Obama and Armenia
President Obama, during his campaign, made it clear that he recognized the Armenian Genocide. During that same campaign, he made strong statements on the Sudan and the genocide going on there. Sadly, he hasn’t done much with the Sudan. I am watching what happens with Turkey. Will he actually do something and make an official declaration about what happened? I hope so. Even if it has taken this long, recognition of the Armenian Genocide would be a big step forward for the United States. However, I fear now it might not seem to be politically correct, even as it seems doing something to help fix what is going on in the Sudan appears to be for Obama unimportant now that he is in office. If Obama backs down here, it will be another black mark on his record, and people will not forget. Just as we won’t forget Sudan.
Comments are closed.
In writing this, it still looks hopeful that Obama will say something. I hope so. It would be a step forward.
I could not agree more, Henry. Well said.
For what it is worth, I actually had great hope that this was one area where President Obama would actually offer real (and positive) change from the previous administration(s). Needless to say, I’ve been disappointed.
Excellent reminder and consideration.
Feddie and Mark
I was hearing the discussion of it on CSPAN yesterday as I drove to liturgy. The reporter suggested President Obama would be saying something on the genocide and I was pleased to hear it. But then, Gibbs, when asked about the possibility, was unable to confirm or deny it would happen, which made me think the decision (by April 3) had not yet been made. We will see.
Henry,
The Voice of America this morning reports:
“As for the long-contentious issue of Turkish relations with Armenia, Mr. Obama said he has not changed his view that the killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks early last century was genocide. But he said he does not want Washington to interfere in what he called “fruitful negotiations” between Ankara and Yerevan.
“Mr. Gul, who in keeping with Turkish policy rejects the term genocide, said the matter is a historical issue, not a legal one. He offered to open Turkish archives to anyone who would like to investigate the issue as part of a joint commission, adding Turkey would accept the findings.”
From The Washington Post:
“If they [Turkey & Armenia] can move forward and deal with a difficult and tragic history, then I think the entire world should encourage them,” Obama said. “While there has been a good deal of commentary about my views, this is really about how the Turkish and Armenian people deal with the past. And the best way forward for the Turkish and Armenian people is a process that works through the past in a way that is honest, open and constructive.”
Gerald
I disagree with President Obama on this. The Armenian Genocide affected and affects more than Turkey and Armenia. We have a large diaspora in the United States. It becomes, through them, an American situation. Moreover, our place in the world also would have some influence here. If Turkey can get by without recognizing the genocide, the effects of this are going to be felt in Turkey itself, and I fear, will encourage Turkey to keep on as it is, right now, in relation to the Orthodox Christians.
Henry,
Passions are thick on both sides. I wrote my first long statement on the matter in 1976 and it was published in the Congressional Record. At that time, and most likely even now, it was an issue that came up every year. But nothing ever got resolved. When you got people together in a room to discuss the matter, you realized that it was a briar patch no ordinary mortal would want to go near. So the solution was to offer resolutions, speeches, and written statements which seemed to satisfy some people for the moment and no one for the long term.
I’m not familiar at all with the process of reconciliation hinted at in the VOA report. It may have a long history. Maybe not. And there may be some wisdom in letting it go forward without strong outside intervention. But then I’m no longer in a position to advise.
Nearly one hundred years is really a very long time for a people to suffer this way. I grew up with a boy whose father and mother actually came from Armenia. During our youth, I was unaware of the massacre. But since then — whenever I think of this tragedy — my sense of being goes back to him and his parents. And I feel very, very sad. There is so much sadness everywhere.
The Armenian Genocide was real and needs to be acknowledged. As to if the President needs to do it during this trip to Turkey, I’m not sure that is any more essential than he needs to talk against the sad reality of sexual abuse of children during his N.D. speech.
Kurt,
I’m confused. Is there disagreement on the sad reality of sexual abuse of children? Has the Church somehow suggested otherwise? As a candidate did Obama bravely pledge to label sexual abuse a sad reality?
As a candidate Obama did pledge to label the mass killings as genocide, and I suppose you are right that doing it in Turkey would be impolitic. Of course, that was McCain’s ultimate point in refusing to commit to such a label. Basically, he said it would be politically unhelpful to make a statement that would be viewed by much of the world as blaming modern Turkey for something that happened before its founding. But I’ll give McCain this — if he thought it was sensible to do he’d have the courage to do it in Turkey, that’s for sure.
I hope he will, but he won’t. He does not have the fortitude to do such a thing.
Sad politics (or geo-political considerations) have to play into this. My great-grandfather was orphaned at 5 and fled Armenia during this time.
Nope. Instead there was a push to include Turkey into the EU and show the world that the new U.S. administration wishes to work with Islamic nations (despite the “secular state” veil, Turkey is very much an Islamic nation that refuses basic freedoms to other religions and cultures). Yet another black mark.