disagree and Turks like to deny responsibility).
History forgets again, the Assyrians and Greeks were also expelled, persecuted, and murdered in similar (but lower death toll) genocides around the same time. Those responsible for the genocides were young people and foreign mercenaries. Just who were those foreign mercenaries? The Ottoman Empire was full of several ethnic groups and religions. They got along more than history tends to have us believe. Yes Turks and Islam had a higher status but that’s the same scenario face by minorities everywhere.
The genocide thing just doesn’t fit and the fact that foreigners were involved is quite suspect. My take is these are the same ‘hidden hand’ advocating ‘regime change’ in Iraq and partitioning by ethnicity/religion just has India/Pakistan. Nations are easier to control and pit against each other. Race and religion do not make us different, we’re all human. But there are those who want us to believe we are different.
It might be true or not but the Greeks and the Armenians during those times weren’t much divine either:
- Navarino Massacre (was one of a series of massacres which resulted in the extermination of the Turkish civilian population previously inhabiting the region Pylos)
Historian George Finlay noted that a Greek priest, named Phrantzes, was an eyewitness to the massacres. Based on the descriptions provided by Phrantzes, he wrote:
“Women, wounded with musketballs and sabre-cuts, rushed to the sea, seeking to escape, and were deliberately shot. Mothers robbed of their clothes, with infants in their arms plunged into the sea to conceal themselves from shame, and they were them made a mark for inhuman riflemen. Greeks sized infants from their mother’s breasts and dashed them against rocks. Children, three and four years old, were hurled living into the sea and left to drown. When the massacre was ended, the dead bodies washed ashore, or piled on the beach, threatened to cause a pestilence…”
When the gates opened on the 19 August 1821, the Greeks rushed in and the whole population numbering around 3000 Turkish civilians were killed.
- The Massacre of Tripolitsa (notorious for the massacre of its Turkish and Jewish population by the Greeks.)
Based on eyewitness accounts and descriptions provided by officers, William St. Clair wrote:
“The Turks of Greece left few traces. They disappeared suddenly and finally in the spring of 1821 unmourned and unnoticed by the rest of the world….It was hard to believe then that Greece once contained a large population of Turkish descent, living in small communities all over the country, prosperous farmers, merchants, and officials, whose families had known no other home for hundreds of years…
They were killed deliberately, without qualm or scruple, and there was no regrets either then or later.”
It would be ironic for the US to do something on the Armenian genocide while defending Israel’s attempts to wipe out the Palestinian presence in their own land.
And doubly ironic to move on Armenia as US power in the region is fading.
And triply ironic vis-a-vis our own history of genocidal tactics against Native Americans.
Not ironic but, despite modern-day nicey-nice liberals, CONSISTENT with power-to-the-powerful. them-as-has-gets white-people-with-guns-have-a-right-to-shoot-weak-darker-people-with-them (remember most American super-banks of 2008-2011 (Goldman Sachs)).
You have a point. Some times I wonder if the United States I learned about in school ever existed at all.
it wasn’t just an Armenian Genocide, it was also Assyrians and Greeks. more of a Christian Genocide, and closer to 3 million souls lost.
that said, the Turks are going to be a difficult force to reckon with. because they are a major pipeline corridor between east and west. and even israel will depend on turkey for “water, natural gas, oil, electricity and fiberoptics”.
link to hurriyet.com.tr
that’s the sort of diplomatic bargaining power that not only affects behavior now, but far into the future.
Turkey is a member of NATO, Israel is not. Under existing American law, if Turkey invokes Article 5 of the NATO Treaty(Senate Ratified) all members including the US must respond to the aggression with vigor. It called the rule of law, if you want to try something else, don’t cry when when the chickens come home to roost
Hej!!
There is literally nothing Israel can do to Turkey to make the US take Turkey’s side against Israel. It simply will not happen. We will bomb NATO ourselves before that would happen.
And that will be the end of NATO and probably, the end of the United States as a world power. Israel is literally costing us our country at this point.
lol the moment the US doesn’t takes sides with the US because of its treaty obligation. NATO will then fall apart because the mistrust between NATO allies.
For some reason many people seem to be convinced that official recognition of the Armenian genocide by Turkey is desirable and a move towards addressing past crimes for the purpose of preventing their repetition. Has this actually worked wrt to the Holocaust and German recognition/compensation? As in the case of the Holocaust, it is quite likely that such a move will perpetuate rather than prevent ethnic cleansing/genocide. From Wikipedia (Armenian Genocide)
“Armenia has been involved in a protracted ethnic-territorial conflict with Azerbaijan, a Turkic state, since Azerbaijan became independent from the Soviet Union in 1991. The conflict has featured several pogroms, massacres, and waves of ethnic cleansing, by both sides.
Some foreign policy observers and historians have suggested that Armenia and the Armenian diaspora have sought to portray the modern conflict as a continuation of the Armenian Genocide, in order to influence modern policy-making in the region.
According to Thomas Ambrosio, the Armenian Genocide furnishes “a reserve of public sympathy and moral legitimacy that translates into significant political influence… to elicit congressional support for anti-Azerbaijan policies.”
The rhetoric leading up to the onset of the conflict, which unfolded in the context of several pogroms of Armenians, was dominated by references to the Armenian Genocide, including fears that it would be, or was in the course of being, repeated.
During the conflict, the Azeri and Armenian governments regularly accused each other of genocidal intent, although these claims have been treated skeptically by outside observers.
The worldwide recognition of the Genocide is a core aspect of Armenia’s foreign policy and overarching grand strategy.”
I’d say one Israel is enough, and I hope Turkey will not commit the same monstrous blunder as Germany. Nor is there any chance. Turkey is a sovereign country. Germany was not when it signed the Luxembourg Agreement with Israel, which had no basis whatsoever in international law.
Armenia is in a position somewhat similar to Israel’s. Because Armenians had a very large diaspora in Azerbaijan and there are few Azeris in Armenia, the pogroms were quite one-sided. However, they expelled Azeris from the area surrounding Nagorno-Karabach (Karabach highlands).
Turkey imposed a total embargo on Armenia, so the only safe outlet for Armenian trade was Iran.
Having a Holocaust in a nation history obviously does not make that nation “more moral” in every subsequent conflict. This is part of “morality versus ethics” idiocy.
Prevalent thinking in USA and Israel is that moral position is one that supports good folks against bad folk, and goodness is proven/disproven by the historical record of these folks, Biblical references, supporting American policies etc. This gives rise to huge mutual misunderstanding.
What does it mean “moral relativism”? To me, it would be supporting or opposing exactly same type of action dependent on our current needs. E.g. supporting torture ALWAYS would be basically insane, SOMETIMES, it is moral relativism. This is “ethics” approach. You try to figure some RULES and then to apply them. To “moral absolutists”, this means to consistently support good people. So if bad people are tortured, it is OK, especially if good people are doing it.
Holocaust is either exhibit two or exibit one in the proof that Jews, particularly in Israel, are good people. That would be of quaint importance, except that this is used to conclude that whatever they do (at least, what a DULY elected government does) is good.
So, from ethical point of view, Holocaust did not turn Armenians into angels, and even if it did, it does not entitle them to, say, ethnic cleansing. Or to kidnap and torture civilians (I have no info on Armenians on that, but other good people did). But from moral perspective, this is exactly the opposite. If this was Class I Holocaust. we should exercise utmost moral, political, military and financial pressure on Turkey to lift embargo on Armenia, whatever they did to Azeris (Azeri language is undestandable to Turks, it is very similar), even if we were booted out of military bases in Turkey etc. And we should praise Iran for all the help they gave to good and brave Armenians (and have a nice word about Putin). And we should send 100 Congrescritters to Armenia, and shower them with aid and aplauds when they dein to speak etc.
a move towards addressing past crimes for the purpose of preventing their repetition. Has this actually worked wrt to the Holocaust and German recognition/compensation?
Don’t be preposterous. It’s an age-old and self-evident principle of equity that no one may profit from their own wrong-doing, e.g. Nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria.
The victim’s right to a remedy and reparation is paramount. Prevention of unrelated crimes committed by others is merely a secondary consideration. See the proclamation on the “Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law”, 16 December 2005
Self-evident principle? Unrelated crimes?
“25. The application and interpretation of these Basic Principles and Guidelines must be consistent with international human rights law and international humanitarian law and be without any discrimination of any kind or on any ground, without exception.”
Hm.
Have you read “Basis Principles and Guidelines to Reality?”
See also your post from 3:10 pm
Self-evident principle? Unrelated crimes? . . . Hm.
Have you read “Basis Principles and Guidelines to Reality?”[sic]
If you are trying to imply that international human rights law and international humanitarian law conflict with the age-old principles of equity, please provide an actual citation which supports that proposition. The passage that you mentioned does not say any such thing.
There are personal, temporal, and subject matter jurisdictional issues involved in the crimes committed against the Palestinians and the Sudenten Germans which are unrelated (i.e. different perpetrators, time, and place). You simply allege that, if the Allies were investigated, they would be found guilty of the same acts enumerated in the ICJ findings of fact in the Wall case. There is no statute of limitations for the crimes against humanity that you’ve alleged, so nothing would prevent the Sudeten Germans from seeking justice in the ECHR and providing the evidence to back-up your claims.
In the ICJ Wall Case, Israel specifically invoked the maxim nullus commodum capere potest de sua injuria propria against Palestine and pointed out that the ICJ applies the principle to refuse petitions in contentious cases and that it had the same discretion in advisory cases. The Court did not disagree, but noted that the General Assembly was the party that requested the advisory opinion in this instance and that it did not come to the Court with unclean hands. See paras 63-64 starting at page 59 of 139. link to icj-cij.org
The ICJ frequently invokes self-evident principles of law. For example, Judge Higgins cited an earlier example and applied it in her Wall opinion:
See also your post from 3:10 pm
I don’t see your point. A non-binding Sense of Congress resolution about an alleged massacre isn’t law or the basis of a claim upon which judicial relief can be granted. It is strictly a political gesture from the same legislative body that refused a mandate for Armenia and refused to make a humanitarian intervention.
The US Congress held extensive hearings and conducted a series of lengthy investigations into public statements made by members of the US military to the press and while testifying under oath about widespread use of water torture, massacres, and other war crimes committed during the Philippine-American War. Evidence was presented during several courts-martial that included written orders and corroborating testimony from multiple witnesses that the commanding officers had directed that no prisoners be taken; that every male Filipino over the age of 10 be killed; and that a multitude of Filipino people had been killed during the course of the war as a direct result. All of that is a matter of public record available from the official government archives of the United States. See for example: link to en.wikipedia.org & link to en.wikisource.org
Both Turkey and Armenia are playing games with this issue. The Armenians openly declare that they’re not after any form of compensation from the Turks but that they simply want a public apology to turn to a fresh page, and this sounds very reasonable. At other times we hear the Armenians speaking in quieter tones that once the Turks admit it, they will hit them with the lawsuits. From a Turkish perspective, this is not very reasonable. The Armenians have to make clear exactly what they want and the Turks have to be clear about what they’re willing to do. Meanwhile others like Israel and the US, that has half a million Armenian-Americans, are toying with whether or not they’d back Armenia against Turkey in the recognition rumble. It’s shameful.
headline – ‘Washington Post’ column refers to ‘powerful Israel lobby’ as factor in 2012 campaign”
does this mean w & m’s israel lobby commentary and views expressed years ago are now allowed to be aired without condescension?
Has anyone heard from Danaa lately?
Has anyone heard from Danaa lately?
She called out to you twice but you were not there:
1. Danaa September 10, 2011 at 6:49 pm with 1 replies
Avi, you’re back! been asking about where you disappeared to…..your voice was missed.
2. Danaa August 28, 2011 at 2:13 pm
“dimadok’s second sentence here contradicts his first sentence”
That’s because he is lying. He has no more been a soldier in Israel, much less on duty at checkpoints, than elephants can grow wings and fly. His post smacks of disingenuousness. He wants to add some on-the-ground eye witness legitimacy to his preposterous claims, so he invented the “I was at a checkpoint” storyline.
The most he has done is serve the 6 months or so new older olehs and other foreign volunteers to the IDF do (the Rahm Emmanuel’s kind of service). Such volunteer draftees will not be put on duty at a checkpoint in any case. Chances are that he hasn’t done even that much and in all likelihood is at the wrong age for “joining” the IDF. His sentence of having served 3 years at checkpoints is a dead giveaway. he must have googled and found out that Israeli men are drafted for 3 years (in reality, most are released sooner). I’ve seen nothing in dimadok’s posts that would lend authenticity to his claims of being an Israeli. A pretend one, yes, an extended time visitor, perhaps.
Which BTW, is similar to eee, who claims to be an Israeli, but is, in reality a failed oleh.
Where’s Avi, our master debunker of Israeli soldier myths when we need him? he’d most likely chase dimadok off these boards in shame and trepidation.
Yep, this is the signal that W&M weren’t anti-semites after all.
Even Thomas Friedman at the Times today openly speaks about the political damage done by the powerful lobby:
“This has also left the U.S. government fed up with Israel’s leadership but a hostage to its ineptitude, because the powerful pro-Israel lobby in an election season can force the administration to defend Israel at the U.N., even when it knows Israel is pursuing policies not in its own interest or America’s.”
I guess this signals the turning point.
hey paul.. nice to see you here.. i hope you stick around..
it does look like a turning point from a few years ago when w&m were being chastised for this and that, not to forget the anti-semite label was also in regular use…. things can change, although those playing with sticks and stones would be unlikely to want to acknowledge any of this….
at this point in time the changes coming appear very real and very positive or frightening, depending on what you want to hold onto…
Hi James,
these are dramatic times in the Middle East, and I’ll continue to watch this site closely in the coming weeks/months, but I’ll try to avoid getting fully absorbed into the discussions like in the old days, because I have to focus on my trip to the Magreb countries.
Yes, as you said: “those playing with sticks and stones would be unlikely to want to acknowledge any of this”. But I think it’s very significant when both the Washington Post and the NYT refer to “the powerful Israel lobby” at the same time, because that’s an acknowledgment from the MSM that defines a new normal, and it makes the right-wing politically motivated accusations of anti-Semitism and “delegitimism” sound more dubious and fringe-like, and the voices of people like Carter, Tutu, Walt, and Mearsheimer (and, if you will, Petraeus and Gates) the voices of reason and common sense.
It’s strange to witness this semantic spectacle, but I think that’s what’s happening right now, and it’s significant.
i think you’re right paul… the semantics have changed and it is significant.. i can’t remember when you leave on the trip, but stay well and enjoy what sounds like a really fascinating time..
Thanks, James. I’ll leave in the beginning of November and return in April. I’m very excited about this trip.
The scariest part of that op ed is towards the end, where the authors call on Obama to use the U.S. Navy to threaten Turkey: