On a new state department policy on Turkey and Armenia, Bruce Fein

Bruce Fein

The Quest for Change

Posted March 7, 2008 | 05:36 PM (EST)

---

By all accounts, the 2008 presidential election is about "change," yet it is politics as usual when it comes to the ongoing Armenian dispute with Turkey. The quarrel over World War I history in Anatolia -- which many have difficulty even finding on a map -- has been turned into a special interest issue by the Armenian lobby. Political calculations prompted Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to release presidential campaign statements supporting a congressional resolution to mischaracterize tragic events which unfolded during the waning years of the Ottoman Empire as genocide. The two White House aspirants are aping the Armenian resolution initiative of the House of Representatives in the previous Congress, whereby Members would hijack the role of both historian and the World Court in deciding the genocide question; this resolution was derailed by the then House Speaker. The Obama-Clinton pandering to the Armenian lobby betrays the signature Washington habit of making promises now and thinking about them later. It speaks volumes that Senator John McCain, arch enemy of earmarks and sister special interest money, refrained from bowing to Armenian campaign contributions and votes.

For several decades, some outspoken Armenian-Americans have politicized the events of 1915 in lieu of seeking the full truth. By playing their game, Obama and Clinton wander from history, fan the flames of division, and stray ever farther from what they purport to be about: change from past myopia, folly, or pettiness.

Turkey opened the Ottoman archives for academic research many years ago. Armenian archives that remain closed, including those in the United States, should be opened for examination by scholars. Openness would foster constructive change by creating an impartial forum free from the influences of domestic electoral politics to establish a more comprehensive narrative of the events of 1915. Genocide questions are too important to be entrusted to amateurs. They should be addressed by objective experts in the proper forum un-distracted by political calculations.

Turkish President Abdullah Gul responded to the recent Armenian presidential election results by calling for "normalized relations" between Turkey and Armenia and urging increased cooperation. His remarks highlight Turkey's commitment to change from a political landscape reminiscent of a petrified forest. Our nation's leaders, both current and prospective, should follow President Gul's instruction.

Reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia is no pipedream. Who ever thought Germany and France would reconcile in the short decades after World War II? At issue are not only the grim events of 1915, where innocent life was tragically lost on both sides during the war, but also Armenia's occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh, territory belonging to Azerbaijan. Turkish-Armenian reconciliation may need the catalyst of leaders who care not only about geostrategic maneuvering, but the people whose lives would be directly implicated. To play the role of facilitator, a United States leader would need to harmonize the disparate voices of domestic constituencies, without neglecting strategic allies such as Turkey.

A leader who promotes reconciliation and peace among peoples and nations is the architect of change.

America deserves that kind of leader.

Response:

Bruce Fein Explains the Turkey/Armenia Issue
Michael van der Galien on March 13, 2008 @ 12:02 pm CET
Publish Post

Bruce Fein wrote a great post for the Huffington Post (of all places) about ” the ongoing Armenian dispute with Turkey.” “The quarrel over World War I history in Anatolia — which many have difficulty even finding on a map — has been turned into a special interest issue by the Armenian lobby,” he writes, and American politicians seem all too willing to give in to Armenian pressure.

Political calculations prompted Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to release presidential campaign statements supporting a congressional resolution to mischaracterize tragic events which unfolded during the waning years of the Ottoman Empire as genocide. The two White House aspirants are aping the Armenian resolution initiative of the House of Representatives in the previous Congress, whereby Members would hijack the role of both historian and the World Court in deciding the genocide question; this resolution was derailed by the then House Speaker. The Obama-Clinton pandering to the Armenian lobby betrays the signature Washington habit of making promises now and thinking about them later. It speaks volumes that Senator John McCain, arch enemy of earmarks and sister special interest money, refrained from bowing to Armenian campaign contributions and votes.

For several decades, some outspoken Armenian-Americans have politicized the events of 1915 in lieu of seeking the full truth. By playing their game, Obama and Clinton wander from history, fan the flames of division, and stray ever farther from what they purport to be about: change from past myopia, folly, or pettiness.

He goes on to write that Turkey open its archives (for research) years ago. The Armenian archives, on the other hand, remain closed. Why don’t Armenians open their archives? Well, the reason is simple: Armenians misbehaved tremendously before, during and after the first World War. The world doesn’t have to know that, of course. Those who want to spend time investigating this matter know so nonetheless, but if the Armenian archives contradict the Armenian claims (and propaganda), well, they’ve got a problem.

So, that’s why many people who know a bit about this issue think the Armenians refuse to open their archives (interestingly enough, they continue to say that Turkey has to open its archives, even though Turkey has opened them; it’s all part of the propaganda war).

Fein also writes that if Armenians want reconciliation, they should open up the archives. The problem with this kind of reasoning is, of course, that Armenian lobbyists don’t want reconciliation. They want money and lands.

However; at the moment that Armenia understands that this isn’t going to happen, then - and only then - they might be willing to reconcile with Turkey. In order for that to happen, Fein writes, the US should stop functioning as a mouthpiece for Armenian propagandists. The US shouldn’t be an activist, it should play “the role of facilitator.”

The next president, he writes, should be a person who understands that. Not a person who’s willing to condemn Turkey for something that happened before Turkey existed and who doesn’t understand the difference between a tremendous tragedy with many deaths (on both sides) and genocide.

Well said Bruce.
Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

* Digg
* del.icio.us
* Technorati
* SphereIt
* NewsVine
* TailRank
* Reddit
* StumbleUpon

6 Comments

1.

1 Harb
March 13, 2008 @ 2:08 pm CET

The issue of whether or not a genocide was committed by the Ottoman Empire against their Armenian Citizens has been decided. The International Association of Genocide Scholars has determined it to be a genocide. It seems that Clinton and Obama are courageously standing against genocide denial despite the fallout with Turkey.
2.

2 raffi
March 13, 2008 @ 3:23 pm CET

i don’t think that for obama and clinton, it’s an issue of courage, but rather of votes. either way, the content of this article is total bullox. it is true that the turkish archives are open, no one disputes this, however, it is a question of ‘what’ is open. though technically you may enter through the doors, the number of articles that one may read are quite restricted, mostly because turkish scholars must go over them first. now, about the armenian archives of 1915, i find it rather difficult to see how mr. fein wants them open. he must not have realised that in 1915, armenia did not exist, for it was under ottoman occupation for the last 400 years. records have been kept, however, and today’s modern republic of armenia’s archives are quite open. it is interesting to note that mr. fein places all armenians in the same boat, as if they were one thinking block. he seems to be sure that all armenians are sleeper agents, part of a global conspiracy to soil the ‘good name’ of the turkish state. it is unsafe to say that all armenians just want land and money. the land issue has nothing to do with the genocide, as it is related to the sevres treaty, and compensation is not such a bad thing to be sure, the jewish state was built on german money after all. how easy is it to say that armenians are some sort of money hungry creatures. many times over, armenian families of genocide victims have gone to court to retrieve their insurance money. however, after winning, they were only payed a tiny fraction of what was owed, but to the armenians it was not the monitary value that counted, but rather the symbolic value. thus it is my opinion that bruce fein is living in a kemalist fantasy world. also it must be noted that politics are what create history, so for turks to claim that armenians are trying to ‘politicise a historical issue’ is quite wrong.
3.

3 Richard
March 13, 2008 @ 3:26 pm CET

Interesting piece from the "Resident Scholar for the Turkish Coalition of America. Prior to this position, Mr. Fein was also resident scholar at the Assembly of Turkish American Associations and a columnist for the Turkish Times".

He repeats a few inaccuracies though. Armenia’s archives are open and accessible. The various Ottoman and Turkish archives have been progressively opened in recent years although some still remain restricted and there is evidence of "cleansing".

The U.S.A. should be putting more pressure on Turkey to end its blockade of Armenia and re-establish diplomatic relations with this tiny country. Armenia has offered to do so without pre-conditions. This is the way forward to reconciliation.
4.

4 Nihat
March 13, 2008 @ 5:15 pm CET

There wasn’t Armenia in those years, so there are no Armenian archives to speak of. That’s a good one…
5.

5 Harut
March 13, 2008 @ 6:36 pm CET

When you have thousands upon thousands of Armenians who are living today all over the world, who did not see any grandparents, any aunts, any uncles, any cousins because all were massacred by the Turks, this are the Armenian archives. When you have both of your parents growing up after the 1915 Genocide with out any relatives, this is the Armenian archives. And also to mention that this archives have mouths and this archives do speak. And times this archives speak very loud. And even when there time is up and they have to pass on, their off springs in multiple numbers will be continuing to be the old and new archives.

The Bible says:
John 12:24
I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds.
6.

6 Jason
March 13, 2008 @ 9:37 pm CET

Because so many (more than 60% of all comments on this thread) of those who disagree have shown themselves unwilling or unable to do so without using racial and ethnic slurs and baseless accusations of corruption, comments have been deleted and this comments thread has been closed.

Let this be a warning to those who would use racial, religious, and national slurs and baseless accusations in the future as well. If you do it, your comments will be deleted, threads closed, and you may be banned.

If you can disagree civilly, without name-calling, without bigotry, and without accusations of corruption, you are welcome and encouraged to comment.

Backgrounder: Was Iran the Reason for the CIA Director's Visit to Baku?

General Michael Hayden Meets With Azerbaijani President To Discuss Strategic Iran War Plans

Submitted by MichaelVail on Fri, 2007-10-05 06:53.

• Azerbaijani
• Baku
• Border
• CIA
• Eldar Makhmudov
• IAEA
• Ilham Aliyev
• iran
• Iraq
• Michael Hayden
• neighbor
• nuclear weapons
• Our Government At Work
• Spotlight
• War Machine
• World News

Eurasia Insight
Posted: 2007-10-05 01:43:14

AZERBAIJAN: IS IRAN THE REASON FOR THE CIA DIRECTOR'S RECENT VISIT TO BAKU?

Rovshan Ismayilov: 10/04/07

Political analysts in Baku are debating the reasons for an unannounced late September trip to Azerbaijan by Central Intelligence Agency Director Gen. Michael Hayden. US diplomats remain tight-lipped about the visit. Many local experts, however, contend that Hayden’s talks with Azerbaijani leaders likely concerned Iran, Azerbaijan’s neighbor to the south.

Gen. Hayden’s one-day visit on September 28, which included a meeting with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev and Minister of National Security Eldar Makhmudov, was not publicized in advance, and few details have since been provided. According to informed sources, the CIA director arrived in Baku late on the night of September 27. The Turan news agency has cited “unofficial sources” as saying Hayden stayed in a private downtown hotel at which special security measures were taken. He left Baku in the early evening on September 28.

US Embassy spokesperson Jonathan Henick told EurasiaNet that Hayden’s visit was part of a trip to several countries in the region. Henick would confirm only that Hayden discussed issues related to regional security and international terrorism with President Aliyev and National Security Minister Makhmudov. Azerbaijani officials likewise declined to elaborate on the nature or specifics of the discussions.

Some Azerbaijani analysts, however, see “the Iranian issue” as the most pressing reason for the CIA director’s trip. The trip came five days before an October 3 statement by US President George W. Bush that Washington was prepared, under certain conditions, to negotiate with Tehran on the nuclear issue.

"This is a leader who has made very provocative statements, and we have made it clear, however, in spite of that we are willing to sit down with him so long as he suspends his program, his nuclear weapons program," President Bush said, referring to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "In other words, it's his choice not mine any more."

“It is obvious that the CIA director would not travel to Baku without a serious reason for discussions,” commented expert Rasim Musabekov.

“It is clear – most likely Iranian issues were discussed.”

Political columnist Rauf Mirkadirov of Baku’s Russian-language Zerkalo (Mirror) daily seconds that view. “[The] CIA director would hardly visit Azerbaijan just for meeting with the president and the national security minister and discussing general issues,” he argued. “Most likely, a complex of problems [was] discussed . . . The major issue is no doubt Iran and the potential development of the situation around its nuclear program,” Mirkadirov said. Relations between Azerbaijan and Russia and the construction of the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline could also have been raised, he added. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Ilgar Mammadov, an independent Baku-based analyst, drew attention to the fact that Hayden's visit occurred shortly before the scheduled start of a trial of a pro-Iranian extremist group charged with trying to create a Shar’ia-based religious state in Azerbaijan.

A preliminary hearing for the government’s case against the 15-member group, named after its leader, Said Dadashbeyli, took place at the end of September in Baku, the Turan news agency reported on October 1. Group members are also charged with high treason, illegal arms possession, illegal contact with foreign intelligence services, robbery and other crimes.

The Ministry of National Security alleges that Dadashbeyli, an Azerbaijani citizen, worked with radical Islamic organizations – as yet not publicly named – and Iranian intelligence agents to set up a state with Shar’ia laws. A military group, dubbed the Northern Army of Mehdi, was allegedly formed by several of the defendants, prosecutors allege. Prosecutors also claim that one of the group’s members, Jeihun Aliyev, traveled to the Iranian holy city of Qom, where he was offered money by Iranian agents. The money was to be used to mount a propaganda campaign designed to undermine Western and Israeli influence in Azerbaijan.

According to the investigation, group members received training in Iran. In Baku, they carried out physical training routines at the Interior Ministry’s Dinamo sports center and held religious discussions at the Karabakh War Invalids Society, according to media reports. Mob-related contract “hit jobs” were allegedly carried out by Dadashbeyli to raise money for the group’s activities, authorities allege.

Neither the group, nor Tehran is known to have commented on the charges. The group’s trial is scheduled to begin on October 8 in Baku behind closed doors.

“Usually, such issues [security, fighting extremists and terrorist groups] are being discussed at the highest level. Therefore, it is possible that Hayden’s visit is somehow linked with this trial,” Mammadov said. “It is possible that Iran has intensified subversive activity against Azerbaijan and the CIA director discussed this issue.” An exchange of intelligence information on extremists groups’ activity in the region, he added, is another possibility. [Ilgar Mammadov is a board member of the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation Azerbaijan. EurasiaNet.org is financed by the Open Society Institute’s Central Eurasia Project].

Azerbaijani media and political analysts have long contended that Azerbaijan could be used by US forces as a base for potential military operation against Iran. The US government, however, has repeatedly denied such a possibility. Azerbaijani officials have also stressed that they have no interest in being part of a military campaign against Iran, a country with which Azerbaijan, also a majority Shi’ite society, shares strong cultural and religious ties. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

The denials, however, have not convinced all analysts. Musabekov did not exclude that Hayden traveled to Baku “to familiarize the Azerbaijani leadership with some additional intelligence data that may change Baku’s position over the issue of military operation against Iran.”

Columnist Mirkadirov takes issue with the claim that Hayden’s trip was part of a larger regional tour. “There was no information that Michael Hayden traveled to any other place in the region except Baku,” he said. “I believe it was a targeted visit to Baku and after that he [Hayden] returned to the United States.”

Some pro-government political analysts, however, prefer to steer clear of commentary. Political analyst Aydin Mirzazade, a parliamentarian for the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan Party, commented that he does not want to get lost in guesswork. “The US Embassy provided some information [on the visit] and I have nothing to add,” he said.

Editor’s Note: Rovshan Ismayilov is a freelance journalist based in Baku.

ARMS SALES to dictators increases: Daily KOS (Daisy Cutter)

Another one of those items I happen to "miss" once in a while. I found it by tracking what goes on and off on that swicki over there on your left.

This is one not to miss - and it indicates what might happen if the oo-la-la Hillary gets in as she and Bill are the couple deluxe for "making" big points with foreign dictators who they try to "dust up" into "supporters of democracy". Big, big buck$ in that manoveur.

Question really is: Arms to protect whom? YOU and me, surely NOT.

Who, just who, is oversighting these guys? I ask you ..

I think I should start a new category called

Military KeynesianISM, the proof is in the pudding.

Arms sales to dictators increase under Bush

by Daisy Cutter [Subscribe]

Wed Jan 03, 2007 at 03:21:17 PM PST

Among Bush apologists, there is somewhat of a myth that the Bush administration is somehow different from old conservative realists in that they put pressure on authoritarian regimes to improve their human rights practices and generally put "freedom over stablity". Michael Rubin in particular recently made the claim that Bush puts fear into the hearts of even long-time allies such as Mubarak. He makes the laughable claim that Egypt's elections were a victory for Bush's "pro-democracy" policy, despite the subsequent crackdowns and arrests of dissidents.

We can now officially put the myth of a democracy promoting Bush administration to rest:

• Daisy Cutter's diary :: ::
• 
  

In the five years since the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush administration has solidified a trend of supplying high technology weapons and millions of dollars in military assistance to allies in the "war on terror." "We’ve found that in exchange for support of U.S. efforts to stamp out international terrorist networks or operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States is sending military assistance to countries with poor human rights records, lack of democracy, and even past support of terrorism, " said Center for Defense Information Senior Analyst Rachel Stohl. "This is an alarming trend," Stohl added.
...
On average, countries have received 50 percent more U.S. weaponry and military training in post-Sept. 11 years than in pre-Sept. 11 years. This trend has been dominated by marked increases in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and Direct Commercial Sales (DCS) specifically. On average, countries are receiving 80 percent more FMF and DCS since FY 02 than prior to FY 02. The increase in FMF and DCS demonstrate that both the U.S. government and U.S. defense industry are reaping the rewards of the increased sales.

At the same time that U.S. military assistance is increasing, the poor human rights situations in many countries have not improved since the start of the "war on terror" (and in some cases have become worse). In 2005, alone, the State Department reported that "serious abuses" were committed by the government or state security forces in more than half of the countries examined in this series.

From this link you can view some reports on separate countries with spotty human rights records and their relationship with the US since September 11. In this diary I will only focus on a couple of countries, beginning with Armenia:

The U.S. State Department’s 2005 Human Rights Report concluded that, despite limited improvements, the human rights situation in Armenia remains quite poor. Freedom of assembly and religion are somewhat limited and, although there is no official censorship, many journalists practice self-censorship. Security forces continue to engage in torture and arbitrary detention, and the courts are subject to political pressure from other branches of the government. Corruption is acknowledged as endemic in all branches and levels of government. Armenia has no laws against domestic violence, which is believed to be widespread, and human traffickers continue to use Armenia as a trafficking corridor. Although the U.S. State Department’s 2005 Terrorism Report noted "few perceived terrorist threats" in Armenia, the country’s porous borders allow it to be used as a corridor for the trafficking of, "illicit materials, persons, and finances." The report also made mention of Armenia’s "deepening political and economic ties with neighboring Iran" and its relations with Syria as points of potential concern.

How do you suppose an Uncle Sam who cares about human rights and open societies might treat such a country? Not as you'd expect:

Military aid to Armenia since Sept. 11, 2001, mirrors that of its neighbor and rival, Azerbaijan, both of which the United States now views as partners in the "global war on terror." Armenia was one of six countries (along with Azerbaijan) that had U.S. sanctions against it removed in the immediate aftermath of the attacks.2 The arms sanctions were lifted despite the fact that the Nagorno Karabakh conflict was still unresolved (the justification for imposing the sanctions). Armenia immediately began receiving IMET funding and FMF in FY 02, with assistance totaling $75,000 and $4 million, respectively. In FY 03 these numbers rose to almost $700,000 and $5 million, and funding for these two programs has remained relatively consistent since, with another $790,000 for IMET and $3.5 million for FMF requested for FY 07. Although commercial weapons sales to Armenia did not experience a significant escalation after 2001 (only $63,000 of DCS licenses have been issued between FY 02 and FY 05), $12.1 million of defense articles have been transferred under FMS licensing during the same period. Additionally, Armenia received $332,000 in Anti-terrorism Assistance (ATA) through the Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related Activities (NADR) account in FY 05, and is slated to receive over $1 million more in FY 06 and FY 07. Whereas, before Sept. 11, Armenia had received no military assistance whatsoever from the United States, the country received more than $30 million between FY 02 and FY 05 alone, with an estimated $12 million more slated to go to Armenia in FY 06 and FY 07.

Next comes Azerbaijan:

the U.S. State Department’s 2005 Human Rights Report classified Azerbaijan’s human rights record as poor and reported that the government continued to commit human rights abuses against its citizens. Moreover, corruption is endemic at every level of government, specifically within the law enforcement sector, and the executive branch continues to dominate the political system, which is marked by a lack of checks and balances and a merely nominal division of power. Arbitrary arrest is common and there are credible reports of torture being used on detainees. The mass media and civil society do not enjoy freedom of speech or the press and there are documented cases of harassment of and violence against journalists. All organizations – including political parties, religious groups, and NGOs – are required to register with the Ministry of Justice and while many are able to do so without incident, certain NGOs were unable to register, and others that were registered were intimidated by the government. Although freedom of assembly was restored for the first time since 2003, it was systematically restricted around the time of the November 2005 parliamentary elections. In the run-up to the November 2005 parliamentary elections, Aliyev issued two presidential decrees stressing the importance of these elections complying with international election standards; the decrees notwithstanding, monitors still reported "major irregularities and fraud" during the elections. The U.S. State Department noted in its 2005 Terrorism Report that Azerbaijan "aggressively" pursued and prosecuted suspected terrorists, convicting six men in February 2005 that were allegedly involved in "al-Qaeda Caucasus" and plotting an attack on the capital. However, Azerbaijan’s lax border security allows for its continued use as a corridor for the transit of terrorists as well as their money and weapons.

Now why on Earth would we aid such a state?

Despite the flawed elections, Azerbaijan has become considerably important to U.S. interests due its strategic geographical position (the country serves as a bridge between Western Europe, Eurasia, and the Middle East) and its rich energy resources. Congressional budget documents refer to Azerbaijan as, "a vital link in the Trans-Caspian energy corridor." In 1994, Azerbaijan signed a major oil contract with the Western Oil Consortium, which marked a major breakthrough in Azerbaijan’s integration into the world economy, and also marked a significant change in the post-Soviet power balance in the Caucasus region. The Shahdeniz gas field (discovered in 1999) is expected to diversify the regional gas supply that currently comes predominately from Russia, and a Baku-Tbilisi-Erzerum gas pipeline which is currently under construction. The development of its domestic gas industry, in addition to the completion of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline in May 2005, has further strengthened the economic independence of Azerbaijan.

I'm beginning to notice a pattern here:

There was once a time when I wondered why people rolled their eyes whenever our leaders preached to the rest of the world about democracy and human rights. By now, every single American should know why.

Tags: human rights, arms trade, friendly dictators, Armenia, Azerbaijan,