Diplomacy - US is still figuring out new ways not to.

[Arrian]

But truthtelling, memory, still matters. Ive heard that enough from survivors of the Shoah. The perpetrators wanted their crimes hidden, and the victims are doubly victimized when the crimes are whitewashed.

And the question, of course, is whether truth-telling:

a) is properly done by non-binding resolutions of congress (particularly concerning events that the US congress had nothing whatsoever to do with)

b) is worth pissing off our ally, even if our ally was (and is) in the wrong.

Individual historians and others have, if I'm not mistaken, done extensive work on the Armenian genocide/ethnic cleansing/whatever. The truth is out there for those who want to see it. A non-binding resolution from the US congress, or the lack thereof, isn't going to change that, is it?

-Arrian

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo

So a rubber stamp carries the same level of culpability as independent acts of congress?

Seeing as how Congress is an equal branch to the Prez, absolutely. Congress (specifically, the members of Congress who rubber-stamped Dear Leader's ****ing up of our foreign policy) is totally culpable.

Don't get me wrong. What the Dems are doing is stupid. But this is an insignificant drop in the bucket compared to the enabling by the Republican Congress of Bush's sheer decimation of our foreign relations.

Co equal yes but typically with defined scopes of powers. That meaning for the most part the Executive establishes foreign policy and the legislative ratifies or rejects treaties trade agreements and the like. Typically the legislative does not establish foreign policy. I struggle to find examples of when congress independently established foreign policy in defiance of the executive.

Of course the President does reserve the right to veto this useless garbage. "Course the whole thing will be well known by then, and if he vetoes it, gives one more jab at the president being soft on genocidal regimes and/or obstructionistic to the Dems.

To LotM,

a) A meaningless resolution to simply condemn Armenian genocide circa 1915 does what to advance current interests? There are no reparations intended and no sanctions. It merely is an insult to a country that will surely take it as an insult.

b) Like the ME situation circa 1947, the statue of limitations has long since passed to claim greivance. Its time to move on.

I feel for all who lost relatives and friends but its time to move past this. Dredging up this garbage needlessly, and simply perpetuates rifts.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian


And the question, of course, is whether truth-telling:

a) is properly done by non-binding resolutions of congress (particularly concerning events that the US congress had nothing whatsoever to do with)

b) is worth pissing off our ally, even if our ally was (and is) in the wrong.

Individual historians and others have, if I'm not mistaken, done extensive work on the Armenian genocide/ethnic cleansing/whatever. The truth is out there for those who want to see it. A non-binding resolution from the US congress, or the lack thereof, isn't going to change that, is it?

-Arrian

a - The US govt deals with (And will continue to deal with) Turkey. It does not seem inappropriate for the Congress to put those relations in the context of truth

b. I dont know. Is Turkey only going to stay on good terms with countries that deny the genocide? How important is truth telling about genocide, for a congress that has to deal with Kurdistand and Darfur, with Ahmadinajad and Kosovo? Thats why Im saying you may be right, but im still troubled.


Another view


"This summer, Elie Wiesel was the lead signer of a statement co-signed by 126 Holocaust scholars and intellectuals on “Affirming the Incontestable Fact of the Armenian Genocide” (June 8, 2000, New York Times). Moreover, the Association of Genocide Scholars has ratified a similar Armenian genocide resolution. Not long ago, Israeli Minister of Education Yossi Sarid publicly declared that the Armenian genocide “would have a prominent place in the Israeli school curriculum.” Even twelve thousand Turkish citizens living in Germany petitioned their government last year to acknowledge the Armenian genocide. In short, the world is asking Turkey to confront its moral responsibilities, to stop the violence of state-sponsored genocide denial, and to apologize to the Armenian community.

Unfortunately, the force of economic and political state interests does not always coincide with the truth of historical witnessing. By various methods, including threats of canceling large economic deals, the Turkish government has had success in coercing parliamentary votes into “officially” colluding with its genocide denial. While this is shameful, it cannot erase over eight decades of scholarship and survivor testimony, as well as thousands of government records documenting the Armenian genocide.

Denial of genocide–whether that of the Turks against the Armenians or the Nazis against the Jews–is not an act of historical reinterpretation. Genocide deniers conspire to reshape history in order to demonize the victims and rehabilitate the perpetrators. Denial of genocide is the final stage of genocide; it is what Elie Wiesel has called “a double killing.” Denial murders the dignity of the survivors by destroying the remembrance of the crime.

Genocide denial is an insidious form of intellectual and moral degradation. It violates what a university represents. As Turkey seeks to improve its human rights record–one of the worst in the world today–we are hopeful that all Turkish citizens will work to end their government’s denial of the Armenian genocide and to seek reconciliation with the world community.

Deborah E. Lipstadt

Director, Institute of Jewish Studies

Dorot Professor of Modern Jewish and Holocaust Studies

and

Wole Soyinka

Nobel Laureate in Literature

Robert W. Woodruff Professor of the Arts

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
None of their members attempted to screw with our relations with a major ally, AFAIK.

IIRC a couple people were a little miffed when walked into this Iraq place.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
None of their members attempted to screw with our relations with a major ally, AFAIK.

. . . . .




You're joking here, right?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
so Ogie, Arrian and Ramo are all agreed that its best to keep our mouths shut about genocide for the sake of Incirlik?




Im not saying youre wrong, im just troubled.

I think this characterization in the OP is correct:

Imagine the 435 members of the House, many of whom still don't know the difference between Iraqi Shiites and Sunnis, solemnly weighing whether Schiff's version of events 92 years ago in northeastern Turkey deserves congressional endorsement.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe

To LotM,

a) A meaningless resolution to simply condemn Armenian genocide circa 1915 does what to advance current interests? There are no reparations intended and no sanctions. It merely is an insult to a country that will surely take it as an insult.

b) Like the ME situation circa 1947, the statue of limitations has long since passed to claim greivance. Its time to move on.

I feel for all who lost relatives and friends but its time to move past this. Dredging up this garbage needlessly, and simply perpetuates rifts.

a. I understand the world is all about current interests, and telling truths is left to those wimply liberal artists at universities, at least until the fizzicists can get their hands on all the money.

b. Israel is quite willing to forgive the terrorist acts commited by arab groups against Jews in 1947, and the british sending refugees headed to Israel to detention camps in Cyprus. But as unpleasant as those things were, they did not constitute genocide, and so any denial is not that important. At this point all we want is for the Arabs to make peace with Israel.

BTW, if what you meant to refer to was Israeli complicity in certain acts of expulsion of Palestinians during 1948, I think the time will come for the Knesset to acknowledge that. Its difficult now in that Israels existence is still contested, as Turkeys is not. And of course that not only wasnt a genocide, it was not a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing either, nor was it the principle factor in the flight of the Palestinians.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


I think this characterization in the OP is correct:

Imagine the 435 members of the House, many of whom still don't know the difference between Iraqi Shiites and Sunnis, solemnly weighing whether Schiff's version of events 92 years ago in northeastern Turkey deserves congressional endorsement.

Imagine them making decisions on global warming. In that they will have to look to scholars, as best they can. Thats what theyve done here as well.

[Kuciwalker]

Imagine them making decisions on global warming.

I have no more faith they will make that decision properly than this one, even if in both cases the end up with the correct answer.

[Ramo]

Co equal yes but typically with defined scopes of powers. That meaning for the most part the Executive establishes foreign policy and the legislative ratifies or rejects treaties trade agreements and the like. Typically the legislative does not establish foreign policy.

But it does. See the Iraq War Resolution, Military Commissions Act, the total lack of oversight on pretty much everything Dear Leader did, etc. The point ultimately is that without the consent of the Republican Congress, Dear Leader couldn't have ****ed up our foreign relations anywhere near the extent to which it currently has. And what the Dems are currently doing pales in comparison, to understate things, to the monumental run of malfeasance by the past two Congresses...

If we restrain the PKK, and get an equitable solution in Kirkuk, I cant see Turkey intervening over the Armenian res. If we DONT restrain the PKK, I dont think NOT passing the res is going to matter much.

Probably not. As I said, this is pretty insignificant, but inflames the situation at a sensitive time. And frankly, I don't think that the Turks are looking for a human rights lecture from us, of all countries. Perhaps if we followed through by calling the Trail of Tears a genocide, or better yet, restored habeas corpus...

[BeBMan]

In any case, before they twist it into a vague resolution denouncing "ethnical cleansing" as Ramo suggests they would be IMO better off with doing nothing at all.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
so Ogie, Arrian and Ramo are all agreed that its best to keep our mouths shut about genocide for the sake of Incirlik?




Im not saying youre wrong, im just troubled.

Is the genocide currently happening? Does complaining about it now provide a material benefit? Does it cost us something? Forgive me for being highly cynical, but perhaps it isn't wise to further weaken attempts to control the chaos in Iraq (costing people lives now) in exchange for what essentially ammounts to pandering to a special interest in a few members' districts.

Now, if they actually cared about the genocide victims, if this were an ongoing genocide, then yes. If they had shown any interest in Darfur, maybe they'd be more credible. As it is, a handful of powerful congressmen have decided to insult Turkey for no reason.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
[ Looks a bit like rank hypocrisy concerning past and present circumstances. Perhaps if we followed through by calling the Trail of Tears a genocide, or better yet, restored habeas corpus...

The trail of tears was an ethnic cleansing. There was apparently inadequate provision of supplies, which aggravated the situation, and some viciousness on the part of at leat one local official, but nothing comparable to what occured with the armenians.

BTW, the Virginia legislature recently apologized for slavery (and also for mistreatment of native americans) I posted about that hear. Some of those who join you on the "realist" side of the armenian res were not too happy with the virginia resolution, either.

as for habeas corpus, not every nation has the same rules wrt to that. Theres no international convention on HC, that I know of, in contrast to genocide.

And btw, nations like France, which dont particularly agree with the US in the WOT also have passed resolutions on the Armenian genocide. One has nothing to do with the other, its a red herring.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


a. I understand the world is all about current interests, and telling truths is left to those wimply liberal artists at universities, at least until the fizzicists can get their hands on all the money.

Its not even telling the truth. It is simply saying nothing as it is an acknowledged history by all respectable historians. No need for the US to rub Turkeys nose in it.

b. Israel is quite willing to forgive the terrorist acts commited by arab groups against Jews in 1947, and the british sending refugees headed to Israel to detention camps in Cyprus. But as unpleasant as those things were, they did not constitute genocide, and so any denial is not that important. At this point all we want is for the Arabs to make peace with Israel.

BTW, if what you meant to refer to was Israeli complicity in certain acts of expulsion of Palestinians during 1948, I think the time will come for the Knesset to acknowledge that. Its difficult now in that Israels existence is still contested, as Turkeys is not. And of course that not only wasnt a genocide, it was not a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing either, nor was it the principle factor in the flight of the Palestinians.

Actually my point was quite the opposite. Time for the pals to get over their grievances as by now almost 3 generations have passed. You'll find my stances towards Israel typically sympathetic. Time for the temple to be built so that baby Jeebus can come down from the clouds.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Victor Galis



Is the genocide currently happening? Does complaining about it now provide a material benefit? Does it cost us something? Forgive me for being highly cynical, but perhaps it isn't wise to further weaken attempts to control the chaos in Iraq (costing people lives now) in exchange for what essentially ammounts to pandering to a special interest in a few members' districts.

Now, if they actually cared about the genocide victims, if this were an ongoing genocide, then yes. If they had shown any interest in Darfur, maybe they'd be more credible. As it is, a handful of powerful congressmen have decided to insult Turkey for no reason.

While the genocide is not going on, human rights violations of some sort are still going in Turkey, for example when you're one that calls the events a genocide.....