I was browsing Serj Tankian's (lead singer of System of a Down, now a self-titled artist) youtube channel, and I found a video of his discussing the Armenian genocide and how it must be recognized by the United States as a genocide. Since youtube is blocked at work, I can't get you the exact video, but I think this is fairly close to it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyZe1PL4hA0 Anyway, we all remember that Obama promised to recognize it as a genocide, but hasn't yet. From a clear conscience standpoint, I cannot see a reason why a person would not recognize it as a genocide (slaughter of 500,000 Armenians). However, in his video (I'm not sure if it's in the one above or not), there a clip of George Bush refusing to recognize it and rationalizing it by asking: what do we gain from angering a diplomatic ally (Turkey)? It's a good question, in my opinion. What benefit is there to the United States for doing so, other than looking noble? So, here's my general question for debate: While Obama promised to recognize the genocide, should he still do it?
turkey is an ally that we don't want to annoy too much. especially since germany and france do everything they can to annoy it anyway. secondly the relationship between armenia and turkey has improved dramatically over the past few months, with a big signing in zurich a few weeks back. but at the end of the day, turkey committed a genocide, obama promised to recognize it, and he should. turkey needs to get over it. it killed hundreds of thousands of people. the turkish people today shouldn't are obviously not directly responsible, but at the same time, they need to quit ignoring the reality of what their ancestors did and what their country did.
This genocide recognition business is strange to me. The US recognizing it makes no difference except to the feelings of the Turks and Armenians. The practice of recognizing stuff like that probably should never have been started. I think since the US has never denied the genocide, we shouldn't have to recognize it. Just don't comment. Except the Turks don't want us to recognize it. They've got a problem if, after nearly 100 years they still want to pretend like they didn't do anything wrong when everyone knows they did. For their own therapy, they should confront the genocide, accept it, and move on. I feel like the US is an enabler for considering and turning down a recognition of the genocide. For this reason, we should recognize. But, the time might not still be right. If we still need Turkey's cooperation in Iraq, and if they're going to act all butt-hurt by the move, we may as well wait a little. The project in Iraq is probably more important than recognizing a long-past genocide that everybody already knows about.
^^^ Should US recognize human rights problems in countries that US have substantial interests with? There has to be a consistent singular standard. US can't assume the role of world police in some situations while not in others.
The video from Serj I was referencing: <object style="height: 344px; width: 425px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rcJjxOqgANM"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rcJjxOqgANM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></object>
If the US recognizes it then that makes it real tough for Turkey to keep on denying it...plus it serves a message for other countries that genocide is not something you can get away with...which unfortunately, is a message that many still need.
Peace of mind, maybe vindication of justice. A mounting international pressure on the Turkish government to apologize to the victims, or may be even the possibility of legal remedies. Why do people still go after Nazis who wronged Jewish people? I heard a group of Austrian law students pinned a former Nazi officer, who is in his 90s, recently.
Yes, the US should recognize the genocide. It probably won't do any good after the fact, but Turkey should not get away with continuing to deny what they did. While they're at it, the US should also officially recognize the genocide it committed here on its own soil.
It's ridiculous that Turkey is still trying to deny it and that the US is letting them get away with it? Or it's ridiculous that we're even talking about something as trivial as the murder of hundreds of thousands of people when it happened so long ago?
It is ridiculous that people are asking someone to RECOGNIZE something officially that happened nearly 100 years ago. There is nothing gained by doing it..... Should we now recognize Stalin purging 20 million of his own people? Or what about the Roman Catholic Church mudereing all those Cathars? I mean come on....what is the point? It is history, teach it, but no need to do anything official about it. DD
Really? Really? So, the scary message it sends to other nations is they better not commit genocide or 100 years later (nearly) the United States will call them out on it while not allowing it to impact economic or diplomatic relations with the United States in anyway? Yeah, I'm sure the next country that thinks about committing an act of genocide will be really nervous. Don't want the US to call you out down the road when nearly everyone who participates in will have died off anyway. That would really, really suck.
From the wikipedia entry about it: So, according to "genocide scholars", the denial of it can enable more genocidal violence. That's something to be gained, if they're correct, no?
yeah, uh no. Nothing to be gained diplomatically by doing it at all. The US should look out for it's interests alone in this matter, and it does NOTHING to help the US by recognizing something. DD
So what police action do you recommend for the United States to intervene in the genocide which occurred 100 years ago? Retroactively recall our ambassador to the Ottoman Empire?
But it might force Turkey to recognize it too. And Turkey recognizing it may prevent future genocidal activity, according to experts. Unless you'd prefer genocides as long as the US's interests aren't hurt...
I'd like to see any sort of study that empirically demonstrates that "recognizing a genocide prevents further genocide." That is a lame hypothesis that is impossible to prove. Would there be a warm heart benefit to acknowledging it? For some Armenians I'm sure it would be nice to have America finally say we know what happened and it was genocide. But it won't really impact a damn thing. Turkey isn't going to say "Man, I guess everyone was right. We believed in our heart that it wasn't genocide, but now that Obama says it was...tear tear...we did commit genocide! OMG! We will never do it again!"
I think the near-universal unofficial recognition of the genocide is more important in this regard than one more official recognition. While the government of Turkey denies the genocide, how many Turks believe it wasn't a genocide?
