What does Turkey rely on, continuing denial policy?

PanARMENIAN.Net - By the decision of Turkey’s Directorate General of Foundations, the school adjacent to the Istanbul based Armenian church of St Gregory the Illuminator, the Armenian cemetery and the Holy Cross Dprevank were returned to the Armenian community of Turkey. The return of Armenian property is a good thing in itself, but what Ankara did is only return of what was robbed in 1915-1923. These steps in no way can be considered fulfillment of the U.S. Congress resolution on the return of confiscated property of the Christian nations slaughtered in the Ottoman Empire.

The number of Turkish intellectuals calling on authorities to finally recognize the Armenian Genocide and try to become a full member of a civilized society is increasing. However, their voices still remain a voice in the wilderness, and Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code still works. Moreover, reading articles in the Turkish press, one gets the impression that they are not written to truly recognize the Armenian Genocide, but just to try to “lull” the Armenians and make them believe that things in modern Turkey are just as presented in pages of the media. By this logic, the fact that Erdogan purchased the book “The Turks and the Armenians” must have evoked tender emotion in the Armenian media... Except for Taner Akcam, Ragip Zarakolu and several other professors, all other publications are fraud. But it is also true that every year Turkey is spending more and more money on the policy of denial. Let us talk straight - not every budget can stand this and Turkey is no exception. No matter how often Erdogan speaks of the alleged fantastic rise of the Turkish economy, the latter cannot cope with the annual, if not daily, necessity to allocate hundreds of millions for an aim that is doomed to failure.

Only God knows how much money is spent on the Turkish lobby of the U.S. and France, with almost null result. Moreover, on the eve of April 24 congressmen, who in Turkey and Azerbaijan are called “pro-Armenian” but in reality what they do is just putting moral values above short-term benefits, call on the current U.S. president to call a spade a spade, and instead of “Mets Yeghern” utter the words “Armenian Genocide”. Roughly speaking, these expressions are identical, but in this case terminology is important, because the Ottoman Empire, and Modern Turkey as its successor, shall be liable, in that case, for murder of peaceful children, women and the elderly.

The other day, Congressman John Sarbanes of Maryland addressed the U.S. House of Representatives to support the full and official U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide. In his April 18th speech, Representative Sarbanes stressed that the U.S. government's failure to stand up to Turkey's denial of this crime “puts salt on the wounds of the Armenian people. But it does more than that. It corrodes the moral standing of our Nation as a whole.” He also explained to his House colleagues that: “When faced with the deeply compelling research and scholarship surrounding the Armenian Genocide, it is wholly untenable to assert that the genocide did not occur. Instead, many in Congress offer the protest that recognition would harm our relationship with Turkey and undermine our broader geostrategic interests. Others suggest weakly that it is just not the right time to push the issue of recognition.” Let us note that for some American congressmen “the right time” will never come, but these congressmen are becoming fewer and fewer in number.

With regarding to the Azerbaijani policy it should be said that in all probability Turkey has decided to engage in the denial policy of the Aliyev regime, believing that if for official Baku Armenians are enemy number one, she cannot find a better ally than Azerbaijan. But there are dangers here, and sooner or later the two “brotherly nations” will run into them. The thing is that Turkic policy is based on lies and there will win the one that will be fooling the other longer. However, the winner, as a rule, is a third party, which must always be prepared. The third party in this case is Armenia and the Diaspora, which over the years of struggle for recognition may not cope with new challenges, particularly with the requirement of moral and material compensation.