OBAMA and Armenian Issue: Moving Forward

The following article by Bruce Fein, was published in The Journal of
Turkish Weekly on January 27, 2009.

Armenian Issue: Moving Forward

During the Senate confirmation hearings of the newly confirmed
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Senator Robert Menendez (D. N.J.)
lobbied the Obama administration to characterize the tragic events of
World War I as a “universally recognized” Armenian “genocide”.  That
official verdict was said necessary to “move forward.” The Secretary
of State demurred on the characterization question, but concurred with
the idea of moving beyond the contentious status quo.

Moving forward, however, requires recognition of facts, not fiction:
that the Armenian “genocide” is disputed by reputable scholars and
historians; that politicians are ill-equipped to deliver “genocide”
verdicts on matters light years beyond their ken; that Ottoman Muslims
also suffered horribly during WWI at the hands of Armenians fighting
as armed belligerents; and, that voicing sympathy for Armenian
suffering while ignoring the suffering of those whom Armenians
slaughtered and terrorized would reflect the Christian bigotry of
yesteryear.

The Armenian “genocide” is hotly disputed within the universe of
genuine Middle East scholars versed in the Ottoman Empire, the
circumstances of World War I, and otherwise.  An inexhaustive list of
doubters would include:  famed Middle East expert Bernard Lewis of
Princeton University, the late Stanford Shaw of U.C.L.A., Guenter Lewy
of the University of Massachusetts, Justin McCarthy of the University
of Louisville, Norman Itzkowitz of Princeton University, Brian G.
Williams of the University of Massachusetts, David Fromkin of Boston
University, Avigdor Levy of Brandeis University, Michael M. Gunter of
Tennessee Tech, Pierre Oberling of Hunter College, the late Roderic
Davison of George Washington University, Michael Radu of Foreign
Policy Research Institute,  and military historian Edward J. Erickson.
Outside of the United States even more scholars have endorsed a
contra-genocide analysis of the history of the Ottoman Armenians,
among them Gilles Veinstein of the College de France, Stefano
Trinchese of the University of Chieti, Augusto Sinagra of the
University of Romae-Sapienza, Norman Stone of Bilkent University, and
the historian Andrew Mango of the University of London.  In addition
to these and other scholars, the United Nations, Great Britain, and
Sweden have refused to endorse the “genocide” label.

Politicians, including Members of Congress or the President, are
ill-suited to decide the issue pivoting on century-old happenings that
sharply divide experts.  They have neither the time nor inclination to
undertake intellectual labors commensurate with the importance of a
“genocide” charge.  And they do not sit like members of a jury to
listen to both sides present their respective cases.  Senator Menendez
exemplifies why politicians should shy from deciding ancient
historical controversies.  He rendered judgment without examining all
the credible evidence and analyses.

Moving forward on the “genocide” question requires placing the
decision with an international commission of impartial experts with
access to all relevant archives.  The most important archives that
remain closed belong to Armenian organizations.  Turkey’s Prime
Minister has agreed to the international commission solution to the
Armenian “genocide” issue.

Moving forward further requires reciprocal apologies by both Turks and
Armenians for the mutual devastation wrought upon each other.  What is
customarily ignored are World War I’s harrowing Ottoman Muslim deaths
effectuated by numerous bloody Armenian revolts; raids and slaughters
by Armenian extremist revolutionaries; treasonous defections in the
hundreds of thousands to fight for invading Russian and French armies;
and, austere wartime conditions that occasioned starvation, disease,
epidemics, and deaths from acute shortages of medical personnel and
medicine.  According to research reports, nearly 524,000 Ottoman
Muslims perished from the actions of Armenian revolutionaries during
the war.

Armenians have never acknowledged any culpability for their side’s
atrocities of World War I. Instead, they apotheosize to this day those
Armenians who murdered scores of Turkish diplomats in the 1970’s and
1980’s.

William Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice” descried the bigoted
hierarchy of human suffering that would be reflected by expressing
moral outrage over historical Armenian suffering or killings while
remaining silent over the counterpart suffering and deaths of Ottoman
Muslims or Turks. To paraphrase from an immortalized passage:  “Hath
not a Turk eyes?  Hath not a Turk hands, organs, dimensions, senses,
affections, passions?  fed with the same food, hurt with the same
weapons, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same
winter and summer, as a Christian is?  If you prick a Turk, does he
not bleed?  If you tickle a Turk, does he not laugh?  If you poison a
Turk, does he not die?”

In sum, to honor her pledge to move forward on the Armenian “genocide”
question, Secretary Clinton should promote the ideas of an
international commission of experts and reciprocal apologies.  It is
also the best formula for Turkish-Armenian reconciliation.