Democrats split on genocide resolution

The Hill ^ | October 16, 2007 | Jim Snyder

[jazusamo]

October 16, 2007

Democrats are split on the value of bringing a controversial Armenian genocide resolution to a floor vote.

Five House Democrats plan to hold a news conference Wednesday to urge their leadership not to bring the resolution to the floor, although the measure passed the House Foreign Affairs Committee last week with strong Democratic support.

Reps. Alcee Hastings of Florida, John Murtha of Pennsylvania, Robert Wexler of Florida and Steve Cohen and John Tanner, both of Tennessee, will participate in the news conference. They plan to urge House leadership to “reconsider its decision” to bring the Armenian genocide resolution to the floor.

The non-binding resolution would require the president to call the killing of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians between the years 1915 and 1923 “genocide.”

Turkish officials have said the resolution will harm relations between Turkey and the United States. Turkey acknowledges hundreds of thousands of Armenians died as modern Turkey grew out of the crumbling Ottoman Empire, but Turkish officials contend the killings were part of a civil war and that atrocities were committed on both sides.

Top administration officials have warned Congress that Turkey could respond to the resolution’s passage by blocking access to an airbase critical to the supply of troops in Iraq.

Despite the pushback, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has indicated she would bring the controversial resolution to the floor. California is home to a significant number of Armenian-Americans, including some who came to the United States after fleeing the World War I-era upheaval.

The House has passed similar resolutions in past decades.

President Ronald Reagan also once referred to what happened to Armenians as they were being pushed out of what became eastern Turkey as genocide. During his presidency, however, Bill Clinton also worked to block an Armenian genocide resolution from passing the House.

[syriacus]

Then why did you insinuate that this resolution carried any penalties or reparations?

I didn't say it carried penalties or reparations.

But some paragraphs near the end of the resolution imply that imposing some sort of punishment would be a necessary step toward forestalling future genocides.

In Section 2, Paragraph 30, of House Resolution 106 the authors say that,,,
past "recognition and affirmation of the Armenian genocide" has not stopped genocides, because those who carried out the Armenian genocide were not punished.

In other words, someone must be punished for the Armenian genocide if we want to stop genocide

[tabsternager]

So you don’t believe that any countries in the future that commit genocide should ever be punished in any way.

That’s interesting.

[syriacus]

Genocide is a crime. Criminals should, as a rule, be punished. Criminals sometimes go unpunished, especially if they are already deceased.

[tabsternager]

Again, the resolution is simply calling on the UNITED STATES to recognize the Armenian genocide, just as past resolutions called on the U.S. to recognize other genocides (the Holocaust, Darfur).

For Turkey to have threatened the U.S. every year in order to prevent that recognition, what kind of “friend” or “ally” is that?

Turkey looks out for Turkey, and every year they’ve threatened, we’ve blinked.