Armenian reaction to Obama'si Interest‏

OBAMA UNDERMINES HIS CREDIBILITY BY NOT SAYING GENOCIDE IN ANKARA
By Harut Sassounian
www.hairenik.com/
April 6, 2009

For several months now, I have been exposing the Turkish government's
ploy of creating the false impression that Ankara is engaged in serious
negotiations to establish diplomatic relations with Yerevan. Turkey
has been exploiting the illusive promise of opening the border in
order to pressure Armenia into making concessions on a host of issues,
while simultaneously subverting President Obama's pledge to recognize
the Armenian Genocide.

Turkish officials have been repeatedly warning President Obama not to
issue a statement on the Armenian Genocide, claiming that such a step
would disrupt the on-going negotiations between Armenia and Turkey.

Regrettably, Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian's decision
to travel to Istanbul this week to participate in the meeting of
the Alliance of Civilizations served to substantiate the Turkish
government's contention that all is going well between the two
countries.

Azerbaijan's President, on the other hand, was determined to stick
to his guns in safeguarding his nation's interests. When President
Aliyev learned that Ankara was contemplating opening the border
with Armenia, he viewed it as a betrayal of Azerbaijan by "fraternal
Turkey." He promptly canceled his planned trip to Istanbul. Aliyev
even threatened to block the sale of natural gas to Turkey should
it proceed with its announced plan to open the border. He wanted the
Turkish border to remain closed in order to force Armenia into making
territorial concessions on Artsakh (Karabagh). The Azeri Press Agency
reported that Aliyev turned down a personal invitation to Istanbul
by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as well as Turkey's President
and Prime Minister. Aliyev remained unmoved even when he was offered
a private meeting with the President of the United States.

It is not clear if President Obama was deceived by the Turks
warnings to third parties not to interfere in the Armenian-Turkish
negotiations. It could be that he found it expedient to heed the
Turkish objections in order to maximize the concessions he wanted to
extract from Turkey on Iraq and Afghanistan.

During a press conference in Ankara on Monday, this is how
President Obama responded when asked if he had changed his view on
the Armenian Genocide: "My views are on the record and I have not
changed views. What I have been very encouraged by is news that under
President Gul's leadership, you are seeing a series of negotiations,
a process, in place between Armenia and Turkey to resolve a whole
host of longstanding issues, including this one. I want to be as
encouraging as possible around those negotiations, which are moving
forward and could bear fruit very quickly, very soon. And so, as a
consequence, what I want to do is not focus on my views right now,
but focus on the views of the Turkish and the Armenian people. If
they can move forward and deal with a difficult and tragic history,
then I think the entire world should encourage them. And so what I
told the President was I want to be as constructive as possible in
moving these issues forward quickly. And my sense is that they are
moving quickly. I don't want, as the President of the United States,
to preempt any possible arrangements or announcements that might be
made in the near future. I just want to say that we are going to be a
partner in working through these issues in such a way that the most
important parties, the Turks and the Armenians, are finally coming
to terms in a constructive way."

When the reporter pressed him for not using the term genocide,
President Obama repeated the deceptive arguments advanced by Turkey:
"What I'd like to do is to encourage President Gul to move forward
with what have been some very fruitful negotiations. And I'm not
interested in the United States in any way tilting these negotiations
one way or another while they are having useful discussions."

President Gul then took the floor, and in a lengthy response, repeated
the standard Turkish denials of the Armenian Genocide.

Later that day, while addressing the Turkish Parliament, President
Obama again carefully avoided using the term genocide: "Human endeavor
is by its nature imperfect. History is often tragic, but unresolved,
it can be a heavy weight. Each country must work through its past. And
reckoning with the past can help us seize a better future. I know
there's strong views in this chamber about the terrible events of
1915. And while there's been a good deal of commentary about my views,
it's 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."

In view of these developments, it is imperative that the Armenian
government terminate at once all negotiations with Turkish leaders
in order to limit the damage caused by the continued exploitation
of the illusion of productive negotiations. Moreover, the Armenian
leadership should denounce in the strongest possible terms President
Gul's shameful denial of the Armenian Genocide during the Ankara
press conference which was broadcast live by TV networks worldwide.

Meanwhile, Armenians from all over the world should inundate the White
House Comment Line with phone calls to inform President Obama that his
statements on the Armenian Genocide in Ankara did not go far enough
and do not fulfill his solemn promises on this important issue. Please
call: 1 (202) 456-1111 and leave a message. Unless the White House
hears immediately from a large number of Armenians, President Obama and
his aides might think that Armenians are satisfied with the remarks he
made in Ankara. The President may then not issue a statement on April
24 or he may repeat the same unacceptable words he used in Turkey.

Finally, President Obama should understand that the significance of
keeping his word on the Armenian Genocide goes beyond this issue and
has a direct bearing on his overall credibility. Within hours of the
President's remarks in Ankara, the Politifact.com website questioned
his integrity, having concluded that he had broken his promise on the
Armenian Genocide-one of the 511 campaign promises that the website
keeps track of, to verify his trustworthiness.

No sooner President Obama's speech in the Turkish parliament got

close to its end, electronic messages, articles, editorials, interviews,

reports...were being carried through the wires. For Armenians this visit

had a special importance.
Could the speech provide clues as to what the President has in store

for April 24 when he faces Armenians? Will Obama officially recognize

the Genocide of the
Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman Young Turks?

As expected there is no shortage of opinions, comments, remarks, outright
praises or denunciations. See following assessment by Prof. Dennis R.

Papazian's assessment

This moment is historic. We must understand, recognition by the United

States is only one part of the greater battle which is to gain Turkish recognition.

In effect, President Obama has given us that recognition, and he has done

it at a press conference in Turkey in the presence of Turkish
President Gul. Without using the G-word, he said that he had not changed

his belief-- "which is well-known." He has said many times and in many places

that he will recognize the Armenia genocide. He said in the Turkish Parliament,

attended by both P.M. Erdogan and Pres. Gul, that Turkey should look into its

dark past just as America has done, and should discuss "the events
of 1915." He said that in the Turkish parliament! This marks the end of one

era and the beginning of another.

Turkey cannot be bludgeoned into accepting the Armenian genocide, it must

be persuaded, it must be led there in stages. If Obama threw down the gauntlet,

it would have a negative reaction and would be useless for both Armenia and the

United States. In this way he effectively said, I know that was a genocide and you

should look into it for yourselves, you have to come to terms with your past
as America has come to terms with its past, then Turkey could become a true ally

of the United States.

Yes, there will be historic commission, There has to be. Turkey must find a way

of backing down which will not look like an ignominious defeat. You will notice that

president Gul said after the Obama press conference, that he is willing even to have

French and American scholars on the commission appointed by those two countries.

Denial of the Armenian genocide has been condemned in France, and it is very
well known that 95% of all genocide scholars in America accept the fact that an

Armenian genocide took place.

Of course, as they say "there is many a slip between the cup and the lip," so the

game is far from over. Turkey could move or slide backward at any time. If it does,

however, I am sure Obama will make a very public display of his belief that what

happened in Ottoman Turkey was, indeed, a genocide.

Obama is handling this situation brilliantly, better than I could ever imagine. He will

get Turkey to acknowledge the Armenian genocide and at the same time remain an

ally of the United States. It is a miracle. Pray for his safety. A plot was already

discovered in Turkey.

Dennis R. Papazian, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Founding Director,
Armenian Research Center
U of Michigan, Dearborn

President Obama’s Message to Turkey: Let’s Agree to Disagree About
the Armenian Genocide
By Michael Mensoian • on April 9, 2009 •

President Obama’s statement at a joint news conference on April 6 with

President Abdullah Gul that “(M)y views [on the Genocide] are on the record and

I have not changed my views” may be translated to mean that the United States

and Turkey should agree to disagree about the Armenian Genocide.

During his much-anticipated visit to Turkey by both Turks and Armenians,

President Obama adroitly played to both sides of the street. For his Armenian

constituents he mentioned his having views on the Genocide that are well known,

and for his Turkish audience he capitulated to the need to assuage the Turkish

leadership. What happened to his conviction that the Armenian Genocide is not

only an historic fact, but that there was a moral imperative requiring his administration

to recognize it?

The Turkish leaders wisely co-opted his moral sensibilities by having him address

the Turkish Grand National Assembly; a rare honor for a western dignitary. It must

be granted, that it would have been difficult for President Obama to be forthright on

such an emotional issue in that particular venue, but a much stronger enunciation of

his views and a more balanced evaluation of the Turkish-Armenian normalization

process could have been made.

However, a cynic might wonder whether his side trip to Turkey to pay homage to

a government that has utterly failed to honestly address the issue of the Armenian

Genocide—an established historic fact—was orchestrated by Secretary of State

Hillary Clinton and President Obama himself, to give cover to his expected muted

expression of support for the April 24th message to the Armenian people.

This is not an overly critical analysis of his speech to the Turkish Grand National

Assembly when his comments are evaluated with respect to the various issues

relating to normalization. When he claims that Turkey is a critical ally and an important

part of Europe, it only encourages the Turkish government’s continued veiled threats

that passage of any genocide resolution by the United States Congress would
do irreparable harm to what Obama sees as a “critical” Turkey-United States

relationship.

In his speech in the Grand National Assembly, Obama said, “(A)t the end of World War I

Turkey could have succumbed to the foreign powers that were trying to claim its territory….

(b)ut Turkey chose a different future. You freed yourself from foreign control.” Did “foreign

control” include Armenian claims to its historic lands? How does he presume that this

so-called success affected the legitimacy of the independent Armenia
that was promised in the Treaty of Sevres and eliminated by the subsequent Treaty of

Lausanne. Wasn’t this the purpose of the Genocide unleashed by the Ottoman Turkish

government: to clear eastern Turkey—the western provinces of historic Armenia—that

was continued under Ataturk during the years between Sevres and Lausanne? Its purpose

was to prevent legitimate Armenian territorial claims from being implemented.

Are these territorial rights to be forgotten in the name of normalization? Evidently so.
Perhaps the most telling of the several disturbing comments made by President Obama

occurred when he said “(T)hat there has been a good deal of commentary about my views,

[but] 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.” How anyone
can believe that this comment before the Turkish National Grand Asembly is a step in the

right direction is difficult to understand. Juxtapose President Gul’s statement as he stood

next to President Obama when he expressed the long-standing determination of the Turkish

government to tie normalization to a Turkish-Armenian commission to study the totality of

events that occurred during the period from 1915 through 1923. “It is not a political,
but an historic issue. That’s why we should allow historians to discuss the matter.” Does

President Obama believe exculpatory evidence exists to support Turkey’s view that the

Armenian Genocide never occurred? If so, how does this square with his campaign rhetoric

(January 2008) that “(T)he Armenian genocide is not an allegation…but rather a widely

documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence…”
Add to this Prime Minister Erdogan’s statement on the previous Friday in London when he

maintained that “(F)or Turkey, it is impossible to accept a thing [the Armenian Genocide]

that does not exist.” How can Turkey’s position, emphatically stated and maintained as

official policy through decades of obfuscation and revisionism, fail to raise serious doubts

in President Obama’s mind as to the Turkish leadership’s desire or ability to deal objectively

with Armenia? If it hasn’t, it should.

Not having strengthened Turkey’s position vis-à-vis Armenia sufficiently, President Obama

continued: “We have already seen historic and courageous steps taken by Turkish and

Armenian leaders. These contacts hold out the promise of a new day. An open border would

return the Turkish and Armenian people to a peaceful and prosperous coexistence that
would serve both of your nations. That is why the United States strongly supports the full

normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia.”

On what basis, one might ask, would normalization be achieved that would be beneficial

to Armenia and its long-term interests? In an interview with journalists on April 6, the

President is quoted as saying that he is not interested in the United States in any way tilting

these negotiations.” Would not recognizing the Armenian Genocide “tilt these negotiations”

toward Armenia? If that is so, how does this affect Genocide recognition by his administration?

Conversely hasn’t his deference to Turkish interests tilted the negotiations toward Ankara?

Praising Turkey’s leadership, President Obama went on to say “…that…[Turkey is] …poised

to be the only country in the region to have normal and peaceful relations with all the South

Caucasus nations.” This comment certainly could not have pleased either Moscow or Tehran.

He continued to say that “… to advance that peace, …[Turkey] can play a constructive role in

helping to resolve the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict, which has continued far too long.” How is

“constructive role” to be interpreted? For whose benefit? Azerbaijan’s? How do these comments

expressed before the Turkish National Grand Assembly affect the future of our brothers and sisters

in Artsakh? It effectively strengthens Baku’s demands by reinforcing the United States position

that any settlement must maintain the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan. This all but eliminates the

likelihood of Artsakh ever achieving a free and independent status. Is this why their

lives and homes were sacrificed?

President Obama’s performance in Turkey cannot be viewed as having any beneficial impact

on Armenian interests; just the opposite is true. Unfortunately, it significantly bolstered the Turkish

position in the ongoing process of “rapprochement.”

How much better it would have been if President Obama had been less eager to have Armenia

bear the burden for his obsequious performance before the Turkish Grand National Assembly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~