The Misguided Policy of Censuring Allies
Note: I know that I've already touched on this; however, this is the formal submission for my parallel writing endeavour. It also includes a couple of developments that have come up since I made my original post.
A major development in American foreign policy during recent weeks has been the decision of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee to declare the actions by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 to have been genocide. On the surface, this effort appears to be little more than a symbolic effort to acknowledge a past injustice. However, the situation is far more complex, with far-reaching consequences for national security.
In 1915, the present-day nation of Armenia was a possession of the Ottoman Empire. As World War I escalated, the forces of the Ottoman Empire forcibly deported and, in some cases, killed the Armenian people; this led to the deaths of an estimated one million Armenians. While the Ottomans ostensibly claimed that this effort was part of a wider war strategy, accusations of genocide have resounded ever since. The Ottoman Empire, the last remnant of the Islamic Caliphate, dissolved after the defeat of the Central Powers in 1918. Its largest remnant, Turkey, was reorganized by the legendary Mustafa Kemal Atatürk into a secular democracy. Turkey is a NATO member, and although the Turks expressed concerns regarding the invasion of Iraq, Turkey remains a crucial logistical hub for American forces operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Armenia, despite sporadic episodes of independence, was a possession of Ottoman Turkey until the Ottoman Empire dissolved. Despite a brief stint as a sovereign nation, Armenia was conquered by the Red Army in 1920 and held as a Soviet possession until the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1991. Armenia has had a continuing territorial dispute with neighboring Azerbaijan, another former Soviet holding, since 1988. The Armenians claim the distinction of being the first Christian nation in history; Armenia's neighbor's include Christian Georgia, and Muslim Turkey, Iran, and Azerbaijan. Armenia committed a contingent of troops to support Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The Bush Administration has opposed the move by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and President Bush has consulted with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on the matter. In the wake of the resolution's approval by the committee (which will likely result in movement to the House of Representatives for a full vote), the Turkish ambassador to Washington has been recalled, and the Turkish government has threatened to restrict its airspace or cut off access to a Turkish air base used by U.S. forces if the resolution is pushed through. Turkey has increased in importance following the closure of several facilities in Central Asia during the past several years.
Of perhaps greater import is the looming incursion of Turkish forces into northern Iraq in an effort to disrupt outposts in Iraqi territory that are used by PKK terrorists. Despite recent diplomatic efforts between Ankara and Baghdad, continued attacks on Turkish forces by the PKK have resulted in a buildup along the border in recent months. Turkish lawmakers have authorized the Turkish government to enter Iraqi territory. Although the Turks have stated that an incursion is neither imminent nor inevitable, continued attacks by the PKK continue to raise tensions between Turkey, Iraq, and the United States.
One of Turkey's major reasons for concern over the invasion of Iraq was the issue of the Kurds. The most stable region of Iraq, Kurdistan enjoyed a degree of independence even under Saddam Hussein; as a result, it has become a sort of de facto safe haven for the Kurdish PKK terrorists, who attack Turkish forces and then retreat into sovereign Iraqi territory. A major component of the worldwide Kurdish population resides in Turkey, and Kurdish separatism is a continuing concern to the Turkish government. The Turkish build-up on the border has led to growing concern among both American and Iraqi officials, as an incursion and major disruption in Iraqi Kurdistan would run the risk of introducing instability into one of only a handful of stable regions in Iraq.
The severity of the treatment of the Armenians at the hands of Ottoman troops should not be trivialized. However, why the House Foreign Relations Committee decided that October of 2007 was the right time to bring government attention to an event that happened more than ninety years ago, and that was perpetrated by a country that no longer exists, is less than apparent. Further, the motivation for knowingly offending the only secular, Western-style democracy in the Islamic world (and a NATO ally, no less) is, in this case, a total mystery. This resolution has already had a far-reaching negative impact on national security, and it follows similar congressional proceedings in February aimed at censuring Japan for sex slavery in World War II.
While both the private and public sectors in the United States should remain committed to a steadfast accountability for human rights, cases such as these are yet another reminder that diplomacy and responsibility are directly tied to our national security. Given that many claim (though erroneously) that Americans are universally loathed abroad, surely we as a nation can find better ways than this to show our solidarity with formerly-oppressed friends without provoking our closest allies. What's more - don't our distinguished elected leaders in the United States Congress have more important contemporary issues to address, rather than dredging up symbolic issues from nearly a century ago?
A major development in American foreign policy during recent weeks has been the decision of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee to declare the actions by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 to have been genocide. On the surface, this effort appears to be little more than a symbolic effort to acknowledge a past injustice. However, the situation is far more complex, with far-reaching consequences for national security.
In 1915, the present-day nation of Armenia was a possession of the Ottoman Empire. As World War I escalated, the forces of the Ottoman Empire forcibly deported and, in some cases, killed the Armenian people; this led to the deaths of an estimated one million Armenians. While the Ottomans ostensibly claimed that this effort was part of a wider war strategy, accusations of genocide have resounded ever since. The Ottoman Empire, the last remnant of the Islamic Caliphate, dissolved after the defeat of the Central Powers in 1918. Its largest remnant, Turkey, was reorganized by the legendary Mustafa Kemal Atatürk into a secular democracy. Turkey is a NATO member, and although the Turks expressed concerns regarding the invasion of Iraq, Turkey remains a crucial logistical hub for American forces operating in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Armenia, despite sporadic episodes of independence, was a possession of Ottoman Turkey until the Ottoman Empire dissolved. Despite a brief stint as a sovereign nation, Armenia was conquered by the Red Army in 1920 and held as a Soviet possession until the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1991. Armenia has had a continuing territorial dispute with neighboring Azerbaijan, another former Soviet holding, since 1988. The Armenians claim the distinction of being the first Christian nation in history; Armenia's neighbor's include Christian Georgia, and Muslim Turkey, Iran, and Azerbaijan. Armenia committed a contingent of troops to support Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The Bush Administration has opposed the move by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and President Bush has consulted with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on the matter. In the wake of the resolution's approval by the committee (which will likely result in movement to the House of Representatives for a full vote), the Turkish ambassador to Washington has been recalled, and the Turkish government has threatened to restrict its airspace or cut off access to a Turkish air base used by U.S. forces if the resolution is pushed through. Turkey has increased in importance following the closure of several facilities in Central Asia during the past several years.
Of perhaps greater import is the looming incursion of Turkish forces into northern Iraq in an effort to disrupt outposts in Iraqi territory that are used by PKK terrorists. Despite recent diplomatic efforts between Ankara and Baghdad, continued attacks on Turkish forces by the PKK have resulted in a buildup along the border in recent months. Turkish lawmakers have authorized the Turkish government to enter Iraqi territory. Although the Turks have stated that an incursion is neither imminent nor inevitable, continued attacks by the PKK continue to raise tensions between Turkey, Iraq, and the United States.
One of Turkey's major reasons for concern over the invasion of Iraq was the issue of the Kurds. The most stable region of Iraq, Kurdistan enjoyed a degree of independence even under Saddam Hussein; as a result, it has become a sort of de facto safe haven for the Kurdish PKK terrorists, who attack Turkish forces and then retreat into sovereign Iraqi territory. A major component of the worldwide Kurdish population resides in Turkey, and Kurdish separatism is a continuing concern to the Turkish government. The Turkish build-up on the border has led to growing concern among both American and Iraqi officials, as an incursion and major disruption in Iraqi Kurdistan would run the risk of introducing instability into one of only a handful of stable regions in Iraq.
The severity of the treatment of the Armenians at the hands of Ottoman troops should not be trivialized. However, why the House Foreign Relations Committee decided that October of 2007 was the right time to bring government attention to an event that happened more than ninety years ago, and that was perpetrated by a country that no longer exists, is less than apparent. Further, the motivation for knowingly offending the only secular, Western-style democracy in the Islamic world (and a NATO ally, no less) is, in this case, a total mystery. This resolution has already had a far-reaching negative impact on national security, and it follows similar congressional proceedings in February aimed at censuring Japan for sex slavery in World War II.
While both the private and public sectors in the United States should remain committed to a steadfast accountability for human rights, cases such as these are yet another reminder that diplomacy and responsibility are directly tied to our national security. Given that many claim (though erroneously) that Americans are universally loathed abroad, surely we as a nation can find better ways than this to show our solidarity with formerly-oppressed friends without provoking our closest allies. What's more - don't our distinguished elected leaders in the United States Congress have more important contemporary issues to address, rather than dredging up symbolic issues from nearly a century ago?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home