A resolution has gained a majority of support in Congress that would label the slaughter of Armenians by the Turks between 1915 and 1923 as an Armenian genocide. President Bush is resisting the resolution because he says it would endanger already strained "diplomatic relations" between Turkey (which wants to go after PKK rebels in Northern Iraq and the US, which has had the support of the Kurds since it's 2003 invasion of Iraq. essentially Turkey feels that if you free the Kurds in Iraq, then Kurds in Turkey would wish the same freedom. Which makes me wonder why we're afraid of offending a country with one of the worst human rights abuses records.
One also has to wonder why it's okay to label deliberate mistranslations as genocide (see previous post), but not to label real acts of systematic governmental eradication of ethnic groups (the very definition of genocide) as such.
Even more important is the question why the Congress is obsessing on actions that started over ninety years ago, while 77percent of Americans feel we should get out of Iraq now. Especially when 1.5 million Iraqi refugees has crossed the border into Syria (probably lugging those missing WMD with them)since the illegal US invasion in 2003. Ironically, Syria was the final destination for many of those Armenians during the rule of the Young Turks.
And while mentioning the Armenian holocaust in Turkey is a crime (I guess I'd better cancel that trip to Istanbul), denying the Holocaust (or even questioning it) can get you thrown in jail.
While any wholesale slaughter of inidgeonous people is a tragedy (anyone remember our own Native Americans?), this legislation, while noble, cannot do anything to change the past. What we need to do is focus on the here and now, and get down to business to do do waht's really important to Americans now.