4.28.2010

Foreign Affairs Friday*: Genocide and Geopolitics

April 24, which was just a few days ago, is the day that commemorates the deaths of up to 1.5 million Armenians as the Ottoman Empire dissolved in what is now Turkey during World War I. While this would seem like a clear-cut case of genocide, the US has not officially called it that, despite much pressure over the years. Heck, even Kim Kardashian says it should be recognized (but she's of Armenian descent, so she's biased).

The reason the US has not used the g-word is because we want to stay in Turkey's good graces. Turkey is an important country for several reasons. First, it is a secular Muslim country, and thus provides an example of how the West would like to see other Middle Eastern governments operate, with a separation between mosque and state. Second, Turkey's location makes it a potentially valuable partner in dealing with Iran, Iraq, and Syria, as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan, which have a long-simmering territorial dispute we'd like to see resolved. Third, Turkey is a potential conduit of energy from Iraq and Central Asia. The planned Nabucco pipeline and the existing BTC and South Caucasus pipelines have terminals in Turkey. Fourth, Turkey has a large and growing economy and is a potential EU member. Finally, Turkey is a NATO ally.

On the other hand, there are reasons to use the term genocide. First of all, most scholars agree that that's what it was. It was systematic, targeted, and brutal. Second, the Armenian-American lobby is quite powerful, maybe one of the most powerful ethnic lobbies in the US. That means a lot in congressional districts where Armenian-Americans, of which there are 1.5 million in the US, are concentrated.

The US seems to be moving towards recognition. President Obama said during the campaign he would recognize the genocide. He did not do so on the 24th, but his statement was pretty close (Turkey didn't like it). The House Foreign Affairs Committee passed a resolution of recognition last month. Additionally, an unnamed Turkish diplomat thinks recognition will happen later this year (right before the election, not coincidentally).

This is one of those classic foreign policy issues; do what's right vs. doing what might make more geopolitical sense. It's not easy.

*As you've seen recently, I'm really going away from doing these only on Friday, but for the sake of tradition and alliteration, I'll keep the title.

2 comments :

  1. My dad was stationed in Turkey during the Cold War because it was easy to spy on Russia from there. (I think they mostly collected Russian radio transmissions, but he said that sometimes they'd look across the Black Sea with binoculars and see some Russian dude watching them right back.)

    I didn't know the Armenian-American community was so vocal. Do you think it's because they have this issue to rally around?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that would be why. Baltic-Americans have also been powerful, and they were united behind opposing the Soviet Union and pushing for Baltic independence. Us Norwegian-Americans may be more numerous, but we're just too fractured to have an impact.

    ReplyDelete