Since 2006, the US Congress has had a fascination with making sure that the tragedy of the Christian Armenians forced to leave the Anatolian plateau in 1915-16 is labeled a "genocide" and that this terms is applied by all that refer to the horrific event.
Why? What does US foreign policy gain, either in Turkey or Armenia, by applying this one-and-only term?
The event happened in the 20 months of 1915 and 1916, and the numbers of dead range from 300,000 (Turkey) to 1.5 million (Armenian). These deaths resulted from exposure, starvation, dehydration and disease as an entire population of Armenians were forced out of Turkey entirely and into the Syrian desert beyond the "Ottoman" frontier. No one, not even Turkey, denies that atrocities were committed. After WWI, Turkey held trials in which the governor of Anatolia and 14 other military and political leaders were found guilty of crimes ranging from murder to "barbarism" against the ethnic Armenians, and all hanged (or sentenced to hang, if they were tried in absentia).
Armenia still has issues with this problem, and does want the event recognized as genocide... and understandably so. They are a body of government made up of Armenians, representing Armenian interests, and defending Armenian rights, and as such can call for whatever terminology they wish to have attached to this dark chapter in their history.
I applaud President Obama for putting the brakes on this process. Congress passed a resolution in 2008 wherein all references to the event within the US Government would refer to the tragedy as "genocide", and the President has refused to sign it, or even endorse it. Whatever his intentions or reasoning, it is the right thing to do, because it flies in the face of the latest round of American "politically correct" obsession that seems to be floating around DC.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment