Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate very much that recognition, and I appreciate the Republican leader giving me this opportunity tonight to participate in our Special Order.

I am here tonight to talk about something that happened last week in the Foreign Relations Committee and to talk about something that is proposed to happen here in the House between now and the middle of November when we are supposed to be taking a break for Thanksgiving. I am here to talk about House Resolution 106, the Armenian genocide resolution. I am, as I have said before here many times, an extremely proud Member of the House of Representatives. I am so pleased to be able to represent the people of the Fifth District of North Carolina. However, when I came here, I took an oath, an oath to defend the Constitution and uphold the Constitution. I did not take an oath to say that I would ignore the good of the United States for the good of the Fifth District of North Carolina.

I thought that everyone who came here understood that our Number 1 responsibility is to work together as a group on behalf of the entire United States of America. Certainly we should do all we can to represent our districts, and I believe that every Member does that. But there are times when we must put aside provincial interest for the good of this country.

I am very disappointed that last week the Foreign Relations Committee voted out of that committee a resolution that I think puts the good of the United States in second place to the good of a small interest group. We should never do that as Members of Congress. We should assume that the oath that we take is like the doctor's oath, above all, do no harm. The resolution that was passed out of that committee last week does harm to the United States of America and does harm to people in Turkey and in other parts of the world. That is not what we should be about. The action that was taken last week and the proposed action for a vote on the floor by the entire House has been called by many others the most irresponsible act of this Congress. I agree with that.

I am particularly concerned that the Speaker of the House is the person pushing this resolution. She is third in line to be President of the United States. And exhibiting behavior that shows such provincial interest does not give me great comfort in thinking that if something were to happen and the Speaker were to assume the Presidency, that she would have the presence of mind to do what needs to be done for the good of this country. It is simply not being exhibited by her behaviors, by pressing this resolution and by other things that she has done. I am quite concerned about it.

Many people have written this Speaker, many editorials have been written saying, don't do this. This will do harm to the United States. This will do harm to Armenians. This is not the right thing to do.

I want to talk a little bit about the history of Turkey, our relationship with Turkey, and give a little bit of background to people who may not be so familiar with Turkey as a country and with what has happened there and talk about why, again, this resolution is so wrong not just at this time, but at any time in the history of this country. The Republic of Turkey was formally established on October 29, 1923, with the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. He was the visionary leader of modern Turkey and became its first president. You see, Turkey wasn't even a country in 1915 at the time that the events that are being discussed in House Resolution 106 are talked about. The fall of the Ottoman Empire was occurring during that period of time. And so bringing these charges against Turkey is wrong because Turkey didn't exist as a country.

Turkey is the only secular pluralistic westward-looking democracy with a predominantly Muslim population. I have been to Turkey. I have been to Turkey several times. I have gotten to know the Turkish people and know them for the wonderfully warm, kind, intelligent and entrepreneurial people that they are. We are so fortunate to have them as our ally. Turkey has a significant and constructive physical and influential reach in the Balkans, the Middle East, the Caucasus and Central Asia. The United States and Turkey share common values of democracy, diversity, tolerance, social mobility, the separation of religious and civic life.

Anatolia, the home of the Republic of Turkey, has been the cradle of civilizations for millennia. The city-states of the Lycian Federation located in Patara, Turkey, inspired the Founding Fathers of the United States as they wrote the Constitution of the United States. Indeed, there is a figure of Suleyman here in the House Chamber. We recognize Suleyman as one of the great lawgivers of the world.

Again, the United States and Turkey have been close friends and allies for more than half a century. Turkish Americans are leaders in many walks of life, ranging from the arts, science, academia and business, and have a proud heritage. Turkish Americans are good-will ambassadors of the friendship between the United States and Turkey. In celebrating their rich cultural heritage, Turkish Americans enrich society in the United States and the United States' understanding of that part of the world.

Mr. Speaker, Turkey is becoming a reliable energy hub for the Western world, in a highly volatile region, completing the East-West Energy Corridor. For decades, Turkey has stood as the bulwark of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, on the southeastern flank of the alliance, and guarded a long common border with the Soviet Union.

Turkey has become an important partner of the United States in facing new, major challenges, such as international terrorism, ethnic and religious extremism and fundamentalism, energy and security and diversity, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and international organized crime, including drug and human trafficking. This has been especially true since the Cold War ended.

In July, 2006, the United States and Turkey signed a ``shared vision document'' outlining a strategic vision for bilateral cooperation and coordination on a wide range of international matters of common concern. In 2006, and so far in 2007, Turkey has been the 30th largest market for United States exports and the 44th largest source of imports.

Mr. Speaker, Turkey continues to play an important role in Afghanistan, having twice commanded the International Security Assistance Force, and maintains a provincial reconstruction team in Afghanistan which builds hospitals, schools and roads. It plays a crucial role in helping supply services and equipment to United States forces in Iraq.

Turkey, again, has had an extraordinarily proud history and has been a very close collaborator with the United States in doing good things all over the world, but especially in its part of the world. We as Americans need to recognize the important role that Turkey has played, again, from the early millennium, and the importance that it plays in keeping peace in that part of the world.

I had the opportunity to go to Turkey in May of this year, along with five other Members of Congress. There were three Democrats and three Republicans. We visited the Armenian Patriarch and we visited the Jewish community while we were there. We visited all the major players in the Turkish government while we were there.

Turkey this year has gone through some challenges to its constitution. It has worked out those challenges. It has held elections. It has gone through some crises and handled them extremely well. We are very proud of the way that all of those things have been handled.

When we talked with people in Turkey, we heard over and over and over again how devastating this resolution would be to our relationship with the Turkish people. We heard from the Armenians in Turkey that this was a mistake. They told us over and over again that this is something people in the United States are pushing, that Armenians in the United States are pushing. They said ``We do not want this done.

We are working out our differences here in Turkey, and working them out very well. Please do not pass this resolution.''

My three Democratic colleagues who went on that trip are all opposed to this resolution. The Republicans are opposed to it. This is a mistake. The Speaker should not be pandering to people in her own district and risking the friendship that we have with Turkey, and indeed risking our military endeavors in the Middle East. But that is what she's doing.

Again, I want to say that many people have called this the most irresponsible act of this Congress. I think that that is appropriate.

Mr. Speaker, let me share with you some other people who have expressed their interest and concern and opposition to this resolution. Eight former Secretaries of State, Democrats and Republicans, sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi. I want to quote from that letter, dated September 25, 2007:

``We are writing to express concern that H. Res. 106 could soon be put to a vote. Passage of the resolution would harm our foreign policy objectives to promote reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia. It would also strain our relations with Turkey and would endanger our national security interests in the region, including the safety of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

``We do not minimize or deny the enormous significance of the horrible tragedy suffered by ethnic Armenians from 1915 to 1923. During our tenures as Secretaries of State, we each supported Presidential Statements recognizing the mass killings and forced exile of Armenians. It has been longstanding U.S. policy to encourage reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia and to urge the government of Turkey to acknowledge the tragedy. We understand the administration continues to urge the Turkish government to re-examine its history and to encourage both Turkey and Armenia to work towards reconciliation, including normalizing relations and opening the border.

``There are some hopeful signs already that both parties are engaging each other. We believe that a public statement by the U.S. Congress at this juncture is likely to undermine what has been painstakingly achieved to date.''

They go on to say: ``We must also recognize the important contributions Turkey is making to U.S. national security, including security and stability in the Middle East and Europe. The United States continues to rely on Turkey for its geostrategic importance. Turkey is an indispensable partner to our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, helping U.S. troops to combat terrorism and build security. By providing the U.S. military with access to Turkish airspace, military bases and the border crossing with Iraq, Turkey is a linchpin in the trans-shipment of vital cargo and fuel resources to U.S. troops, coalition partners and Iraqi civilians.

``Turkish troops serve shoulder to shoulder with distinction with U.S. and other NATO allies in the Balkans. Turkey is also a transit hub for non-OPEC oil and gas, and remains key to our efforts to help the Euro-Atlantic community bolster its energy security by providing alternative supply sources and routes around Russia and Iran.

``It is our view that passage of this resolution could quickly extend beyond symbolic significance. The popularly-elected Turkish Grand National Assembly might react strongly to a House resolution, as it did to a French National Assembly resolution a year ago. The result could endanger our national security interests in the region, including our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and damage efforts to promote reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey. We strongly urge you to prevent the resolution from reaching the House floor.''

It is signed by eight former Secretaries of State, and I will submit this for the record with their signatures.

There is another letter sent to the Speaker of the House by three former Secretaries of Defense dated September 7, 2007.

``We write today to convey our deep concern regarding the damage that passage of H. Res. 106 could do to relations between the United States and Turkey, a long-time NATO ally and a country which plays a critical role in supporting the U.S. national security interests in the Balkans, greater Middle East, the Black Sea region and Afghanistan.

``The depth and breadth of our defense and security relationship with Turkey are considerable, and, as former Secretaries of Defense, we value Turkey's friendship and partnership. Turkey makes numerous and substantial contributions to U.S. goals and interests abroad, including its close relationship with Israel, its deployment of military forces to the Balkans and its contribution to the NATO effort to defeat terrorism and support democracy in Afghanistan.

``Just as public opinion plays a crucial role in our own country, the reaction of the Turkish public to the passage of H. Res. 106 would be considerable. Passage of H. Res. 106 would have a direct detrimental effect on the operational capability, safety and well-being of our armed forces in Iraq and in Afghanistan, because the Turkish parliament would likely respond to the Turkish public's call for action by restricting or cutting off U.S. access to the Turkish air base at Incirlik and closing the crossing into Iraq at the Habur Gate. The Turkish parliament would also likely retract blanket flight clearances for U.S. military overflights, which are vital to transporting supplies and fuel to our troops.

``We also believe the increasingly open debate about this issue in Turkey would surely be restricted by negative public reaction to U.S. congressional action. We are also concerned that any potential steps toward better relations between Turkey and Armenia will be set back by any action in the U.S. Congress.

``In stating our opposition to H. Res. 106, we do not suggest that anything other than the most terrible of tragedies took place as the Ottoman Empire disintegrated in the early part of the last century. As President Bush and other presidents before him have done, we recognize the need to acknowledge and learn from the tragedy.

``We respect that this issue is of great concern to you, and hope that you can consider other appropriate ways to highlight, commemorate and honor the memory of the victims, without doing damage to our contemporary relations with modern Turkey.''

Again, I will submit this letter for the Record.

Editorials have come out in most of the major newspapers, newspapers that are not generally opposed to the Speaker. The Washington Post editorial was titled ``Worse Than Irrelevant.''

``A congressional resolution about massacres in Turkey 90 years ago endangers present day U.S. security. It is easy to dismiss a nonbinding congressional resolution accusing Turkey of ``genocide'' against Armenians during World War I as frivolous,'' and ``genocide'' is in quotations. ``Though the subject is a serious one, more than 1 million Armenians died, House Democrats pushing for a declaration on the subject have petty and parochial interests.

``The problem is that any congressional action will be taken in deadly earnest by Turkey's powerful nationalist politicians, and therefore its government, which is already struggling to resist a tidal wave of anti-Americanism in the country.''

I am going to submit this entire editorial also, because it refers again to some of the letters that I have already read. But the Washington Post has said this is worse than irrelevant, because it will do harm. Again, what we should practice here is the same thing that doctors practice: Above all else, do no harm.

There is an excerpt from an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, October 2, 2007. ``History is messy enough without politicians getting into the act. As a general rule, legislatures in far-off countries ought to think carefully before passing judgment on another people's history. When their sights turn in that direction, it is a fair bet that points are to be scored with powerful domestic lobbies. Playing with history often complicates the implementation of foreign policy goals as well. Politicians are paid to think about the future, not the past. Many would say, why are we doing this? Why should the Congress not be dealing with the future, instead of the past?''

I question that too, and I am going to come back to that in a minute in terms

of what may be one of the real underlying reasons for all of these things coming out.

Some have said that Congress rarely holds the key to America's foreign relations with a critical ally. But now with Turkey, the only Muslim country in the world allied with the United States and NATO, the future of Turkish-American relations are very much in the hands of the Congress.

This is from a survey conducted by Terror Free Tomorrow, an organization that did a survey in Turkey earlier this year. It was the first nationwide public survey of Turkey on the issue and what the survey found was that it would actually set back the cause it purports to achieve, namely Turkey's recognition of its own past and reconciliation with Armenia today.

I have a chart on this showing 78 percent of the Turkish people who were surveyed opposed this resolution, any congressional resolution dealing with the Armenian situation. Almost three-quarters of them felt that passage of an Armenian regulation resolution would worsen their opinion of the United States. Only 7 percent favored no action by the government or favored such a resolution. And three-quarters of Turks, though, would accept scholarship by independent historians on what occurred between Turks and Armenians during 1915.

Also, Turks do not consider the U.S. Congress a neutral judge of this issue. Instead, they see the resolution as driven by anti-Muslim feelings and American domestic politics. And 73 percent of Turks think a resolution will have the opposite effect and actually worsen relations between Turkey and Armenia. Again, this was a poll done in January and February of this year by Terror Free Tomorrow and the ARI Foundation. These are groups that wanted to study this issue to gather information to help people be informed of what the effect would be. The survey was done all over the country of Turkey, and the views that were held were held firmly regardless of age, income, education, or even their present view of the United States.

And 84 percent of those who now have a very favorable opinion of the United States responded that their opinion would deteriorate if the resolution were to pass. And of course the resolution has passed in the committee and the Speaker has said that she will bring it to the floor for a vote which most people in Turkey believe would be a terrible, terrible mistake.

Turkey again is a stable, moderate Muslim democracy. It is our most strategic and valuable Muslim ally. This resolution would help the cause of those extremists in Turkey who wish to reduce the nation's ties with the United States. It would discredit those within Turkey who continue to call for greater openness and plurality.

The Turkish people who answered the survey felt that it would alienate the Armenians and the Turks who through fits and starts have been slowly moving toward reconciliation of this important and divisive historical question. It could scuttle dialogue to establish a joint commission to examine the events of 1915.

Turkey is a country of considerable nationalism. The passage of this resolution would likely produce a nationalistic backlash against the United States. The whole issue of probing and making amends for the wrongs of history would be completely lost in this onslaught of Turkish nationalism. It would probably dramatically and perhaps permanently damage U.S. relations with Turkey.

As the Turkish community of Turkey recently said in a statement: ``What happened to the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire during World War I--death, destruction, displacement--was a terrible tragedy, but eminent historians do not agree whether the term `genocide' is the appropriate description of that tragedy.'' I certainly agree with that.

In another article by the Washington Post it said: ``It is true that Turkey's military and political class has been slow to come to terms with the history and virulent nationalism, but Turkish writers and intellectuals are pushing for a change in attitude and formal and informal talks between Turks and Armenians are making slow progress. A resolution by Congress would probably torpedo rather than help such efforts. Given that reality and the high risk to vital U.S. security interests, the Armenian resolution cannot be called frivolous. In fact, its passage would be dangerous and grossly irresponsible.''

Now I want to go to a piece that has been written that I certainly hope is not true. Jed Babbin, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense in President George H.W. Bush's administration, has written in Human Events magazine: ``According to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Incirlik Air Base near Adana, Turkey, is the transshipment point for about 70 percent of all air cargo, including 33 percent of the fuel going to supply U.S. forces in Iraq. Included are about 95 percent of the new MRAP, mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles, designed to save the lives of American troops.

``Turkey's Erdogan government has indicated that if the House of Representatives takes action on a nonbinding resolution being pushed by Speaker Pelosi, Turkey might revoke our ability to use Incirlik as a waypoint for Iraq supplies.''

And Mr. Boehner has said if the Turks cut off our ability to use Incirlik, there is no question this could jeopardize our troops on the ground in Iraq. And, frankly, if this is just the latest in the Democrat string of back-door attempts to force a retreat against the war against al Qaeda, it is certainly the most dangerous.''

Mr. Babbin comes to a chilling conclusion in his analysis of the resolution and its impact on our Nation's relations with the nation of Turkey. This is what gives me great pause. He writes: ``Speaker Pelosi is apparently so intent on forcing an end to American involvement in Iraq that she is willing to interfere in our tenuous friendship with Turkey. When she does, it will be an historic event. The House of Representatives will be responsible for alienating a key ally in time of war and possibly interdicting supplies to U.S. troops.'' If his prediction proves true, it will be a low point for the history of this noble body.

I hope that what Mr. Babbin is saying is not true. I hope that this is not an attempt by the Speaker to sabotage our efforts in Iraq and in Afghanistan because it puts our troops in harm's way and we have been hearing over and over again that this is not what she wants or that others in the majority want. But it would have the effect of doing that. We as Members of Congress should never take a position that would in any way put our troops in harm's way.

I am urging the Speaker to rethink her statements that she will put this resolution, H. Res. 106, on the floor for a vote. It is a nonbinding resolution. It will go nowhere else. People outside here don't understand how these resolutions work, but it would not go to the Senate to be passed. It would not go to the President to be vetoed as I feel certain the President would veto if it went there. It is a resolution only from the House of Representatives. This is a body that is capable of doing so much good, but we also have the capability of doing harm. We should practice again what physicians take an oath to do: Above all, do no harm.

I urge the Speaker: rethink your commitment to put H. Res. 106 on the floor for a vote. Realize the significant responsibility that has been given to you not just as a Member of the House of Representatives but as the Speaker of the House of Representatives, an extraordinarily great honor, the first woman in this country to be named Speaker of the House.

What message are we sending to our troops if we pass such a resolution or even consider such a resolution that puts our troops in harm's way, damages our relationship with a country that has been such a wonderful ally to us and does damage to our relationship for a long, long time to a government that has been working very hard to do the right things, to promote democracy in the Middle East, to shore up other countries that are working to promote democracy. What messages are those going to send to other people.

I urge the Speaker to rethink her commitment to put this resolution on the floor. I urge the Speaker to get above petty and parochial interests, to think about the tremendous responsibility she bears as the Speaker of the House.

We are not often involved in foreign relations on the scale that we are being

asked to be involved in the House at this time. It is an awesome responsibility. We all should remember that we have taken an oath to defend the Constitution and to defend this country. Bringing such a resolution to the floor will do damage to our country, to our relationship with a valued ally, and I believe ultimately will do harm to our efforts to bring peace and stability to the Middle East.

I urge the Speaker to rise above again petty parochialism, come to the realization that this is an extremely serious matter that needs to be dealt with in a very different way than it has been dealt with thus far, and reject petty parochialism in favor of looking to the larger issue, looking to the future, not to the past, and helping the Armenians and the Turks come to grips with this difference of opinion that they have, resolve it within their own country, keep the United States looking for those things that are important to the United States, not getting involved with the internal affairs of other countries and promoting peace and stability in the Middle East.

Let us let the 110th Congress not be thought of as passing the most irresponsible resolution that could be passed in this session of Congress. Let us focus on positive things, things that will move this country forward and not things that will do harm to this country, to other countries and, most of all, not to our troops serving overseas, protecting us so we can be here to practice the free speech that they make possible for us.

I will insert the material I previously referred to in the Record at this point.

TCA Issue Paper 25

October 1, 2007, Former Secretaries of State and Defense Object to H.

Res. 106

The following letters have been sent to the Honorable Nancy

Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, by former

U.S. Secretaries of State and former U.S. Secretaries of

Defense voicing their objection to House Resolution 106,

which asks for U.S. recognition of Armenian allegations of

genocide.

Letter by Secretaries of State to Speaker Pelosi

September 25, 2007.

Hon. Nancy Pelosi,

Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Madam Speaker: We are writing to express concern that

H. Res. 106 could soon be put to a vote. Passage of the

resolution would harm our foreign policy objectives to

promote reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia. It would

also strain our relations with Turkey, and would endanger our

national security interests in the region, including the

safety of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We do not minimize or deny the enormous significance of the

horrible tragedy suffered by ethnic Armenians from 1915 to

1923. During our tenures as Secretaries of State, we each

supported Presidential statements recognizing the mass

killings and forced exile of Armenians. It has been

longstanding U.S. policy to encourage reconciliation between

Turkey and Armenia and to urge the government of Turkey to

acknowledge the tragedy. We understand the Administration

continues to urge the Turkish government to reexamine its

history and to encourage both Turkey and Armenia to work

towards reconciliation, including normalizing relations and

opening the border. There are some hopeful signs already that

both parties are engaging each other. We believe that a

public statement by the U.S. Congress at this juncture is

likely to undermine what has been painstakingly achieved to

date.

We must also recognize the important contributions Turkey

is making to U.S. national security, including security and

stability in the Middle East and Europe. The United States

continues to rely on Turkey for its geo-strategic importance.

Turkey is an indispensable partner to our efforts in Iraq and

Afghanistan, helping U.S. troops to combat terrorism and

build security. By providing the U.S. military with access to

Turkish airspace, military bases, and the border crossing

with Iraq, Turkey is a linchpin in the transshipment of vital

cargo and fuel resources to U.S. troops, coalition partners,

and Iraqi civilians. Turkish troops serve shoulder-to-

shoulder with distinction with U.S. and other NATO allies

in the Balkans. Turkey is also a transit hub for non-OPEC

oil and gas and remains key to our efforts to help the

Euro-Atlantic community bolster its energy security by

providing alternative supply sources and routes around

Russia and Iran.

It is our view that passage of this resolution could

quickly extend beyond symbolic significance. The popularly

elected Turkish Grand National Assembly might react strongly

to a House resolution, as it did to a French National

Assembly resolution a year ago. The result could endanger our

national security interests in the region, including our

troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and damage efforts to promote

reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey. We strongly urge

you to prevent the resolution from reaching the House floor.

Sincerely,

Alexander M. Haig, Jr., George P. Shultz, Lawrence S.

Eagleburger, Madeleine K. Albright, Henry A. Kissinger,

James A. Baker III, Warren Christopher, Colin L.

Powell.

Mr. Speaker, I want to urge my colleagues this evening to support House Resolution 106, a resolution that reaffirms the Armenian genocide.

I also wish to express my support for its swift passage in the House of Representatives. As the first genocide of the 20th century, it is morally imperative that we remember this atrocity and collectively demand reaffirmation of this crime against humanity.

The resolution, which I introduced with Representatives Schiff, Radanovich and Knollenberg, has over 180 cosponsors. It's also the exact same resolution that passed the International Affairs Committee last Congress by an overwhelming majority.

I strongly believe it is important for Members to understand that this is a matter of historical fact. Many Turkish deniers have been meeting with Members of Congress and sending correspondence, discouraging this resolution. They are claiming that passage of such a resolution would be untimely and counterproductive.

Mr. Speaker, for 92 years this has not been reaffirmed here in this Congress. I think 92 years is far too long for a proper recognition to be made, and its reaffirmation is a matter of conscience.

In the meantime, the Turkish Government has threatened to close supply routes to U.S. troops in Iraq if this resolution is considered. It's appalling that a country who claims to be our ally would put the lives of soldiers at risk in the pursuit of its desperate campaign to deny the systematic slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians.

The highly reputable International Association of Genocide Scholars recently wrote to Members of Congress urging support for the Armenian genocide resolution, and I request permission to insert their letter in the Record.

International Association of

Genocide Scholars

March 7, 2007.

Dear Members of the United States Congress: We write to you

as the international organization of scholars who study

genocide. We strongly urge you to co-sponsor H. Res. 106, the

House Resolution recognizing and commemorating the Armenian

Genocide.

In three previous statements of the International

Association of Genocide Scholars--first, a unanimous

resolution declaring that the Turkish massacres of Armenians

in 1915-1918 constituted genocide; second, an Open Letter to

Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan calling upon him to

acknowledge the Armenian Genocide; and third, an Open Letter

concerning scholars who deny the Armenian Genocide--we have

made our position clear: the historical record on the

Armenian Genocide is unambiguous and documented by

overwhelming evidence. It is proven by foreign office records

of the United States, France, Great Britain, Russia, and

perhaps most importantly, of Turkey's World War I allies,

Germany and Austria-Hungary, as well as by the records of the

Ottoman Courts-Martial of 1918-1920, and by decades of

scholarship.

We believe it is important for Members of Congress to

understand that Turkey's nine-decade-long campaign to deny

the facts of the Armenian Genocide is driven by a government

that has yet to engage in the honest historical self-critique

that is a vital part of the democratic process. The numerous

trials and imprisonments of Turkish intellectuals and

journalists and the assassination of the Armenian-Turkish

journalist Hrant Dink in January make this clear. It should

be noted that there are Turkish scholars who are urging their

government to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, and many

parts of Turkish society share this pro-democratic

perspective. We would note, however, that a government that

still encourages extreme, uncritical nationalism has created

a false narrative about the Armenian Genocide in order to

absolve its predecessors of responsibility for the

extermination of the Armenian people and their culture in the

Ottoman Empire in 1915.

We are aware that you may be pressured by a small number of

academics who support Turkey's denialist stance for often

self-interested reasons. Such academics willingly falsify,

distort, and manipulate the evidence in sometimes subtle ways

to present a false view of history. These academics violate

the ethical obligations of historical scholarship. We have

noted that academics who deny the Armenian Genocide are no

different than academics who deny the Holocaust, the Rwandan

Genocide, or the Cambodian Genocide. The recent conference in

Teheran devoted to Holocaust denial is a case in point.

``Where scholars deny genocide in the face of decisive

evidence . . . they contribute to false consciousness that

can have the most dire reverberations. Their message, in

effect, is . . . mass murder requires no confrontation, but

should be ignored, glossed over. In this way scholars lend

their considerable authority to the acceptance of this

ultimate crime'' (Roger Smith, Eric Markusen, Robert Jay

Lifton ``Professional Ethics and the Denial of the Armenian

Genocide,'' Journal of Holocaust and Genocide Studies, vol.

9, Spring, 1995).

We urge you to reject the Turkish campaign of denial, as

you may be meeting with groups and individuals who are ardent

deniers. We would underscore that the Armenian Genocide is

not controversial, but rather is denied only by the Turkish

government and its apologists.

We urge you to pass H. Res. 106:

(1) It is a recognition of an historical turning point in

the twentieth century, the event that inaugurated the era of

modern genocide. In spite of its importance, the Armenian

Genocide has gone unrecognized until recently, and warrants a

symbolic act of moral commemoration. The Armenian-American

community first arrived in the United States as refugees and

survivors of this great catastrophe and of earlier massacres

in the late 19th century.

(2) Congress will honor America's extraordinary foreign

service officers (among them Leslie A. Davis, Jesse B.

Jackson, Oscar Heizer, and Ambassador Henry Morgenthau) who

often risked their lives rescuing Armenian citizens in 1915.

These courageous American diplomats left behind some 4,000

reports totaling 37,000 pages, now in the National Archives,

documents that prove the Armenian mass murders were

government-planned, systematic extermination--what Raphael

Lemkin named genocide. By this resolution the U.S. Congress

would demonstrate that the moral principles and courage of

those foreign service officers continues to represent a

powerful example of American leadership. It is in the

interest of the United States to support the principles of

human rights that are at the core of American democracy.

(3) Inasmuch as the popular effort in the United States to

rescue and bring relief to the Armenians, first from

massacres in the 1890s and then from genocide in 1915, set

the

stage for the era of modern human rights activism, H. Res.

106 would honor this significant contribution to United

States history.

(4) We expect that the United States would not permit

foreign governments to intrude on its own legislative

process. We also expect that the U.S. government would not be

influenced by threats to close American military bases or cut

off sales of military hardware, especially when that pressure

comes from a country with a deeply disturbing human rights

record today, including violence and repressive measures

against writers, minorities, intellectuals, and scholars.

(5) As crimes of genocide continue to plague the world,

Turkey's policy of denying the Armenian Genocide gives

license to those who perpetrate genocide everywhere. Just as

we would not sanction denying the Holocaust, we cannot give

credence to Turkey's falsification of the facts of 1915.

Denial is the final stage of genocide, as it seeks to

demonize the victims and rehabilitate the perpetrators.

We believe that it is in the interest of the Turkish people

and their future as proud participants in the international

democratic community to acknowledge the responsibility of a

previous government for the genocide of the Armenian people,

just as the German government has done in the case of the

Holocaust.

We would be happy to meet with you in person, and would

gladly supply you with the scholarly evidence that has led to

the unanimous resolution of the International Association of

Genocide Scholars that the Turkish massacre of over one

million Armenians from 1915 to 1918 was a crime of genocide.

Sincerely,

Israel Charny, Ph.D.,

President, International Association of Genocide Scholars.

Gregory H. Stanton, J.D., Ph.D.,

Vice President, International Association of Genocide

Scholars.

I would say, if I could quote some sections of that letter, in that letter the scholars state their position clearly, noting that the Armenian genocide ``is proven by foreign office records of the United States, France, Great Britain, Russia and even of Turkey's World War I allies, Germany and Austria-Hungary.''

They also say: ``Just as we would not sanction denying the Holocaust, we cannot give credence to Turkey's falsification of the facts of 1915; denial is the final stage of genocide.'' They are unanimous in their findings.

Mr. Speaker, the American people and this Congress should deserve a full and truthful account of the role of the Turkish Government in denying the Armenian genocide. Congress should be allowed to reaffirm that genocide was orchestrated by the Ottoman Empire in 1915 to exterminate its Armenian citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 92nd anniversary and commemoration of the Armenian Genocide. Yesterday, I had the privilege to join the Armenian-American community of Worcester, Massachusetts, including survivors of the Genocide and their families, and many dignitaries of Central Massachusetts and the Commonwealth at an event remembering the Armenian Genocide and the role it plays in understanding contemporary events.

I am submitting today for the Record a copy of the remarks I made at this special commemoration and an article that appeared in the Worcester Telegram and Gazette.

Worcester Armenian Genocide Observance

I want to thank Father Terzian and the Armenian Church of

Our Savior for inviting me

to participate in this remembrance--and I'm very pleased to

be here with Lt. Governor Tim Murray and the Mayor of

Worcester, Konstantina Lukes. But I am especially honored to

be here with the Worcester Armenian-American community,

survivors of the Armenian Genocide, and their families.

There are several reasons why I look forward to this event

each year.

First and foremost, it gives me an opportunity to reconnect

with all of you, the Worcester Armenian-American community,

and to thank you for all your fine work and contributions to

our city.

Second, it is a moment when we recommit ourselves to

pressing the United States government to officially recognize

the Armenian Genocide.

And finally, it provides me each year with a moment to

reflect on our world; and on how I as an individual, we as a

community, and we as a Nation are responding to genocide and

crimes against humanity that, sadly and unbelievably, are

carried out nearly every day in some part of the world.

I believe that this year there is a very good chance that

the U.S. House of Representatives might actually pass H. Res.

106, the Armenian Genocide Resolution.

I can tell that this is a real possibility because for the

first time in years, I'm receiving materials arguing against

the resolution and against the official recognition of the

Armenian Genocide.

I believe adopting the Armenian Genocide Resolution is the

right thing to do:

As a matter of morality--and in the name of humanity--the

United States should recognize and condemn all genocides.

In the name of historic truth--and in honor of the historic

role so many American diplomatic personnel and humanitarian

and relief workers played in saving lives and condemning the

genocide as it was taking place--the U.S. especially should

recognize the Armenian Genocide.

And in the hope of preventing future genocides--we have to

recognize and honor the truth of the past. Denial of the

Armenian Genocide--just like denial of the Holocaust--makes

future genocides more likely, not less.

No Nation, not Turkey or any other country, should be

allowed to block the official recognition or commemoration or

the teaching of historic truth about the Armenian Genocide.

It's ironic that the current Turkish government doesn't

seem to realize that the more it denies the Armenian

Genocide, the more people begin to think that there really is

a connection between the Turks who carried out the Armenian

Genocide at the beginning of the 20th century and today's

21st century government.

By denying the truth, Turkey undermines its own standing

throughout the world, blocks its own acceptance into the

European family, and increases regional tensions, especially

with neighboring Armenia. Turkey's recognition of the

Genocide, its reconciliation with the past, would widely be

viewed as the act of a mature democracy, which the world

would rush to embrace and reward.

This is why America must also officially recognize the

Armenian Genocide.

A couple of weeks ago, I was in eastern Chad. And the

reality of genocide was right before my eyes.

There are over 250,000 refugees from Darfur, Sudan living

in camps inside Chad. Thanks to the many international and

humanitarian workers who have chosen to work and help these

survivors of the violence taking place every day in Darfur,

the camps are well-organized and efficient.

But I'd like to describe for you some of what I saw--and

what the Darfur refugees told me about what they had

witnessed.

I met with individuals and families who had been forced to

flee their villages in Darfur. Each had a story about loved

ones murdered, homes destroyed, people and family left

behind. Many didn't know if some of their family or children

were even alive.

I talked with one woman who was harvesting onions at a

small agricultural site in Camp Gaga, a Darfur refugee camp a

couple of hours from the town of Abeche in eastern Chad. She

held a tiny baby in her arms as she worked on her onion

patch. She told me the Janjaweed attacked her village so

quickly and so ferociously that she couldn't even bury her

husband who was struck down in the attack; she barely had

time to cover him with a sheet before she escaped with her

baby and children. She feels guilty and thinks about this all

the time. And she now hopes to stay alive and return,

someday, to her village.

I met with several other men and women, refugees from

Darfur, at the Goz Amer Camp near the town of Koukou, Chad.

This is a much larger and older camp. Many of the people have

been here for 3 years or so. These people were being

interviewed for the eyewitness testimony regarding crimes

against humanity that some day may be reviewed by the

International Criminal Court.

I went to eastern Chad to meet and talk with refugees from

Darfur because the Government of Sudan wouldn't give me a

visa to enter their country.

But sometimes things happen for a reason, I believe.

Because not only did I learn about the reality of Darfur--I

personally discovered Chad.

The war in Darfur is bleeding into Chad, as well as other

neighboring countries.

While I was in Chad, two ``towns''--Tiero and Marena, which

actually consist of about 31 small villages--were attacked by

``Janjaweed'' militias operating inside Chad. According to

the Chadian survivors who I talked to--they described their

attackers as a combination of Sudanese Janjaweed and Chadian

Janjaweed allies. They were armed. They were on horseback.

The attacks started at about five in the morning, and came in

about 3 distinct waves of attack. They shot randomly, at

everything and everyone. Women, children, men, livestock,

fell to the earth dead or wounded. Homes were burned to the

ground. Abandoned crockery, left charred and broken.

These Chadians--now internally displaced inside their own

country--were gathering in the thousands near Koukou--some

estimates were 8,000-9,000. Many walked, some arrived on the

backs of burros, and many others were being trucked in by

humanitarian groups. U.N. agencies and NGOs were rushing to

provide them with emergency aid and to set up an emergency

operations site where people could receive food, water,

medical aid, and some form of shelter from the relentless

heat.

These new internally displaced now join the more than

140,000 Chadian IDPs.

I had the privilege to watch UNHCR, UNICEF, Doctors without

Borders (Medicins sans Frontierres), the ICRC, Italian Aid,

and the World Food Program work together to provide emergency

relief to these traumatized people.

So this year, as we meet to remember and commemorate the

92nd Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, I'm struggling to

find meaning in the words, ``Never Again.''

I'm thankful to this community especially, which has worked

tirelessly for nearly a century, to keep alive the historic

memory of the Armenian Genocide and to speak out, condemn and

organize against the genocides--too many--that mark the past

nine decades of human history.

Thank you for your persistence. Thank you for your

commitment to take action. Thank you for your generosity and

compassion.

And thank you, once again, for including me in this special

program.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 93rd anniversary of the start of the Armenian genocide, which was the first genocide of the 20th century and sadly, the template for a cycle of genocide that continues to this very day.

It is, by any reasonable standard, established history that between 1915 and 1923 the Ottoman Empire systematically killed an estimated 1.5 million Armenians and drove hundreds of thousands of others into exile from their ancestral homeland. The record of this atrocity is well documented in the United States Archives and has been universally accepted in the International Association of Genocide Scholars and the broader historical and academic communities.

However, there is still debate around the world, including here in our Nation, on whether this incident actually qualifies as genocide. On April 26, 1915, the New York Times reported on the first reported purges of Armenians in Ottoman Turkey. Later in 1915, the Times ran a front page article about a report from the Committee on Armenian Atrocities discussing exactly what was happening to Armenians in Turkey. ``The report tells of children under 15 years of age thrown into the Euphrates to be drowned; of women forced to desert infants in their arms and to leave them by the roadside to die; of young women and girls appropriated by the Turks, thrown into harems, attacked or else sold to the highest bidder, and of men murdered and tortured.''

One can debate specific historical incidents, but growing up in Fresno, California, the land of William Saroyan, I heard stories shared by grandparents from the Kezerian, Koligian and Abramhian families about being forced to leave their homes, the stories of the long marches, and the random murders. Clearly, they believed there was a systematic approach to eliminate the Armenian communities in places that had been their homes and farms for centuries. My Armenian friends believe this systematic approach was among the first genocides of the 20th century, and so do I.

Around the world, in the single, longest lasting and far-reaching campaign of genocide denial, Turkey seeks to block recognition of this travesty. It's against the law to even mention the Armenian genocide in Turkey. The Armenian Genocide involved the issue of man's injustice to mankind, and it continued to occur throughout the 20th century in the Holocaust, Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia, and now in Darfur. As leaders, we must confront this and not allow Turkey to continue to stand alone and ask us to believe that the Armenian genocide was not genocide.

In standing up to this policy of denial, we, of course, honor the martyrs of the genocide and we encourage our Turkish allies and friends to come to terms with their past. And, in a very powerful and significant way, we reinforce our own vital role, as Americans, in leading the international community toward unconditional opposition to all instances of genocide.

Last October, the House Foreign Affairs Committee passed H. Res. 106, a resolution to recognize the Armenian genocide in the United States. Unfortunately, this bill has yet to come before the full House for a vote. Supporters of this resolution are constantly told that now isn't the time to recognize the genocide, that scholars, not Congress, should determine if this event was genocide, or that passage of this resolution will hurt our relationship with Turkey. I could not disagree more with these statements.

First, there is never a ``right time'' to recognize genocide. Ninety- three years have passed since the start events occurred, and we cannot wait around for a convenient moment to recognize this truly catastrophic historical event. Secondly, the scholars have spoken and the historical record is clear and thoroughly documented. And finally, we have seen over and over again that Turkey's warning of disastrous consequences are dramatically overstated. In fact, in nearly every instance, Turkey's bilateral trade has gone up with each of the countries that have recognized the Armenian genocide--including Canada, Italy, France, Russia, and Belgium.

Genocide is not something that can simply be swept under the rug and forgotten. We need leaders around the world to not only recognize it, but to condemn it so the world can truly say, ``Never Again.'' The United States cannot continue its policy of denial regarding the Armenian genocide, and I encourage passage of H. Res. 106 to recognize the Armenian genocide in our Nation.

Madam Speaker, the denial of the Armenian genocide is an absurdity. Looking at the history of this catastrophic event from 1915 to 1918, it is impossible to deny that this was indeed genocide on all accounts.

One way to bear witness to the truth is to make reference to the war trials that took place immediately following the end of World War I. Looking at the substantial evidence and testimony gathered during these war trials proves that this was an indisputable genocide aimed at destroying a race of people.

Following the Ottoman Empire's defeat in World War I, a new government formed and accused its predecessor, Young Turk regime, of serious crimes. These accusations led to the court-martialing of the leadership of the Committee on Union and Progress, the party that had seized and held power since 1908.

Nearly 400 of the key government officials implicated in the atrocities committed against the Armenians were arrested. They were deported to Malta, where they were held while searches were made of archives in Istanbul, London, Paris, and Washington to investigate their actions. The charges included the unconstitutional seizure of power, wartime profiteering, and the massacre of Armenians.

At least six regional courts convened in provincial cities where massacres had occurred. The first recorded trial took place in Yozgat, charging three officials, including the governor, of mass murder of the Armenians of Ankara.

Testimony revealed Major Tevfik Bey, commander of the Yozgat military police, had almost completely wiped out the Armenian population of Yozgat. It confirmed that the deportation of the Armenians was ``a policy of extermination,'' and that the people were marched off with ``arms and hands tied up'' and later killed with ``axes, spades, swords, knives and hatchets.'' Meanwhile, Governor Kemal told the captain that he had ``made a vow on the honor of the prophet: I shall not leave a single Armenian alive in the sanjak of Yozgat.''

The most famous trial took place in Istanbul in April 1919. There, 12 defendants, all members of the Committee on Union and Progress leadership and former ministers, were tried. Seven key figures, including Talat Pasha, Minister of Interior; Enver Pasha, Minister of War; and Cemal Pasha, Governor of Aleppo, had fled and they were tried in absentia. One authenticated secret telegram from July 17, 1915, quoted orders from Pasha that quoted: ``The salvation of the country requires the elimination of the Armenians.''

Even more evidence against these top officials was delivered in the key indictment which included 42 incriminating documents that had been gathered by the Mazhar Commission. These documents, such as telegrams, memos, statements, and depositions all confirmed that the campaign to exterminate the Armenians was premeditated and deliberate.

Some of the accused were found guilty of the charges. There were three hangings and numerous convictions. Most significantly, the ruling triumvirate of Young Turks consisting of Mehmed Talaat, Ismail Enver, and Ahmed Djemal, were condemned to death. They, however, eluded justice by fleeing abroad. Many more of the convicted did not serve out their prison sentences, and a majority of the perpetrators escaped punishment after a prisoner exchange deal. To this day, there is still no justice for the victims of the Armenian genocide.

Madam Speaker, I wish to express my support for swift passage of House Resolution 106, which reaffirms the Armenian genocide. It now has 224 cosponsors, a majority of the House. As the first genocide of the 20th century, it is morally imperative that we remember this atrocity and collectively demand reaffirmation of this crime against humanity.

We must stand up and recognize the tragic events that began in 1915 for what they were, the systematic elimination of the people. By recognizing these actions as genocide, we can renew our commitment to prevent such atrocities from ever occurring again.