Turks on the genocide resolution:

I just came across this interesting piece on the genocide resolution by a Turkish columnist in todays Todays Zaman (no, that's not a typo, it was printed today in a paper called "Todays Zaman". Here's an excerpt:

The real problem is elsewhere. First, there is something that Ankara and the Turkish Embassy in Washington are stubbornly refusing to understand: Turkey has already lost the “genocide” battle. There is simply no one -- except people with a vested financial or political interest -- who believe Turkey’s side of the story. Whether “the events of 1915” amount to “genocide” or not is not even debated in the West. This is one of those situations where perception becomes reality. Turkey can blame the nefarious Armenians and all kinds of anti-Turkish lobbies for this situation, but the fact of the matter is that suppressing free debate on this issue and accusing academics organizing conferences does not help the slogan “leave history to historians.”

You can't tell for sure if he believes there was a genocide a not, my guess is, he probably knows there was one, but the point is the sentiments being expressed would never be seen a couple of years ago. And he ends the article by saying, "Who knows, it may even prove to be a good thing for Turkey to get the resolution monkey off its back. We will have to wait and see."

I'm adding to this post since I noticed two more interesting articles. One says "The resolution on the 'Armenian Genocide' will soon be accepted in the US Congress and major troubles will arise for Turks, Americans and others", then goes on with the typical line and threats if it is passed. The other, in the Journal of Turkish Weekly on September 4, by the same author of the quoted text above, is even more impressive in its open mindedness and admissions than his last article, but what stands out as much as the text of the article, is the simple fact that he's writing it, it's being published, and I don't see him being charged with the infamous Article 301 (insulting Turkishness).

Hundreds of thousands were massacred. Wasn't the government and military in charge of protecting the deported? How can you have hundreds of thousands of men, women, children massacred without a sustained campaign? The legalistic answer is that there was no "intent" to exterminate the Armenian race. OK, so what happened is not comparable to the Holocaust. But isn't it still "genocide" when close to a million people are killed while the state is unable and unwilling to protect them?

Today what Turkey needs to do is to engage Armenia and start a reconciliation process. This is no longer a historical issue. It is a political and psychological predicament. Turkey should also issue an official apology, but also indicate that territorial or financial compensations are out of question. A monument that would commemorate the death of Armenians would go a long way in creating goodwill from the international community. But most importantly it would start a process of self-healing at home. Opening the border with Armenia would also secure the moral high ground as it did on the question of Cyprus three years ago.

Of course, he makes a point of saying Turkey should not give reparations, but my take on this has always been that if you are truly sorry, and the apology isn't merely for show, then you'd want to make amends. You wouldn't mind reparations - you'd offer them freely. After being dispersed by the genocide, and having so much of Armenia swallowed by Turkey, paying monetary reparations, and giving Armenia land (including Mt. Ararat and a Black Sea coast) are a drop in the bucket. If we don't insist on these things, we're doing our ancestors and our descendants a huge disservice.

I'll post the link to the entire excellent article here, but it will only be active for a week before it disappears, as groong articles do.