EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Armenian Paper Downplays Postponement Of Us Genocide Vote

EURASIA INSIGHT

ARMENIAN PAPER DOWNPLAYS POSTPONEMENT OF US GENOCIDE VOTE
10/22/07
A EurasiaNet Partner Post from BBC Monitoring

An Armenian newspaper has cautioned the public against dramatizing the obvious postponement of a vote in the full US House of Representatives on a draft resolution recognizing mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman empire as genocide. The paper explained the postponement by the present state of US-Turkish relations where both sides are trying to reach a compromise in the context of a looming Turkish invasion of northern Iraq. The paper proposed waiting for an opportune time where the passage of the genocide resolution could be guaranteed in the US legislature. It also highlighted the long-term interests of parties involved in securing the ultimate approval of the resolution. The following is the text of an article by Vardan Grigoryan entitled "The vote postponement won’t be a tragedy" and published in the Armenian newspaper Hayots Ashkharh on 19 October:

The results of discussions between the US legislative and executive authorities in recent days suggest that the final approval of resolution 106 on the recognition of Armenian genocide in the US House of Representatives could be postponed for a while.

In our previous analyses we predicted the possibility of such developments and concluded that the moment of the resolution’s final approval should absolutely coincide with the developments in Iraq and, as a result of this, with the crisis period in worsening Turkey-US relations. It was clear from the beginning that by the vote in the Foreign Relations Committee [of the US House of Representatives] US legislators in fact did not satisfy the demands of the Armenian lobby, but took a preventive measure to restrain Turkey, which has amassed an army on Iraqi borders.

About a half-month break has been currently announced in the Turkey-US confrontation over northern Iraq. It is natural that under these conditions none of the sides will take steps that would aggravate the situation. Thus, it is not by chance that the number of those who are in favour of the soonest vote on resolution 106 on the recognition of Armenian genocide in the House of Representatives, is decreasing.

Does it mean that we should remain as euphoric we were as right after 10 October [the vote in the congressional committee] - waiting for the victory of the Armenian lobby, or on the opposite - claim that the Foreign Relations Committee’s approval of resolution 106 on the recognition of Armenian genocide does not benefit us in any way and that the US legislature has cheated the Armenian people yet again?

We believe that these two points of view circulating among us currently are limited and clearly biased. This could either inspire or dash the hopes of only those who believed up to the present time that the reason for our success is Armenians’ being a serious factor in global politics, and those who cannot abandon this point of view, or on the contrary those who absolutely deny the inevitable positive outcome of the approval of resolution 106.

Instead of being guided by these superficial and clearly politicized assessments, it is necessary to precisely calculate the convenient moment when it will be possible to achieve the approval of resolution 106 in the US House of Representatives. It is clear that the crisis in US-Turkey relations has objective reasons, which will not disappear even if the [Turkish] Prime Minister [Recep Tayyip] Erdogan visits US 100 times. In its turn, the demonstration of Ankara’s frank wish to move troops into northern Iraq is surely related not only to the intention to destroy PKK [Kurdistan Workers’ Party] fighters.

Thus, the problem is whether Turkey, which is threatening a military invasion, will manage to postpone the implementation of Iraq’s federalization programme, already approved by the US Senate, and if yes, by what time? On the other hand, will the US, via creating a real threat of recognition of Armenian genocide, will manage to gradually accommodate the stubborn Turkey to the idea of implementating Iraq’s federalization programme and as its outcome the prospect of the establishment of an independent Kurdish state.

Temporary "ceasefires" are possible in Turkey-US relations in the nearest future, but they will inevitably be followed by a deeper crisis. Thus, from the point of view of the super task of ensuring the recognition of Armenian genocide there is no need today to be discontent or impatient. On the contrary - resolution 106 must be put to the vote when 100 per cent support is ensured for its approval in the House of Representatives.

It is clear that the forces which ensured the approval of resolution 106 on the recognition of Armenian genocide in Foreign Relations Committee of US House of Representatives - primarily, the Democratic Party - currently are somewhat cautious to take dramatic steps. They could benefit from the game started against the current administration. The US Jewish lobby and Israel, which are using it to lead things towards the establishment of a Kurdish state, have also found themselves in a beneficial situation. Thus, both of them need time to ensure a smooth change in US policy and implement the expected referendum on the issue of Kirkuk’s status.

Afterwards, when the inevitable new crisis of the US policy in Iraq takes place on one side and in Turkish-US relations on the other side, it will not be difficult for the Armenian side to again ensure a prevailing majority in House of Representatives for the final approval of resolution 106.

Editor�s Note: Source: Hayots Ashkharh, Yerevan, in Armenian 19 Oct 07, pp 1, 3

The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues.

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.